Posted by
Patrick Henry on Sunday, March 13, 2011 6:54:44 PM
Largely unreported in the mainstream media is the frequency with which liberal spokesmen
have to eat their own talking points. Most recent on the casualty list is State Department
mouthpiece P.J. Crowley, who commented on the record that the Pentagon's treatment of
Private Bradley Manning, the accused Wikileaker, was "unneccessary, counterproductive
and stupid." His resignation, undoubtedly forced, followed within hours. He apparently
forgot that he and the Pentagon represent the same administration.
Similarly, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid went into a long whine about the "mean-
spirited" Republican budget cuts that could endanger Nevada's Cowboy Poetry Festival.
Apparently lost on Reid was the sheer trivliality of a local arts event against the backdrop
of an ever-escalating fourteen trillion dollar national debt and the two-billion dollar monthly
deficits being racked up by the administration controlled by his party. If there was an award
for monumental inappropriateness, Reid would be a hands-down winner, and Republicans
wasted little time pouncing on his idiocy to score political points.
Then there was Director of National Intelligence (?) James Clapper telling the Senate
Armed Services Committee that Russia and China are the biggest threats to the U.S. today.
Even Democratic Committee Chair Carl Levin laughed in his face over that remark. It
became clear that Clapper had prioritized capacity without regard for intent, sandbagging
the Obama administration claims that the Russians and Chines were "our allies."
But the most blatant examples of edible garbage still spew from the White House, where
the senior Democrat in charge continues to make idiotic statements like his classic "the
police acted stupidly" attempt to justify the actions of his Harvard buddy. Never mind that\
at the time he said it (a) he didn't know the full facts of the case (b) his friend had become
combative both before and after properly identifying himself, and (c) it was discovered
that standard police procedures were followed with regard to unidentified persons at the
scene of felony investigations. Some say that faux pas only cost Obama a couple of
beers. Most realized it made him look like a hot-headed, knee-jerk fool. Throw in the
ACORN prostitution advice, taped NPR conservative-bashing and Nancy Pelosi's "we have
to pass it so we can find out what's in it," and you have a nearly inexplicable series of
liberal foot-in-mouth episodes that have had serious repercussions for them and their
party.
Why liberals so often have to eat their words is self-evident from the foregoing examples.
The real question is why are they given to say such things? Several reasons come to mind.
First, they think they are somehow above the rest of us, can say whatever they want with
impunity and are immune to the consequences of verbalized stupidity. NPR's Ron
Schiller was caught on videotape spelling it out, as he explained how we "uneducated
masses" were incapable of grasping the enlightened liberal genius. By counterpoint, a
recent Rasmussen poll revealed that only 3% of respondents believe that Ivy Leaguers
are better qualified to govern than the rest of the populace. One way of verifying that
is to look at the enormous preponderance of Ivy Leaguers in the government bureaucracy
from JFK forward, vis-a-vis the absolute mess our nation is in today. If this is genius
leadership, America should be recruiting successors from junior colleges an trade
schools. How much worse can they do. Yet liberals prattle and pontificate, raining down
their "wisdom" from on high and pretending that their dung doesn't stink.
Yet another reason for irresponsible liberal babble is the lack of coherent, cohesive
policy. When most of these nitwits spout off, they do so in a policy vacuum, seemingly
ignorant of what others in government are doing or saying and adrift from any kind of
compass-driven direction. The government's reaction to the recent tensions in the Middle
East set the issue in stark relief. Yesterday, the president's contention that he was
"tightening the noose" around Qaddafi was followed immediately by reports that the
rebels were on the run and that Qaddafi's army was turning the conflict into a rout, a
development predicted in the committee hearing by the president's own intelligence
director a day prior. Then you have Hillary Clinton promisng support for the rebels that
never materializes, all the dithering about a no-fly zone and the fact that while Obama
contends that Qaddafi must go because of his tyranny, he is mute about the suppression
of human rights and brutality against protestors in Yemen, Bahrain and elsewhere. It
would seem that in the eyes of this weakling administration, identical tactics are justified
(or not) based on whether we like those employing them (and hope to continue being
able to manipulate them). If consistency is the bugaboo of small minds, then the lack of
it is the mother of contradictory and embarrassing remarks
But the third cause of liberal verbal turpitude is the tar pit of political expediency. P.J.
Crowley was grandstanding for his leftist buddies, Reid pandering to his state's voters,
Obama playing the race card and all trying to shore up a government adrift and increasingly
under fire from an irate public demanding justification for the unjustifiable. They have
apparently forgotten the old maxim that it is better to remain silent and be thought a fool,
than open one's mouth and remove all doubt. Crowley, Ron and Viv Schiller and ACORN
have paid the price. Obama's ratings, after a strong recovery, are beginning to tank again.
Reid, long the prince of fools, is so ineffective he has broken openly with the president
and is slowly losing control of his own caucus. Liberals have simply let too many "genies"
out of the bottle, and they can never stuff them back in. Maybe the "intelligentsia" aren't
so intelligent after all. Eating crow, feathers and all, can be a humbling experience.