Allowing the American public, finally, to see the Left

I’ve been saying for some years that the biggest mistake the Islamists made was impatience.  Demographically, between their fecundity and the sterility of Western culture, Muslims were headed towards societal tipping points all over Europe within a couple of decades.  Had they set tight, they could have completed what they started in the Middle Ages and finally lost at the Gates of Vienna:  the Islamist takeover of Europe.

But they couldn’t wait.  They took down the Twin Towers, bombed trains and subways, blew up school children, exploded night clubs, killed Van Goghs, harassed women, and engaged in myriad other acts that made Westerners aware of their presence as something more than just enshrouded women and cheap labor.  It’s still unclear whether the West has the will to fight, but the West certainly got timely notice to have the ability to fight.  While the Islamists are certainly spoiling for the fight and, indeed, glory in the bloodshed, there’s no doubt that war brings the risk of loss and — as I said — the Islamists could have avoided this risk altogether if they had just waited until critical mass, when the West would have lost before the fight began.

For the last few months, I’ve going around saying exactly the same thing about the American Left, which took its victory, a victory that spread across many states but that never really exceeded more than a few percentage points in any given area, and decided that it had a sweeping mandate.  And what a mandate:  destroy the economy, socialize medicine, and make American supine before all of the world’s worst actors.  Dennis Prager has had the same thought, and wrote a really great article on the subject:

There may be a major silver lining for conservatives and for America’s future thanks to the foreign and domestic policies of President Obama and the Democrat-controlled House and Senate: For the first time in their lives, millions of Americans are coming to understand the left.

It is difficult to overstate how important this is. For decades, the left has largely controlled the news media, the arts, the universities and the entertainment media. And vast numbers of Americans have imbibed these leftist messages and the leftist critiques of conservatives. What these Americans have never been able to do is to see what the left would actually do if in power.


1. The left wants America to abandon its defining commitment to individualism and replace it with a European-style nanny, or welfare, state. At most Americans’ core is an abiding belief that we are supposed to take care of ourselves, our families and our neighbors, and not rely on the state to do so.

2. The left is naive about evil. Most Americans deemed Communism evil; the left ridiculed President Ronald Reagan for calling the Soviet Union an “evil empire” and often undermined the fight against the Communist world. So, too, the left is naive about Islamic terror and undermines the fight against it.

The smoking gun was the nearly universal denial by the left that his Islamic beliefs had anything to do with Maj. Nidal Hasan’s mass murder of fellow servicemen at Fort Hood. One of many examples was this reaction to the shootings by Evan Thomas, Editor at Large at Newsweek: “I think he’s probably just a nut case. But with that label (Muslim) attached to him, it will get the right wing going…”

3. The left is more interested in redistributing wealth than in creating it. This should have been as obvious to Americans as the brightness of the sun. Finally, Americans are coming to realize that the left’s goal is now, as it always has been, equality, not prosperity.

4. The left is far more interested in power than the right is. This, too, should have been self-evident, but finally, people are realizing that those who are preoccupied with creating an ever-expanding state are obviously far more interested in amassing power than those who want a smaller state.

5. The left is preoccupied with America being loved, and in pursuit of that end, compromises some of America’s core values. Examples abound here, too. To cite a few: the Obama administration’s neglect of those in Iran risking their lives for freedom in that tyranny; the administration’s refusal to meet with the Dalai Lama when the Tibetan leader visited Washington, lest the president annoy China’s dictators; the American government siding with Hugo Chavez against the Honduran government, which had legally removed a Chavez clone from the Honduran presidency; and the president’s obsequious apologies for America wherever he goes.

Dennis Prager gives global examples of the ideology powering the Left.  Phyllis Schlafly gives particular examples of those people closest to the president.  And a scarier bunch of rogues and ideologues you’ve never seen.  So far, the media has been working overtime to keep ordinary Americans from learning too much about these pillars of academe, now all0wed to put their theories into effect in the real world, but word is leaking out.  And in keeping with Prager’s theory about knowledge giving the American people power, the Left’s inability to keep its worst actors and ideas off the national stage may prove to be America’s greatest strength.

