 |
| ||
|
||||||||
|
June 24, 2008 The Obama LeftBy J.R. DunnThe American left can be divided into three distinct strands, each with its own characteristics, identifiers, and methods of operation: the wimp left, the weird left, and the hard left. The wimp left is the largest, most amorphous, and least impressive faction. These are the people who are leftists because the neighbors are. They're the NPR listeners, the PBS watchers, the slogan repeaters. They view the left as a lifestyle choice, one that makes you a better person (as they never cease telling you). Wimp leftists usually confine their activities to bumper stickers and "trying to live a politically-correct lifestyle", but often break into sporadic bouts of activity involving recycling, marching, or posting on DU or Kos. The New York Times recently featured a story http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/02/us/02malaria.html about a craze for purchasing mosquito nets for underprivileged Africans that captures the wimp left in all its faddishness, self-righteousness, and futility (the nets in question are supplied in lieu of DDT, the only effective method of preventing malaria, which means that the U.S. do-gooders are actually making things worse). Even the photo is characteristic: precocious children, prematurely dowdy woman, self-conscious emotionalism. (Obama foreign policy advisor Richard Danzig's suggestion that we turn to Winnie-the-Pooh for expertise on counterterrorism strategy is all of a piece with this tendency. Misplaced whimsy is a major indicator of wimp leftism. Many readers will recall the craze for giving copies of Dr. Seuss to college grads a few years ago.) We're all familiar with these types - they appear constantly in media "person in the street" interviews, furrowing their brows and pensively staring off into the distance before intoning that "arms are for hugging", "global warming is about our grandchildren", "change is about hope", or whatever the slogan of the moment happens to be. Wimp lefties don't know much about politics, ideology, or anything else. But they know what's right -- or they will, as soon as the mass media tells them. They're very nice people. They really are. That's what makes them dangerous. To many conservatives, the weird left -- AKA the wacko left or the loony left, is the left, the perfect representation of left-wing thinking and behavior. The wacko left can be defined as leftism as personality disorder, the contemporary expression of Orwell's "nudists, fruit-juice drinkers, and sandal wearers". They tend to be obsessive single-issue types, overwhelmed with paranoia and consumed with conspiracy theories. 9/11 Truthers are the purest current example of the weird left, as are "AIDS is a CIA plot" types, principally among blacks. These are the people most often found romping on DU and Kos. Although we might be tempted to view them as a pure liability, that in fact is not the case. While their equivalent on the right -- Birchers, McCarthyites and so on -- are usually isolated or ejected, weird lefties actually serve quite a useful purpose, acting as a conduit for ideas -- gay marriage, animal rights, Karl Rove as evil mastermind -- too grotesque to be planted in any other way. Examples of the loony left include such figures as Michael Moore and Cindy Sheehan. The hard left is the core left, the armature without which the other factions would fall apart. They are directly descended from the communist groups (the CPUSA, Trotsyites, and so forth) of the ‘30s and ‘40s, through New Left organizations such as the SDS and the Weathermen. The hard left consists of intelligentsia and activists, people who spend their lives reading Alinsky http://www.fraw.org.uk/library/002/anarchism/alinsky_radical.html and Gramsci http://www.marxists.org/archive/gramsci/intro.htm and trying their damndest to put those dicta into practice. They are usually found in universities and surrounding communities, though they are also present in left-wing think tanks and lobbying outfits. Most of us will go through life without ever knowingly encountering one of them. Through their intellectual control over the much larger wimp left (who would be utterly lost without their direction), they possess influence all out of proportion to their numbers. The prototype of the American hard leftist is Tom Hayden. Usually, a political candidate running on a left-wing platform will be associated with one strand in particular. For hard leftists we have Henry Wallace fronting for the communists in 1948, and George McGovern acting as point man for the antiwar movement in 1972. Representatives of the weird left are rarer, although we do have Dennis Kucinich. As in anything else, there is no lack of wimp leftists in presidential politics -- Kerry, Gore, Mondale... take your pick. Michael Dukakis' unwillingness to use the death penalty for a hypothetical convicted rapist/murderer of his wife is wimp leftism in chemically pure form. The extraordinary thing about Barack Obama is that he's intimately connected to all these factions in a way that may never quite have been the case before. The wacko left is represented by Jeremiah Wright and James P. Meeks, with their AIDS conspiracies and related yarns, and ACORN, the leftist fringe group for which Obama served as attorney for many years. The hard left is represented by his Marxist mentor Frank Marshall Davis, http://www.aim.org/aim%1ecolumn/obamas%1ecommunist%1ementor/ who introduced Obama to left-wing politics at an early age, Fr. Michael Pfleger, an advocate of "liberation theology", the application of Marxism to Christianity, and former Weatherman Bill Ayers, who was contending that America could be set right by a few bombs as late as September 11, 2001. The wimp left is, obviously enough, the Obama voter. Never, I think, has any politician been so closely and equally intertwined with all three aspects