Terry Moran and the class warfare theory

Thomas Lifson
Bookworm filets Terry Moran's controversial ABC News blog post sneering at the Duke 3. She boils down his argument to its pure essence:

...the Duke LaCrosse players are not nice people, so they shouldn't complain about having major criminal charges level[ed] against them, hundreds of thousands of dollars in attorneys fees, and be[coming] the subject of nationwide scorn and humiliation.  Yup, that's what he really says. 
Bookworm wields her scalpel deftly and shows Terry shamelessly taking care to word a passage to be literally true:
"During the incident, racial epithets were hurled at the strippers."
Bookworm sneers:
"...you'll notice that the not so bright Terry is still bright enough not to accuse the now-exonerated players of having voiced those same epithets"
When I first read Terry's post, it struck me as based on a class warfare mindset. Let me explain. If you haven't read it piece already, read Bookworm's post, or if your prefer, Terry's original post, to see what he says.

To me, his restrained sympathy -- "perhaps the outpouring of sympathy for Reade Seligman, Collin Finnerty and David Evans is just a bit misplaced" - for the lacrosse players seems based on the following reasoning:

1. The fact that there are classes of people with fewer resources means that the upper middle class Duke families, able to have justice done in the end, are a privileged class, not victims. The Duke families, stricken with six and seven figure legal bills and lives turned upside down, matter comparatively little because others have it worse. They are winners, and it isn't fair that others are losers. That makes them oppressors.

2. If they are oppressors, then they have no victim credits. Quite the contrary. They fall into the category of victimizer. They constitute a class enemy of the victims of the world, whose rescue has always been the ideological heart of leftist legitimacy.

3. The class enemy of the oppressed should be opposed. Therefore sympathy is inappropriate.  Deny sympathy to the enemy in class warfare.

I can't say if Terry Moran believes this line of reasoning, but it is the best rationalization I can makle for his position.

For the record, Terry's brother Rick is a renowned blogger at Rightwing Nuthouse, a valued frequent contributor to American Thinker (as is Bookworm), and a personal friend. That's why I refer to Terry Moran as "Terry". "Moran" means Rick to me. I do not mean to imply a personal relationship with Terry Moran, whom I have never met. But as he is Rick's brother, I bet I would like him.

Bookworm filets Terry Moran's controversial ABC News blog post sneering at the Duke 3. She boils down his argument to its pure essence:

...the Duke LaCrosse players are not nice people, so they shouldn't complain about having major criminal charges level[ed] against them, hundreds of thousands of dollars in attorneys fees, and be[coming] the subject of nationwide scorn and humiliation.  Yup, that's what he really says. 
Bookworm wields her scalpel deftly and shows Terry shamelessly taking care to word a passage to be literally true:
"During the incident, racial epithets were hurled at the strippers."
Bookworm sneers:
"...you'll notice that the not so bright Terry is still bright enough not to accuse the now-exonerated players of having voiced those same epithets"
When I first read Terry's post, it struck me as based on a class warfare mindset. Let me explain. If you haven't read it piece already, read Bookworm's post, or if your prefer, Terry's original post, to see what he says.

To me, his restrained sympathy -- "perhaps the outpouring of sympathy for Reade Seligman, Collin Finnerty and David Evans is just a bit misplaced" - for the lacrosse players seems based on the following reasoning:

1. The fact that there are classes of people with fewer resources means that the upper middle class Duke families, able to have justice done in the end, are a privileged class, not victims. The Duke families, stricken with six and seven figure legal bills and lives turned upside down, matter comparatively little because others have it worse. They are winners, and it isn't fair that others are losers. That makes them oppressors.

2. If they are oppressors, then they have no victim credits. Quite the contrary. They fall into the category of victimizer. They constitute a class enemy of the victims of the world, whose rescue has always been the ideological heart of leftist legitimacy.

3. The class enemy of the oppressed should be opposed. Therefore sympathy is inappropriate.  Deny sympathy to the enemy in class warfare.

I can't say if Terry Moran believes this line of reasoning, but it is the best rationalization I can makle for his position.

For the record, Terry's brother Rick is a renowned blogger at Rightwing Nuthouse, a valued frequent contributor to American Thinker (as is Bookworm), and a personal friend. That's why I refer to Terry Moran as "Terry". "Moran" means Rick to me. I do not mean to imply a personal relationship with Terry Moran, whom I have never met. But as he is Rick's brother, I bet I would like him.