Analyzing "Why are Liberals so Condescending?" by Gerard Alexander

Originally post at Desk of Brian: State of the Nation by Brandon Jones

Before I get to the article by Alexander, let me confirm that outrageous onslaught from those on the left. Time and time again my point made or attempted to discuss was always under some sort of attack.

 

"But American liberals, to a degree far surpassing conservatives, appear committed to the proposition that their views are correct, self-evident, and based on fact and reason, while conservative positions are not just wrong but illegitimate, ideological and unworthy of serious consideration."

 

Alexander's statement totally summarizes much of those on the left. This is particularly intense for former Democrats like myself as any position of dissent is always attributed to brainwashing emulating FOX news or a right-wing talking head.

 

Alexander's Washington Post column quotes President Obama:

 

"We were so busy just getting stuff done . . . that I think we lost some of that sense of speaking directly to the American people about what their core values are."

 

The American people just don't understand or have succumb to the latest rant by Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh.

 

Alexander describes it as: "The benighted public is either uncomprehending or deliberately misinformed (by conservatives)."

 

He then sites "Lionel Trilling's 1950 remark that conservatives do not "express themselves in ideas but only in action or in irritable mental gestures which seek to resemble ideas."

 

Most liberals hold the 1950s-1960s as an age free of biased journalism untainted by the evil shepards of FOX News and talk radio.

 

But Trilling's comment articulates the marginalizing attitude that dissenters are crazy, paranoid or simply irrational.

 

Alexander perfectly tackles another condescending tone that I've hard: "...it was all part of the conspiracy to support conservative candidates for their nefarious, self-serving ends."

 

Bush lover, Obama hater, Beck doesn't even believe what he's preaching and any opposition is just the marching orders of the right -- heard it all.

 

The article quotes NY Times writer Paul Krugman:

 

"What do these people really believe? I mean, they're not stupid -- life would be a lot easier if they were. So they know they're not telling the truth. But they obviously believe that their dishonesty serves a higher truth. . . . The question is, what is that higher truth?"

 

Just like the President, we just don't understand. However, unlike the President (who feels another speech just might work) Krugman just labels us all liars and phonies.

 

Alexander hits on the race card as well and all I'll add is that I've been called (and those on the right) KKKonservative.

 

Diving headlong into political discussions and debates thickens the skin rather quickly. My favorite nickname, which I will gladly wear as a badge of honor, was and is: Brainwashed spewer of bile and filth.

 

 

 

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/04/AR2010020403698_2.html?sid=ST2010020403858

Media provide Damage Control for Democratic Scandals

Rich Noyes present an excellent timeline and analysis of how the media sheltering Harry Reid from criticism and ultimately "morphed the story from one of an embarrassing racial gaffe by the Senate's top Democrat into one about Republican over-reach in going after Reid"

This is a summary of Noyes timeline:

Day 1: TROUBLE -- CBS anchor Jeff Glor calls it "a controversial remark [that] is shaking the political world."

Day 2: SUNDAY FODDER -- ABC's Good Morning America, George Stephanopoulos sounded like a Reid shill: "This was a private conversation....His choice of words, obviously, was unfortunate. The Senator knows that."

PBS anchor Judy Woodruff relayed the White House line: "This is the Mormon from Searchlight [Nevada] with an ear of tin and a heart of gold."

Day 3: CIRCLE THE WAGONS -- NBC's Andrea Mitchell calls Reid's remark "demeaning" of Obama which was met with PBS host Gwen Ifill "I don't understand what's demeaning"

Harold Ford, Jr.: "I don't believe in any way that Harry Reid had any animus, racial animus."

DAY 4: ANNOUNCE IT'S OVER -- CBS's Early Show, co-host Harry Smith was itching to be done with the controversy: "Is the Reid story over, and should it be?"

At this point the debate turns on Republicans, who are being "too critical" of Reid and playing partisan politics.

Maybe so.

Let's look to another story that the media are ignoring: John Edwards has been caught cheating AGAIN.

We have to rely on the National Enquirer to report on the most recent affair with Stephanie Breshears.

Edwards relations with Rielle Huner resulted in a child who turns two in February. The Presidential candidate's infidelities have occurred while his spouse Elizabeth battles cancer.

Let's be fair, where's the coverage of Mark Sanford, whose wife filed for divorce in December. The only recent story I could find was that the official "rebuke" of Sanford has been delayed. This FOX story describes the rebuke as "the two-term Republican was derelict in his duty and abused his power. It has no practical effect on the final year of Sanford's tenure."


Conservatives toss around "liberal media" and "media bias" to often but this is the unfair reporting and handling of stories that drives such accusations. Democrats get a pass on racial insensitive comments while Republicans would be demonized or forced out of office. Family values and hypocrisy will fill the headlines describing an unfaithful Conservative, but someone like Edwards faces no such scrutiny.

Many of us don't care about their party - I want them out. It's so incredibly frustrating that Mark Sanford is still the governor of South Carolina.

The corruption, dishonesty and abuse of power is at the nucleus of problems with the political landscape. If the media cannot or will not provide that "fourth rail" to aid us in gathering information then they should be rewarded the same way -- put out of business.





http://newsbusters.org/blogs/rich-noyes/2010/01/14/mrc-study-after-negro-comment-71-network-coverage-supported-harry-reid#ixzz0cy7Sj1ku

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/01/14/rebuke-sc-gov-sanford-sidelined/