of American leftism. It's as if Obama were out to corner the entire American left, leaving no room for anyone else. If that was the case, then he's succeeded. Of course, it may not have been intentional at all. It may simply be the result of an entire life spent with the left since his early encounters with Davis. But intentionally or not, Obama appears to be adapting the methods of the left, the means by which sanitized, acceptable versions of left-wing ideas are introduced into American political discourse, as part of his campaign strategy. The Gramscian tactics utilized by the American left were predicated on the internal takeover of various institutions (media, the academy, education) which could then be used to push a left-wing agenda. But there were limitations to this technique: these institutions were nowhere near as powerful in the U.S. as in Gramsci's Europe, where government monopolies and elitism are common. This limited the influence and reach of entrenched American leftists. This is where the left's triune nature came in. The millions comprising the wimp left served as a transmission belt for ideas and practices developed by the hard leftists of the academy and the activist organizations. By this means such ideas were "laundered", appearing to emerge from sincere, befuddled "liberals", rather than the career apparatchiks, which eased their acceptance by the public at large. More bizarre concepts were presented by the wacko left (the most effective way to make something seem harmless is to arrange to have it said by a clown). If there was too much resistance, the attempt was curtailed, and the wimps, or alternately the wackballs, took the punishment. The hardcore lefties remained safely insulated. This is an extraordinarily fruitful technique, allowing the introduction and cultivation of ideas -- gay marriage, terrorist nobility, contempt for the armed forces -- that could be introduced in no other way. Obama appears to be doing much the same thing in his political strategy, selling himself -- or rather, his campaign persona -- in similar fashion. Through his connection to ACORN, Pfleger, and Ayers, Obama assures the hard left that he is one of them, an adherent of their tactics and goals. His connections to Black Liberation Theology imply at least some sympathy for the wacko left. But at the same time, he presents himself to the broader audience of wimps as a purely "liberal" figure, the second coming of JFK, if not the Redeemer Himself. Every now and then, Obama will come up with a proposal derived directly from the hard-left playbook -- tax the rich, unilateral retreat from Iraq, "war crimes trials" -- couched in terms acceptable to wimp leftists. If a public backlash develops, he simply drops it and returns to soothing Volvo-and-latte platitudes, using the wimps in the same manner as the hard left -- as a shield for his actual agenda. It's an interesting strategy. But can it work? It's based on several assumptions - that the U.S. is at base a leftist country, open to a leftist message; that the wimp left is a powerful influence; and that a tactic designed for use over the long term can work in the pressure-cooker atmosphere of a political campaign. But the U.S. remains a center-right country. The wimp left is an object of derision (even among themselves) as much as anything else. And the disturbing results obtained by the hard leftists have come only after lengthy effort, at times stretching to decades. It's also extremely risky. Obama's worst moments have arisen from his relationships with members of the more radical left-wing branches, Jeremiah Wright representing the loony left, Pfleger and Ayers the hard left. In no case did his elaborately contrived latte-left facade protect him from the ensuing controversy. Clearly, this strategy comprises a weakness. Obama is figuratively leaping from stone to stone, from a hard-left position here to a "liberal" one there, always keeping on the move, never allowing himself to be cornered, never getting his feet wet. The trick is to hit him in mid-leap and assure that he gets a good dunking. Obama has gotten an easy ride in his previous campaign crises through the assumption that the offenses were personal -- that the problem lay in his relations with Wright, Pfleger and so on. But they were no such thing -- it was the ideas that were the problem. And Obama was never seriously questioned about those ideas. Did he accept Pfleger's vision of Christ as a revolutionary? Did he share Ayers' blazing contempt for American society? He must have expressed belief in Black Liberation Theology, a doctrine of black supremacy, when joining Jeremiah Wright's church. Did he truly believe it then? Does he believe it now? If not, when did he stop believing it? By this means, Obama can be cornered. He does not like being cornered. As the last few months make clear, he does not take it well. Corner him enough times, and his facade will crack, his image as a genial Starbucks and Whole Foods lefty will lie in tatters, and his adherence to the cold and crazed doctrines of the core left will be exposed for what it is. It's not a complete strategy, of course. But the customary electoral strategy of GOP operatives and consultants (e.g. Tom Delay's recent accusation http://edition.cnn.com/POLITICS/blogs/politicalticker/2006/12/is%1eobama%1emarxist%1eleftist.html of Marxism won't work. If didn't work during the Cold War , so it certainly won't work today.) Obama is a strange candidate -- how strange we have as yet no clear idea. Revealing the depths of that strangeness calls for unconventional political tactics, and the will to use them. J.R. Dunn is consulting editor of American Thinker
|
Recent Articles
Blog Posts
|
|
||
Comments
After "Why Do We Call Them Democrats". I was hoping that we would start calling them "socialists" instead of "leftists". whether wimp, weird, hard or loony.
