Conservative Professor Wants GOP Bullshit Taken More Seriously

Last week, Professor Gerard Alexander from the University of Virginia wrote the most whiney and self-pitying Op-Ed piece I’ve ever read in the Washington Post. Titled, “Why are liberals so condescending?” Alexander launches into the standard woe-is-us conservative cant about how liberals are a bunch of meanies because they don’t give conservatives their due respect, saying at one point,

This condescension is part of a liberal tradition that for generations has impoverished American debates over the economy, society and the functions of government – and threatens to do so again today, when dialogue would be more valuable than ever.

Of course, conservatives never do stuff like this, right Professor Alexander?

Of course, plenty of conservatives are hardly above feeling superior. But the closest they come to portraying liberals as systematically mistaken in their worldview is when they try to identify ideological dogmatism in a narrow slice of the left (say, among Ivy League faculty members), in a particular moment (during the health-care debate, for instance) or in specific individuals (such as Obama or House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, whom some conservatives accuse of being stealth ideologues). A few conservative voices may say that all liberals are always wrong, but these tend to be relatively marginal figures or media gadflies such as Glenn Beck.

Remember back in the Bush days when anybody who criticized the president or his idiotic war in Iraq was labeled “anti-American” or was accused of giving aid and comfort to the terrorists by Vice President Dick Cheney no less? Remember when Cheney said that a John Kerry victory in the 2004 presidential election could lead to another terrorist attack? Remember last summer when former Republican Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin, and several GOP members of Congress such as Chuck Grassley claimed that Obama’s health care plan would establish “death panels” to decide the fate of the nation’s elderly? Remember when Republican congresswoman Michele Bachmann called for a House Committee on Un-American Activities redux? Remember how numerous mainstream media conservatives called (and are still calling) Obama a socialist who is seeking to destroy the country? These aren’t “marginal figures,” as Alexander claims. These are very mainstream conservatives within the Republican Party. And time and again American conservatives have shown themselves to be quite willing to steer public debate down a road that leads nowhere. That’s the GOP’s modus operandi. Calling war opponents un-American and saying health care reform proponents advocate death panels is designed to stifle debate, not spark it. How do you argue with someone who believes that the current administration wants to kill old people? How do you argue with the tea party folks who think Obama is the second coming of Hitler or Mao? Such people cannot be engaged in a rational discussion and indeed are often the target of derision from liberals. So yes, liberals can be condescending sometimes, but Alexander should take a look at what the target of that condescension is. And if anything “has impoverished American debates over the economy, society, and the functions of government,” it’s the conservatives’ absurd narrative that they, and not the “godless,” “socialist,” liberals, make up the “real America” (Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck) who are in favor “family values,” as if liberals could not possibly claim likewise.

The current flap over the Obama administration’s handling of the underwear bomber is a perfect example. He’s been treated no differently than the shoe-bomber Richard Reid was by the Bush administration. And yet, conservatives in the House, Senate, and media have been eviscerating Obama for doing exactly what his predecessor did, which these same conservatives voiced no concerned about then. It does not matter to them that the mirandized Abdulmutallab is talking to the FBI and providing them with information about his contacts in Yemen and Nigeria. All that matters is that the GOP sees an opportunity to spout the predictable platitudes about how Obama and liberals in general are weak on terrorism.

But whenever conservatives are called on their bullshit, they play the indignation card and accuse liberals of being condescending. It’s a neat rhetorical trick: warp the debate by making outlandish or hypocritical claims, and then when the opposition points out how ridiculous those statements are, accuse the opposition of being condescending. Conservatives have perfected this debate tactic, and as a result are almost always on the offensive.

The Sarah Palin phenomenon is a typical example. Liberals have subjected her to a never-ending onslaught of criticism and mockery. Why? While conservatives think it’s because liberals are mean and condescending, the fact is, Palin is so obviously unqualified and ill-prepared, that they consider it an insult that John McCain tried to force this woman on us as a viable Vice Presidential candidate. As Christopher Hitchens asked after this dubious VP selection, “What do you take me for?”

But conservatives don’t see it this way. They see liberals attacking Palin—who keeps inserting herself in places where she knows she will garner lots of national attention—and assume that it’s the liberals who have the problem. Forget the fact that Palin has never articulated what it is that she stands for. Forget the fact that Palin clearly has no ability to discuss important national problems in a substantive manner. No, the problem is with the liberals who resent the fact that John McCain picked the hottest MILF at the local high school hockey game to be his Vice Presidential running mate. How dare these liberals demand that our candidates for high office be more qualified than their next door neighbors.

I suppose Alexander and his fellow conservative whiners would chalk up this post to more “liberal condescension.” Fine. But if you’ve been following this site, my condescension comes in proportion to the ridiculousness and stupidity of the things I’m attacking. My level of respect toward an idea or person is generally correlative to the level of seriousness of that idea or person. I have no patience for, “Obama is Hitler” (teabaggers), “This health care plan will kill your grandmother,” (Palin, Grassley), “Gay marriage is a threat to family values” (any anti-gay conservative) or any other garbage that Republicans try to pass off as serious dialogue. If conservatives want liberals to stop being so condescending, they can start by forming some reality-based opinions on the pressing issues of the day.

- Max Canning