New Front Page         
NMJ Search              
International              
Islamist Terrorism      
Government & Politics
National & Local        
The Fifth Column       
Culture Wars             
Editorials                  
Analysis                   
Archive                     
NMJ Radio                 
NMJ TV                    
Constitutional Literacy
American Fifth Column
Islamist Terrorism
Books 
NMJ Shop
Links, Etc...         
Facebook            
Twitter           
Site Information
About Us              
Contact Us           
US Senate
US House
Anti-Google
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.
Social Bookmarking
Recent Articles
Liberals Expose Themselves (And It's a Good Thing)
Epidemic of Foot-in-Mouth
Borders, Polls & Statistics Schmatistics
Blowing Up a Pornographic Boycott
Looking Like Europe
Car Bombs & The English Language
Slouching Toward Columbia & Belgium
Washing Out Dirty Mouths
A Dangerous, Unbeautiful Nanny
The TARP-Profit Lie
Stink Bomb Democrats
Dissing Emilia
War Irreconcilable
Lies, Damned Lies & Statistics
There Is Method in Obama's Healthcare Madness
Perverse Financial Elites
PIGS Flying Under the Radar
Hope Run Amok
Obama: No JFK
Stunningly Shameless
Massachusetts: Vote! For God's Sake, Vote!
Cowardice, Expediency, Language & Liberals
Max, Tax & Principles
Christmas Times Four
A Tax Snake in the Grass
Bad Gifting as Metaphor
Obama’s Narrative & Afghanistan
Prostitution & The Healthcare Bill
The Viruses That Killed at Fort Hood
Prize Winner Perversity
Healthcare: Who Are the Know-Nothings?
Let’s Kill All the Tomatoes!
It's Not a War Against FOX News
Beware CBO Healthcare Estimates
(Let's Hope) We’re Not Gonna Take It Anymore
Hyperpartisanship, Propaganda & Hypocrisy
Afghanistan & Sherman's Legacy
Epistemology, Materialists & Morality
Cleaning Up the House
Worse Than the Stench of the Stable
Obama's Shameful Education Affair
Healthcare Reform: The Good, The Bad & The Ugly
The Real (Audaciously Arrogant) Mob
News Anchor Uncles
Goldman Sachs America
Krugman & The Boiled Frog

American Aristocrats
Long After the Last Cow Has Come Home
Obama Being Obama
Liberals and The Big Hate
The Frog-Worship Scandal
Thomas Jefferson: Don’t Question a Supreme Court Nominee Without Him
I Never Knew That!
Language: A Canary in the Coal Mine II
Language: A Canary in the Coal Mine
Colin Powell Comes Up Small
Headlines, Torture & American Values
Something Very Deep and Dark
Miss California’s Unforgivable Mistake
The President in the Garden
Liberals & The Triumph of Reason
Fear
Messiah, Lincoln or Less?
Obama, Big Bangs & Selling Make Believe
Hostile Alien Case Exposes Danger of Activist...
The Age of Arrogance
Lenin Lite, Perhaps?
Where’s the Guilt?
In the Matter of Public v. Stimulus Bill
Bigger Than the Bacon Explosion
Where Bill O’Reilly’s Going Wrong
Dear Camille
Liberals, Israel & Wolves
Sarkozy, Israel & The Neurotic Mind

AJ DiCintio

Liberals Expose Themselves (And It's a Good Thing)
June 18, 2010

Americans who consider themselves Tea Party "members" or who find themselves in agreement with the Tea Party message have involved themselves in public affairs because they are genuinely concerned about the country's direction, especially (but not exclusively) with respect to the economic madness exhibited by the federal government.

However, in addition to its basic purpose, the Tea Party has provided the nation a great, if indirect, service because in reacting to the movement, liberals have exposed themselves in all their ugly pretentiousness.

For proof, there is no better place to turn than "The Very Angry Tea Party" (NYT), a piece in which J.M. Bernstein, University Distinguished Professor of Philosophy at the New School for Social Research, offers not a single, sensible, honest thought but does manage to expose himself as the quintessential liberal.

In truth, the professor's title says it all regarding the essay's supercilious, anti-intellectual quality because the entire piece simply repeats ad nauseam the decrepit liberal meme that mocks and denounces middle class citizens as contemptible hypocrites, half of whom are angry buffoons, the other half angry sociopathic maniacs.

The following words and phrases ought to give readers more than a feel for Bernstein's perverse vision of tens of millions of decent, hard-working Americans who live by the rules.

Seething anger, enraged, libertarian mob, hysterical incriminations, fantasy of destruction, atmospheric violences [sic], nihilistic rage...

Now, certain insufferable radio commercials all too well employ the propaganda technique of repetition; but Bernstein's essay makes repetition pikers of them as it obnoxiously, pretentiously, and relentlessly attempts to make the case that Tea Party Americans are devoid of even a smidgen of rational thought or justifiable emotion and therefore deserve to be regarded as a dangerous, delusional, disconnected, diabolically mad "mob."