Posted by: stuart williiamson | June 24, 2008 01:42 AM
Brilliant! Thank you so much for this. Absolutely brilliant.
Posted by: TechEd | June 24, 2008 01:44 AM
Obama must be demanded to accept town hall debates after the conventions. Character qualities require the leader of the free world not be a wimp or a coward. Obama's a "coward" if he avoids this format. Why not call him out as such, forcing him to accept?
Posted by: Ciscokid | June 24, 2008 06:47 AM
I call the Wimps "wannabees". Wannabees are the ones who aspire to the glittering lies made by the True Leftists. The True Leftists are the hard core narcisists who desire power over others more than anything in this world and will do and say anything to get it. They see themselves as enlightened saviours, corageously fighting against those impulses in humanity that only they - the annointed - have the ability to recognize as evil.
There are many who have said it better - Chesterton, Menken et al - but it never hurts to restate their tactics and organizing principals again.
Posted by: Mr Ed | June 24, 2008 06:55 AM
Brilliant
Posted by: Bill | June 24, 2008 07:06 AM
Obama is a strange candidate because never has one so vapid and feckless made such inroads. The wimp left? The sheep left is a better description. Fad followers are in my estimation, mere sheep and the left is loaded with them.
As to the hard left, I see not the difference. They differ from the wimp left only in that they are bitter, unpleasant, mean, nasty, at times violent people who are in deep need of counseling. They still follow the hers.
It would be amazing to have a presidential race where each candidate engages in real intellectual debate. Alas, apparently those days are over? Now all we have are pop star who swoon the minions of the left or a tottering dolt who panders to the other party and dumps on his own base.
How exciting, knowing my future might be decided by a intellectual debate I could have dissected in kindergarten.
Posted by: DaveT | June 24, 2008 07:23 AM
These leftists all comprise a minority.We are not a liberal nation and will not stand for any of Obamas ridiculous plans.No matter what any one tells a pollster, when they get in the booth they will not vote for a man with no experience, no common sense and one that looks like he would be blown over in a good wind storm.
These are dangerous times and we want STRENGH in the oval office.
Posted by: Phil | June 24, 2008 07:39 AM
I agree with Mr. Dunn wholeheartedly that the ideas are the problem. Ideas are made clear by clarifying the philosophy behind them as he has done here. However, philosophy does not translate well in the sound-bite age. I am curious as to what he means by "unconventional political tactics." I think I may be for them. But cornering such a slippery fish as Obama who swims in the friendly muck of the MSM might prove to be impossible.
Posted by: John Cooper | June 24, 2008 08:00 AM
The wimp left is, in my view, the very same "useful idiots" segment that the communists so valued. The current hard left is nothing more than the resultant plant that was seeded by the communists back in the 1930s. Obama does need to be confronted and beaten....beaten at the polls badly (whether one likes McCain or not).
Posted by: ThomNJ | June 24, 2008 08:28 AM
The glue which holds Obama's Leftists together is the illusion Hollywood created to help get Obama the role as a US President.
He's fake like Hollywood which is why people are in love his fairy tale.
Posted by: syn | June 24, 2008 08:36 AM
Given that the MSM is in the tank for Obama....do you think it will be possible to implement what Mr. Dunn suggests (i.e. getting Obama to answer a straight question with a straight response)? I would be interested in people's thoughts. Cheers.
Posted by: Nuke09 | June 24, 2008 09:31 AM
Thoroughly enjoyable opinion piece. However, is there any way to check that the urls in it actually go somewhere? Perhaps a consulting editor could ensure that a '404 file not found' not be a distraction.
/heh
Posted by: Moulderx1 | June 24, 2008 09:53 AM
We too often make the mistake of assuming that the American electorate understands the choices in clear terms. They do not. It is the responsibility of those opposed to the left to explain. To teach.
Therefore, we must do two things: 1) explain why the positions of the left are wrong for America (high taxes, appeasement foreign policy, government run medicine, federal government sponsored volunteer programs (100 hours of community service gets you a college grant--take my money from me and give it back if I behave the way you want me to), etcetera; and 2) define Obama's associations.