Be Sociable, Share!
  • Gringo

    Regarding the issue of “mandate,” I am reminded of  some articles which looked at post-election editorials of the NYT. When a Democratic Party candidate was elected President, the NYT would state that the elected President had a “mandate.” When a Republican  Party candidate was elected President, the NYT would state that the elected President did NOT have  a “mandate.”

  • David Foster

    OTOH…the extremely comprehensive, multi-front attack being conducted by the  Obama admninistration has led to quiescence or even support from a significant part of the corporate sector, hoping to get in on the gravy or at least avoid retaliation.

  • Mike Devx

    Book quoted Prager as saying:
    > 3. The left is more interested in redistributing wealth than in creating it. This should have been as obvious to Americans as the brightness of the sun. Finally, Americans are coming to realize that the left’s goal is now, as it always has been, equality, not prosperity.

    Prager let them off the hook here.  I’m all for equality too!  But I believe in equality of opportunity, and I think we *should* fight for equality of opportunity everywhere and in every way.

    What the Democrat left wants is equality of *results*.  This is where you take all the grades in your class’ test, and you borrow from every ‘A’ to give to every ‘F’, with the result being that everyone gets a ‘C’.  Straining the analogy, you could give everyone an ‘A’, but even the noted liberal Garrison Keillor ironically commented on that approach, saying of Lake Wobegon, it’s a place where “everyone is above average”.  Indeed, when it comes to the economy, you *can’t* give everyone an “A”… you have to take from some to give to someone else.  From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.  We ALL know what that defines.  And history is replete with failure after miserable, monstrous socialist failure of that creed.

    In fact, Thanksgiving approaches, and it’s a perfect time to revisit Governor of Plymouth William Bradford’s journal, covering what happened to the early American colonists who tried, even back then, that socialist model, and nearly starved themselves to death before sanity returned.   The story:
    This article mentions the early settlement of Jamestown as well, where socialism was also tried, with the result that 1/5 of the men worked while 4/5 chose to live off the proceeds… and the colony starved.
    The Democrats want equality of results, not equality of opportunity.  As difficult as equality of opportunity is to effect, we should never stop trying.  It’s the conservative way, and the closer we get to true equality of opportunity, the more blessed America will be.

  • David Foster

    Mike Devx…I don’t think influential Democrats *really* want “equality of results.” Rather, they use talk about equality as a smokescreen for their attempt to radically redirect wealth into different pockets.

  • suek

    >>Rather, they use talk about equality as a smokescreen for their attempt to radically redirect wealth into different pockets.>>
    Yeah…their own.
    Even in the Soviet Union, top officials had dachas.  The peons had to share apartments – 3-4 families per apartments.  Of course, they also didn’t have a problem with the homeless…!

  • Pingback: CODE PINK MEETS WITH TALIBAN. WHO CARES? « The Radio Patriot()

  • caribman

    This is an article I penned a few months ago which agrees wholeheartedly with this article.

    The Great Denouement  
    In another forum I penned the view that for President Barrack Obama the Great Denouement is coming.
    From domestic policy to foreign policy Obama has followed the path of a self centered, incompetent   ignoramus who indeed is narcissistic and thinks that his lack of experience and empty suited resume somehow allows him to make judgments on huge moral issues (abortion) and about major financial and managerial matters that would stump even the most tried on those subjects.
    The Great Denouement is coming when this grand childish experiment will decidedly unravel to his detriment.
    He may even be impeached for incompetence.
    As I have already noted I am quite happy that Obama turned up on the scene as he with his disastrous liberal/socialist policies will stop the “one step forward , 2 step backwards” reality of conservative philosophy in which incrementally liberals has taken over your country.
    Finally America will see that which is destroying the very character of what made you great. Hollywood, the state run main stream media, and the academic world are ALL on trial here and the Great Denouement will expose the rot for all to see.

  • suek

    >>He may even be impeached for incompetence.>>
    I don’t think incompetence is grounds for impeachment – not that it would matter to this Congress.  They wouldn’t impeach Obama if they found him standing over a dead body with the proverbial smoking gun in his hand…

  • Charles Martel

    “The Great Denouement.” I like that!