Bullies Can Dish It Out--But They Can't Take It

E. J. Dionne, touchy-feely leftocrat, has an article this week in my favorite Democratic house organ, The New Republic. Dionne is the gentle stalking-horse of the Democratic cadres, a horse that can see all those cruel fascists that the Republicans can't see, but wears blinders so he can't see the thugs and liars among his friends.

The article is entitled: All Isn't Fair--How to fight extremism with civility. And what better magazine to publish it in than the New Republic--the magazine that headlined an article by its own senior editor, John Judis, a few years back entitled: I Hate George Bush? Dionne uses an age-old method of proving that your opponents are out-of-control by citing an alleged member of that opposition who is in agreement with you. The old joke is that liberals love citing Christians to prove their point, as long as they are dead Christians. And they love citing Republicans, as long as they no longer have any standing within the Republican Party.

Dionne's tender sensibilities have been offended by the in-your-face opposition to the Obamassiah, particularly at the tea party protests. And sure enough, he found a "Republican" who agrees with him. Former Congressman Jim Leach spent thirty years "Going his own way. If this meant standing against his caucus, he was content to do so." Pretty heroic, huh? A maverick even. Or maybe just a RINO. But since he agrees with Dionne on the current Republican leadership failing to slap down the "extremists" within their midst, he is therefore the perfect "dead" Republican to cite.

And Mr. Leach is all touch-feely too. Dionne describes him by saying "The characteristic Leach look is a comfortable sweater worn under a tweed jacket, in season and out. That's about as fashionable as the persona of old Mr. Chips, the warmhearted and mildly Victorian headmaster who was the hero of James Hilton's 1934 novel (they made a movie out of it too, in case you hadn't noticed). Yes--Mr. Chips. Doesn't that just warm your cockles?

So now cometh the perfect Republican to go after those Republican leaders who can't get control of their crypto-Nazi troops with the hateful signs and hateful words. Leach, indistinguishable from the Democrats, lost his seat in 2006 because in that Democratic landslide the voters figured they might as well have a real Democrat rather than a Democrat calling himself a Republican. Ah, but he wasn't bitter, says Dionne. "He turned to academia, not the lobbying trade favored by so many other defeated politicians, and in 2008 engaged in the ultimate act of a maverick (a real one) by becoming a Republican for Obama." What a shock. The maverick Republican candidate for President wasn't far enough to the left to suit this maverick.

And glorious Obama, the Anointed One, returned the favor by appointing Leach chairman of the National Endowment for the Humanities. Says chairman Leach: "Little is more important for the world's leading democracy (are we still the leading democracy after 11 months of Obama?) in this change-intensive century than establishing an ethos of thoughtfulness and decency of expression in the public square." Golly, I wish I had thought of that. If I had, I could have understood such thoughtfulness in Democratic discourse as "Bushitler," and "I hate Bush," and "Bush lied, people died." And the gentle, thoughtful Democrats haven't stopped, even today.

"If we don't try to understand and respect others, how can we expect them to respect us, our values and our way of life." And who, exactly, are "we?" "Words reflect emotion as well as meaning. They clarify--or cloud--thought and energize action, sometimes bringing out the better angels in our nature, sometimes lesser instincts," says Leach. "Leach's speech is the kickoff for a 50-state civility tour, and my hunch is that this very civil man may have to put up with a lot of incivility along the way" says Dionne.

Which type of incivility are you referring to, Professor Dionne? The Republican/conservative/tea party kind where they hold up signs that are very disrespectful of the Chosen One, or the SEIU/ACORN beating people up with their signs kind? The "vote against Obama, he's a socialist" kind, or the baseball bat, chain-wielding voter intimidation kind (thank you, New Black Panthers)? Yes, indeed, words can wound metaphorically, which is why we have a First Amendment. You have your panties in a bunch over tea party words that might lead to violence, while continuing to wear those blinders about leftist words which have actually been turned into violence, frequently.

And finally, I should point out that Dionne and Leach don't attack the tea partiers and other anti-Obamists directly. They know full well that those movements can never be squelched by the words and phony peace-offerings of the left. So they address their complaints to the Republican leadership (whoever they are) in terms of their intentional or negligent failure to rein in the "extremists." Well, you two, I have some news for you. Conservatives don't take orders from the entrenched leadership of a fractured party trying to find its way back to its foundations, and conservatives don't march blindly to the tune of their "superiors" in DC and the state houses. Unlike Democrats.