In this second case, the ad spot would run like this: "What is ACORN?" [list their positions, statements, actions, etc.] "Who is ACORN?" [list notable members and their actions] "Who was their attorney? - Obama." "Obama: right for ACORN, wrong for America."
Posted by: dale | June 24, 2008 10:45 AM
Here's an idea. What if Republicans actually nominated a Conservative (or at least a non-leftist), so we at least have a CHANCE to beat Obama. Right now, if Obama loses we are still stuck with McCain - who seems to LOVE LEFTISTS! What are we to do with such an IGNORANT REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP (if you can call it leadership). Unless something amazing happens at the Republican Convention, We are screwed!
Posted by: David J | June 24, 2008 10:57 AM
Clearly, Obama's entire campaign is based on speaking empty rhetoric to the masses in the hopes of never having to detail what he really believes. That is the only way a leftist can get elected in the United States, except in a few areas of the country where those opposed to American values seem to congregate (like the leper colony of San Fran).
Posted by: Mojo | June 24, 2008 11:15 AM
You are right that just summing up Obama's policies and ideology as "Marxist" will have little impact because most Americans have never been taught or shown the outcome of Marxism by their Marxist public school and college re-educators.
We have to get down to the policy and views of Obama and his supporters. We discovered the truth about his "church" and when it was exposed, Obama took a big hit. There is so much more to explore in the wierd world of Obama and his supporters. The word "hate" keeps popping into my mind. But there is also the economic policies that would destroy wealth and the middle class in the US.
One problem we have is that McCain is not much further right than Obama is on economic, overpopulation and extreme environmental policies that will sink the US economy and our infrastructure.
Too bad we ended up with McCain - our latest Bobdole.
Posted by: sara | June 24, 2008 11:32 AM
U.S. remains a center-right country. The wimp left is an object of derision (even among themselves).
That's funny!
Posted by: RM | June 24, 2008 11:49 AM
Obama is indeed the embodiment and unification of Wimps, Weirdos, and Wackademics, a sort of "anti-word" made flesh.
Posted by: Gagdad Bob | June 24, 2008 11:51 AM
The media will never expose the left they are part of it. This election we must win with shoe leather. Talk to anyone that will listen. And its not only about the president we need to organize and work for congress and senate and state offices and we need to start now
Posted by: okie/paul | June 24, 2008 12:18 PM
I envision the structure of the left more like a matrix than a tripartite agglomeration. Along one dimension of the matrix lies a continuum that describes the relative extremity of the person's leftist beliefs. They range from those who have a few socialist tendencies but without a great deal of conviction, to those who are full on collectivists and communists. Along the other dimension of this matrix lies a continuum of sanity. This dimension ranges from the relatively normal to the full on whacko.
Much like the Myers-Briggs personality type, you can describe lefties as belonging to four major groups - high leftist/high whacko; high leftist/low whacko; low leftist/low whacko and low leftist/high whacko. Of course there is an almost infinite interplay of degrees of leftism and degrees of sanity.
Personally, I use my assessment of lefties along both dimensions in order to size them up when I'm considering debating them. I respond to them based on my understanding of where they stand on these two dimensions. To wit, I won't waste my time debating facts with a high leftist/high whacko type, simply because it's a waste of my time. Instead, I spend my time with these folks identifying their illogic and delusions and defusing the impact of their arguments by helping others understand how out of touch with reality they are. With those who are reasonably grounded and are not heavily entrenched in leftism, I can engage in a full debate on issues and particulars.
I find this system helps me to quickly adapt to my opposition and gives me a framework in which to understand the level of threat that any leftie presents.
Posted by: Geoff Gale | June 24, 2008 12:21 PM
Americans aren't just center-right. They've always been a hopeful, optimistic people too: Progress. Onward and upward. And Americans have always been risk-takers.
Obama is offering a hopeful, uplifting message in a troubled time. I believe it's specious. But just as in 1980, voters will take a chance on the challenger, even if they have doubts about him or his policies, if they do not hear anything more positive or hopeful from the incumbent party.
Conservatives today sound strikingly grim. They seem unable to offer a bright future for America--just more war and more economic dislocation caused by globalization, automation, and a shrinking middle class.
Finally, conservatives are still twisting themselves into pretzels trying to defend Bush's foreign and war policies, long after the electorate has soured on them.
And until conservatives change their tone, they cannot hope to win this election or any future election.
It's not McCain's fault. He remains more popular than the rest of his party. It's his party's fault.
Posted by: SteveL | June 24, 2008 12:59 PM
David J said:
"What if Republicans actually nominated a Conservative (or at least a non-leftist), so we at least have a CHANCE to beat Obama. Right now, if Obama loses we are still stuck with McCain - who seems to LOVE LEFTISTS! What are we to do with such an IGNORANT REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP (if you can call it leadership)."