In fact, the professor is so deeply dedicated to the proposition that Tea Party adherents are suffocated by an "incubus of rage" which destroys intellectuality that he claims he can't figure out "where [the mob's] politics ends and metaphysics begins."

What does Bernstein believe has caused these idea-bereft Americans to roll themselves into nothing more than a fiery, frightening ball of rage?

He argues that recent economic events have "undermined the deeply held fiction of individual autonomy and self-sufficiency that are intrinsic parts of Americans’ collective self-understanding."

And the destruction of that myth, he says, has caused Tea Party Americans to come face to face with the truth of "the absolute dependence [emphasis his] of us all on government action," a reality so distressing that they have reacted to it with a raging, totally meaningless anger.

What perfectly stupid liberal nonsense!

The professor first creates a straw man that depicts Tea Party Americans as so extremely libertarian they can be called anarchists.

Then, he "reasons" that having had their libertarian myth shattered, they behave like "jilted lovers [who are] furious that ...'government' has ...made clear that they are dependent and limited beings."

That is why the professor gives Tea Party Americans not a bit of intellectual credit for their protestations over bailouts given to casinos that call themselves banks, rapacious Wall Street firms, bungling corporations, greedy unions, and foolish people who took out mortgages far beyond their financial means.

That is why he denies that intellectuality has anything to do with their warnings about an immoral, "generational theft" spending and borrowing intended to make America "look like" Greece, Spain, or worse.

Now, given the fact that Tea Party Americans aren't anarchists and that the problems they are bringing to light are real, I suspect it is the Professor as Representative of All Liberals whose reason is choked off by anger.

Moreover, I suspect that in true liberal fashion, his extremist anger is directed at "We the [Ordinary] People," whose Middle Class Values and adherence to the principles of Jeffersonian Democracy preclude obsessing and gushing over the Marxist/Hegelian notion of humanity's "absolute dependence ...on government. . ."

("absolute dependence" — How deliriously orgasmic it is when liberals imagine liberal politicians, liberal judges, and liberal bureaucrats telling "us all" how to live our lives, even down to how many milligrams of protein, carbohydrate, and fat we may ingest and milliliters of carbon dioxide we may exhale each day!)

Finally, I ditch the "suspect" to say "I know" anger, pride, and the love of power have obliterated reason when I consider that the professor fails to place the Tea Party protestors in the tradition of Henry David Thoreau, the great proponent of individualism whose love of raw nature as well as bricklaying, carpentry, and gardening always kept his feet planted firmly in the ground of common sense.

No Pollyanna about the realities of human nature, the Concord resident who strove daily to live in harmony with the true spirit of his town had this to say about humanity's eternal duty regarding government:

But, to speak practically and as a citizen, unlike those who call themselves no-government men, I ask for, not at once no government, but at once a better government. Let every man make known what kind of government would command his respect, and that will be one step toward obtaining it.

Of course, the "distinguished" professor refuses to see anything of Thoreau in Tea Party protestors, preferring, instead, to demean them as "not just disturbing, but frightening, in [their] anger."

In that anti-intellectual refusal, he places himself squarely in the company of leftists who regard the Constitution's "We the People" as an angry, ignorant, slobbish mob — the centralized-power loving ideologues represented in America by the nation's three most important liberal politicians:

Barack Obama — The president of the United States superciliously and hurtfully singled out "small town" folks who "get bitter [and therefore] cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them."

Nancy Pelosi — The speaker of the House viciously condemned Tea Party Americans as "AstroTurf" frauds who carry "swastikas" to meetings.

Harry Reid — The majority leader of the Senate maliciously slimed Tea Party Americans as "evil-mongers" who spread "lies, innuendo, and rumor."

However, as mentioned at the outset, this vile invective is, ironically, a very good thing; for in spewing it, liberals enrich the nation by exposing themselves in all their naked, obnoxious, elitist, ugly, power loving arrogance.

Opinions expressed by contributing writers are expressly their own and may or may not represent the opinions of The New Media Journal, BasicsProject.org, its editorial staff, board or organization. Reprint inquiries should be directed to the author of the article. Contact the editor for a link request to The New Media Journal. The New Media Journal is not affiliated with any mainstream media organizations. The New Media Journal is not supported by any political organization. The New Media Journal is a division of BasicsProject.org, a non-profit, non-partisan 501(c)(3) research and educational initiative. Responsibility for the accuracy of cited content is expressly that of the contributing author. All original content offered by The New Media Journal and BasicsProject.org is copyrighted. Basics Project’s goal is the liberation of the American voter from partisan politics and special interests in government through the primary-source, fact-based education of the American people.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance a more in-depth understanding of critical issues facing the world. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 USC Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

hit counter

The New Media Journal.us © 2011
A Division of BasicsProject.org
 

Dreamhost Review