About AJ DiCintio
A.J. DiCintio is a Featured Writer for The New Media Journal. He first exercised his polemical skills arguing with friends on
the street corners of the working class neighborhood where he grew up.
Retired from teaching, he now applies those skills, somewhat honed and
polished by experience, to social/political affairs.
Miss California’s Unforgivable Mistake April 24, 2009
Unhappy truth that it is, the self-anointed intellectual giants called
liberals never quit adding chapters to the book of their arrogant
hypocrisy. Here are the latest additions.
As you most likely know, Miss USA Pageant judge Perez Hilton was so
offended by the crude, stupid quality of Carrie
Prejean’s answer to his question about same sex marriage that next
morning he couldn’t resist the compulsion to inform the world about its
intellectual deficiencies in the manner by which liberals give these
kinds of lectures:
So it was that he called Miss California a "dumb bitch”
— later making it known he was thinking something uglier.
But Hilton was feeling so full of brilliance that he
couldn’t allow himself to write just one chapter. So, next day on the
CBS Early Show, he churned out another when co-host Julie Chen
asked him to provide an example of how Prejean could have answered while
remaining "true to her beliefs.”
Hilton responded with this:
"As a future Miss USA, it is my job not to be a politician, but to be
someone who represents and inspires the women and the troops, and I
think it’s great that the states get to decide for themselves.”
He then added, ". . . she would not have had to insert her own personal
politics into it.”
Now, let’s consider what his suggestion asks us to believe:
(1) Liberals detest public figures (including Hollywood stars and
college professors) who behave as "politicians.”
(Perhaps in another universe! And for the record, Ms.
Prejean was no "politician,” for she spoke honestly and
unequivocally in Plain English, not as a cowardly, doublespeaking liar.)
(2) Liberals think it "great” that state legislatures ought to decide
the issue of same sex marriage, not liberal activist judges or even
activist mayors.
(Who knew? And wouldn’t we love to hear about all the other issues
liberals believe it "great” for states to decide?)
(3) Liberals scrupulously avoid inserting their personal politics into
issues.
(Silly us, for believing that just as sharks will die if they stop
moving, liberals will croak the moment they fail to insert politics into
any issue!)
So, if we keep the truth about liberal behavior in mind, we dismiss
Hilton’s crocodile suggestion in favor of the notion that nothing short
of repeating from the Credo of the Liberal Church would have exempted
Ms. Prejean from the vicious ad hominem attacks typical of "perfectly
rational” liberal discourse.
However, what Americans, especially young Americans, must realize is
that liberals have long been institutionalizing this kind of ugly,
culture-corroding behavior.
For example, do you believe in the Jeffersonian view that Supreme Court
justices ought to confine themselves to their sphere of government as
they meticulously rule according to the principle of Federalism?
If you do, you will be slimed as follows — and not from a
run-of-the-mill liberal or even a prominent liberal but from a liberal
regarded as a "lion” of the Senate:
"Robert Bork’s America is a land in which women would be
forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch
counters, rogue police could break down citizens’ doors in midnight
raids, schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution, writers and
artists could be censored at the whim of the Government, and the doors
of the Federal courts would be shut on the fingers of millions of
citizens ...” (Ted Kennedy, putting his vast intellect on full display
as he opposed seating Judge Bork on the Supreme Court)
Do you believe that for reasons pertinent to national
defense, the economy, social stability, the environment, and national
sovereignty, government has the obligation to secure the nation’s
borders and enact thoroughly reasonable immigration policies?
Then liberals will condemn you as a vile racist or
contemptible reincarnation of a Know-Nothing.
(Of course, hateful, finger pointing liberals think
nothing wrong with regarding members of any susceptible group as cattle
they can use to fatten up the Democratic Party. Indeed, that fattening
is so important to liberals that they have never employed their
expertise in conducuting national outrages to attack anti-American
businesses that in the name of money horribly exploit illegal aliens.)
Do you oppose transforming America into a stagnant,
spiritless, nanny state such as Sweden? Moreover, do you oppose any
attempt to achieve that goal by stealing an astounding 10, even 20,
trillion dollars from future generations?
Then, you’ll be smeared with every epithet from the
liberal slop bucket, the first of which is certain to be "racist,” the
second "fascist.”
Those are but a few instances of the vicious, mindless
attacks that flow from the megalomanical arrogance of the liberal mind.
But they are sufficient to make two points:
Carrie Prejean’s unforgivable mistake was
refusing to bow to political correctness as defined and demanded by the
American left.
An angry,
hateful absolutism regarding mere political ideology corrodes the moral
fabric of any culture. It can produce nothing good — including advancing
a useful national discussion regarding same sex marriage, civil unions,
etc.