Uh, Dave, the voters, most of whom were registered Republicans, elected McCain, not the 'Republican leadership'.
Sara said:
"One problem we have is that McCain is not much further right than Obama is on economic, overpopulation and extreme environmental policies that will sink the US economy and our infrastructure."
That is quite a reactionary but common sentiment that if considering the facts is quite wrong. While McCain might not be as conservative on many areas as many people would like he is very much to the right of Obama on most of the key issues...and lest everyone forget a key point in this essay...American is a CENTER RIGHT country not a hard right or extremely conservative country. To Sara's examples:
- Economic: this is the most rediculous comparison. McCain is fiscally conservative and is advocating tax reductions with spending controls. He does do some silly populist rethoric but overall he's pro growth.
- Overpopulation: he's pro choice but not in a dogmatic fashion and does not advocate government spending. This may be his least conservative area but still less damaging then the hard left Obama
- Environment: While I don't like his acceptance of the AGW fraud he's changed position on drilling (accept for ANWAR) and has proposed an overall quite good energy policy...again while not perfect a huge difference to Obama's silliness.
McCain is also good on the war and national defence in general and is a born, bread American who's served our country with distinction and at his core shares our core American values...unlike the strange foreign feel to Obama regarding core American values.
Drop the emotions and vote with your brain engaged.
Posted by: phil g | June 24, 2008 01:59 PM
What's up with bad mouthing the Birchers? I'd rather elect one of them than McCain.
We need public service anouncements about how economies work (i.e.e wealth is created but not by the government), Hegellian dialectic brainwashing and Gramsci's long march through our culture. Or we did about a generation ago. It is probably too late now. KGB officers describes how they influenced our culture
Posted by: mandy | June 24, 2008 02:16 PM
The "weird" left is more than a transmission belt of the ideas of the hard left, they are the critical source of funding that enables them to push their cause front and center. They are among the wealthiest of the population who enthusiastically contribute to their cause. This is the source of Obama's record fund raising and why the hard left now owns the Democrats.
Posted by: George S | June 24, 2008 02:38 PM
This is still a center-right country, but just barely so. The ranks of the "Wimp" left have been greatly inflated by leftist control of educational curricula. Obama's viability as a Presidential candidate would not have been possible without the massive indoctrination effort of the past 40 years. There are millions of young liberals whose world view makes them believe they must vote for a Black anti-nationalist, lest anyone think they might be a racist or a chauvinist.
Posted by: Beef | June 24, 2008 03:34 PM
9/11 truthers aren't "left," Mr. Dunn, we're a very broad group of people who aren't saddled with this 'groupthink-itis' to which you have fallen prey. Just do some simple reading or investigative work and you'll find out 9/11 was an inside job. Our movement is growing and your old way of thinking is falling to the wayside. Join us and join free humanity. Don't be a slave!
Posted by: Andrew | June 24, 2008 04:14 PM
For more on what drives the Left go to:http://www.MaxEntropy.Squarespace.com
Posted by: Blair | June 24, 2008 04:23 PM
I know I'm preaching to the choir, but...I had an Obamazombie campaigner call me during the Pa. primaries. A polite, pleasant, intelligent sounding young man. He asked the usual, scripted, leading questions. I said 'Shazaam!!'... an oppourtunity for informed dialogue with the loyal opposition! I told him the reason I wasn't voting for BHO was not his skin complexion, but his Marxism. 'His what? I don't understand what that means, sir.' 'His ideology...haven't you ever heard of Karl Marx?' 'No sir.' Wow. I gave up on giving him the 'Cliff Notes' on Communism. Why bother? He already slept with the Big Green Pod under his bed in college. He is now of 'The Body.'
Lenin's Bolsheviks schismed every which way in their bull sessions. Left Bolsheviks. Right Bolsheviks. Troskyites. Kirovites.(Uncle Joe's secret hit team wacked them all, with a wink from Vlad the Impaler.) I hear the closed door proceedings were quite a furball. Their strategic Malthusian genocides opened a can of worms that will haunt the world forever. A Mt. Everest of bleached bones... a Ganges of blood and tears. They're still sqiggling around and stinking up the joint. Especially in Chicago as of late. Radical punk Bill Ayre's is an un-repentant SDS anarchist, who's equally lovely wife gushingly praised the Manson massacre's dinner fork in the dying Sharon Tate's pregnant belly as the groovy opening salvo of the revolution. Helter Skelter!
They are now both Distinguished Professors in Alinskytown, on BHO's mentor squad, and both have VIP gravitas in the city council chambers. I've already done my own personal Taxonomy on the Liberal Left. It's way too gross and disgusting for the classy AT forum.
Please keep posting my anonymous patriotic friends. I'm learning so much from you! Great links! From the bottom of my ex-radical, born-again Reaganite, hippy/socialist heart, I thank you beautiful guys for inspiring me. There's so much at stake. Don't stop teaching the absolute, unvarnished truth with concrete, undeniable facts! This is the sacred First Amendment incarnate. (Honey...speaking of Illinois traitors...get me the airsick bag...that POS Dickie Durbin in on the Laura Ingraham show...get 'em girl!)
Posted by: Ranger Joe | June 24, 2008 05:20 PM
You forgot, Comrade Obama is a post turtle.
Shuck and jive, ethanol is the shuck, the 40 million acres to drill on is the jive. Shuck and jive, hoodwinking and bamboozling, it's all Comrade Obama has to offer.
Posted by: bill-tb | June 24, 2008 08:02 PM
Andrew, resist my brother! That 9/11 was an inside job is an evil disinformation plot orchestrated by Darth Chainee and Chimpy W. McDeath as the second stage of the Rovian Dialectic. When Obama is elected, the world will be theirs!! Arrghh!!
(my name is George and I approved this message)
Posted by: George S | June 24, 2008 08:08 PM
I was on a fishing charter last weekend and was talking to the boat captain who was upset about the cost of fuel and who told me that if fuel goes to $5 bucks a gallon he'll be tying his boat up and suspending his business.
He then proceeded to go into the usual "George Bush is the root of all evil". When I explained to him the details of why fuel was so expensive, highlighting the reasons for the crisis, his eyes glazed over and he tried to tell me how Bush and his oil buddies were making so much money off of the energy shortage that it would continue.
My informed comeback, in the form of a question, was that if GW was making so much money off of oil profiteering, why wouldn't he and his oil pals mandate that we exploit the resources we have here in the U.S. and make even greater profits?? Silence.
These are the passive, biatching blue collar democrats. They're really conservatives but for some reason can't come to grips with it (especially in the People's Republic of Massachusetts) and continue to support the failed policies of the left.
Posted by: asdf | June 24, 2008 09:38 PM
Absolutely true. My daughter is one of the wimp leftists. You described her perfectly. I actually paid to have her brainwashed by the weird left and the hard left for four years in college. Her brother tells me she may vote for Obama (she is very mad about Clinton). I love her anyway. We just don't talk politics. Ever!
Posted by: Ella | June 24, 2008 09:39 PM
The Loony Left is alive and kicking, as the comment by "Andrew" attests. Actually, these people insult our intelligence, as well mock the laws of physics, thermodynamics, and chemistry.
Ranger Joe: As one who used to be on the Left 30 years ago (I left the Left in 1987)I can say that the vast majority of so-called Leftists have no idea of the philosophical basis of their worldview. They do not know Marx, let alone Gramsci and the Frankfurt School Marxists, who I studied. The Obonga kiddies are Lenin's useful idiots. It's symptomatic of the times we live in, with a dumbed-down education from kindergarten onwards through the elite universities, where rampant grade inflation protects their fragile self-esteems.
Every Obonga supporter I personally know knows nothing of the intellectual influences in Obonga's ideological development, from his Communist parents, through Frank Marshall Davis, on down to Dr. Rashid Khalidi. If you bring it up, they think you are making s**t up, just to slander their candidate. Fact and ideas have no solid footing in their universe. It's frightening how these kids have degrees and are so uncultured, unlearned, ungrounded, and in denial of reality.
Ask these kids what Liberation Theology is (I studied it when I was a Jesuit seminarian and read a variety of its authors, but not Cone)
Posted by: fredjr | June 24, 2008 10:08 PM
Andrew! You delusional weeny. I see you there, sitting in your mom's basement in your SpongeBob boxer shorts, munching bowls of Count Chocula, clacking away on your keyboard, writing your apocalyptic manifesto. The moon landing was staged in a studio in Arizona! I saw it on the Net! Michael Moore made a movie that proves 'W' golfed with Osama. FDR sacrificed our entire Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbor to get us into the war. I saw it on TV! It's a Zionist-Bildaburger conspiracy!
You tell the family of my newlywed friend who was instantly evaporated by Mohammed Atta's flying skills at Cantor-Fitzgerald (RIP Keith), or my neighbor who was severely burned by a flaming fire ball of jet fuel blasting out of an opening lobby elevator door, that their government arranged this. My nephew just got off the plaza with his life. He watched people falling out of the sky holding hands. He still has nightmares about that morning. There was a desperate, improvised Dunkirk evacuation off the tip of Manahattan across the Hudson to Jersey City.
I saw the towers burning from a mountain top in NJ. A funeral pyre. MY beloved nation was ruthlessly attacked by a subhuman Islamo-fascist murder cult. (Was yours?) How dare you make such an absurd, creepy assertion. A Jewish curse on you...may all your teeth fall out except one...and may that one need a root canal. (At least I kept my rant clean.)
Posted by: Ranger Joe | June 24, 2008 11:39 PM
To Phil:
You are wrong. They now comprise almost 60% of American people. If the true Americans do not stand against their growing enemy....
by November, you will witness....
The Rise of United Socialist States of America.
See you in Canada or UK if that happens.
Posted by: seeker | June 25, 2008 12:09 AM
WHY NOT TALK TO MCCAIN AND DISCUSS ALL THESE THINGS WITH HIM PERSONALLY, USING ONLY THE FACTS (NOT OUR USUAL HYPED WORDS).
WE CAN DEBUNK THE TEFLON OF OBAMA.
Posted by: seeker | June 25, 2008 12:33 AM
"9/11 truthers aren't "left," Mr. Dunn, we're a very broad group of people who aren't saddled with this 'groupthink-itis' to which you have fallen prey. Just do some simple reading or investigative work and you'll find out 9/11 was an inside job. Our movement is growing and your old way of thinking is falling to the wayside. Join us and join free humanity. Don't be a slave!"
Since your post wasn't followed by 200 pages of "hahahahahahaha," I'm going to assume you're serious. If so, please explain to me how a rudimentary grasp of physics -which your group of conspiratorial wackos sorely lacks- is an example of "groupthink-itis." I think you'd have to drink some pretty potent Kool-Aid to believe that childish "9/11 Truth" nonsense.
Posted by: Lucas D. | June 25, 2008 12:40 AM
For more information on the radical left and information on Obama:
http://www.usasurvival.org/ck2.22.08.html
http://www.usasurvival.org/docs/chicago-obama.pdf
Posted by: Oakley | June 25, 2008 12:41 AM
I have many comments but I must keep it brief. It is to the democrats advantage to stereotype, categorize and pigeonhole their constituency as done in this article. By doing this you smokescreen yourself to positions that do not fall into these ideas. If the democratic party is made up of only these three factions, why is Obama up in double digit points in the last two polls (and yes, I realize that there are some polls that show a smaller lead)? Many of you mention that we are a right of center country, which I agree with, but by resorting to name calling and stereotyping you have already sold yourself short. It is this mindset that will help the republicans lose the election in the fall... We may be right of center, but people's ideas and positions change. There has been a growing number of people identifying themselves as independents and a shrinking number of people identifying themselves as republican (http://pewresearch.org/pubs/773/fewer-voters-identify-as-republicans).
As one columnist recently wrote (I'm paraphrasing), "One great thing about democracy is that neither party can be right all of the time."
Posted by: IndyPaul | June 25, 2008 08:31 AM
Interesting analysis of the Democratic party. How do your recommend fighting the Wimp Left? Their obviously the bigger group the ones that fall for the whole, obama hope, mccain fear slogan.
Posted by: Barack Obama | June 25, 2008 12:27 PM
Please stop with the stupid Leftist stereotypes. Thanks to this nation's purge and scourge tactics, we make up only a small percentage of the electorate. The fact is, Barack Obama is popular with a broad spectrum of Americans - DEAL WITH IT!
Posted by: Ruby | June 25, 2008 01:54 PM
It's ironic that leftists view Obama "as a purely "liberal" figure, the second coming of JFK, if not the Redeemer Himself."
JFK was a pretty conservative guy. He opposed Communism. He might not have done all that well in the brief time he was in office but Democrats of that era weren't afraid to stand up for American values, given that most of them were WWII veterans. They understood the danger of totalitarian ideas.
I associate the "whacko" left with the people I hear regularly on C-SPAN, who love Mearsheimer and his partner. They're the ones who say Bush is a war criminal and should be impeached and brought before the Hague. As someone else said, they're usually the money guys. They accuse Republicans of operating a "smear campaign" when they themselves are the masters of the smear.
Witness Obama preemptively calling Republicans racists when no one has opened his mouth about the junior senator from Illinois.
Posted by: pmk | June 25, 2008 06:45 PM
fredjr...thanks for the back ping (hip blog talk)...I hear ya brother...or is it Father? As a lapsed Catholic (pure sloth and indolence)...Jesus is my best friend with or without a religion...although I did receive the Eucharist last fall at a U. of Notre Dame chapel. My genius step-son goes to grad school there. What a mysterious, holy place. The Basilica...the Grotto...Touchdown Jesus. Awesome vibe! The scholarly Jesuit tradition is akin to the Jewish learning heritage (my original European roots are proudly Jewish...my ancestors converted in the bad old days when being a Jew was illegal.) Soldiers of human enlightenment and progress. As a retired Forest Ranger with a huge accumulation of books and copious free time...these are the days! A pleasure communicating with you sir! Blessings on your big brain and big heart!
Posted by: Ranger Joe | June 25, 2008 10:48 PM
You sound bitter over the rejection of Conservstism by America.
Posted by: Marko | June 26, 2008 08:49 AM
Dunn's analysis is fascinating. As someone who is proud to be catagorized as "left", perhaps "wimp", perhaps "hard", his piece confirms my sense that there is great fear in the conservative ranks. I suggest that Mr. Dunn's amorphous "left" be better labeled as "citizens voting their self-interest". The politics of name calling and fear are being retired and replaced by the politics of a citizenry that has been beaten down and impoverished by the special interest policies of the conservatives. Obama is not the perfect spokesperson for this change but he is greatly preferable to a continuation of the pattern of failure our country has endured.
Posted by: Tom Inghelram | June 26, 2008 01:09 PM
You forgot the most important part of the Obama coalition: Independents who are mad as hell at the Republican Party. The Republicans have no one to blame for this but themselves.
McCain is one of the few Republicans who can save the party from itself. McCain knew better than to jump on the anti-immigrant bandwagon. The U.S. born children of illegal immigrants are citizens (it's in the Constitution.) They grow up, and they vote. California Republicans tried to be the anti-immigrant party. Look how well that turned out.
Republicans have an even larger demographic problem than immigration. In 2004, the younger the voter, the more likely they would vote for Kerry. Do you think the new 18-21 year old voters who were too young in 2004 are more liberal or more conservative than those who have died since then?
The Democratic base is growing while the Republican base is shrinking.
However, McCain's moderation puts him in a good position to pickup the moderate wing of a Democratic Party that is moving left. Joe Lieberman is already backing him. Plenty of Hillary supporters will as well, especially in Arkansas, Kentucky, and West Virginia. McCain is the type of Republican who can offset the Democratic demographic advantage by realigning the parties.
20 years from now, McCain will be remembered as the "new Republican" who saved the party from the loony right.
Posted by: Anonymous | June 26, 2008 09:58 PM
Who are the citizens Tom Inghelram identifies as voting their self-interst and can they actually be a majority of voters? I can understand the affinity and self interest of African Americans voting for Obama. I cannot understand the "self-interest" position of upper middle class supporters of Obama. I can understand that "white guilt" may factor into their support, but I still can't identify their self interest. I understand the left-wing grounding via the educational system that would result in younger voters supporting Obama, but I still don't understand their "self-interest" being served by his candidacy. If it were possible to clarify the actual "self interest" of the variety of supporters, it would assist in creating a means of identifying an alternative strategy of satisfying that self-interest.
Posted by: NCMike | June 26, 2008 11:35 PM
Great article! You really nailed the concept of "The Power" behind the left ("Useful Idiots") in a very understandable way.
Posted by: Valentina | June 27, 2008 01:05 AM
Osama Obama's followers=Lenin"s useful IDIOTS.
Posted by: mike geremia | June 28, 2008 12:19 PM
A useful taxonomy, but the labels could use some improvement. Let me suggest the Feel-good Left, the Fantasist Left, and the Fundamentalist Left. Or perhaps the Kumbayas, the kooks, and the cadres.
Posted by: Kelly | June 30, 2008 09:48 PM
An Obama nation will be an abomination. The country will never recover.
Posted by: Kevin K. | July 4, 2008 03:33 PM
Obama is not a lefty. I would know. I am a lefty. Obama is just a normal Dem. If and when the media begins reporting on the failures of the Bush administration, perhaps then you will understand WHY people are heading towards Obama. LIFE SUCKS in the USA under Bush who was installed by all of you centrist-rightists -- NOT THE LEFT. You guys almost killed the world! Republicans, I bet some of your lives are horrible too! No health care, rising oil prices, your relatives in the Iraq war, you lost your home, you have no job, wages stagnant, Wall Street bankers are laughing at you, you have no stability, the schools are bad, your preacher just wants more money from you, you can't afford anything, and you have nothing to retire on. And the whole world hates the USA and thinks we're horrible non-law abiding types who torture innocent people in our prisons. VOTING OBAMA is an apology for failed Bush policies. SORRY WORLD. LOVE, USA
Posted by: I wish Obama was a lefty! | July 15, 2008 01:50 AM