Friday, January 20, 2006
Just a Suggestion...
OLD SCHOOL. The liberal elite -- you know, the ones who are so much better and smarter than the rest of us -- seem to be having themselves a bad week in all kinds of arenas.
Hollywood liberal genius George Clooney probably thought he was being as witty as a latter-day Oscar Wilde at the Golden Globes:
...Clooney, during his acceptance speech for best supporting actor, thanked Jack Abramoff “just because” and made a comment about the lobbyist’s name.
“Who would name their kid Jack with the last words ‘off’ at the end of your last name? No wonder that guy is screwed up,” Clooney said during the internationally televised awards show.
But a joke can be said to have backfired when an aged parent of the target offers up this kind of response:
“You want to make fun. You can do that, but you don't make fun of someone else's hardships and misery,” the 78-year-old Abramoff said. “We’ve gone through quite a bit in our family. But the political end of it and the media end of it and all the other areas are one thing. When you see something like that on a show for 500 million people, it was not only a slap in my son’s face but in my father’s.”
There can't be anything much worse than being made to feel small by one of your inferiors. But that's been happening with regularity this week. Consider the sad plight of the Numero Uno Democrat legislator:
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid on Thursday apologized to 33 Republican senators singled out for ethics criticism in a report from his office titled "Republican Abuse of Power."
"The document released by my office yesterday went too far and I want to convey to you my personal regrets," Reid said in a letter.
"I am writing to apologize for the tone of this document and the decision to single out individual senators for criticism in it."
Reid came under attack Wednesday over the report, which was issued by his staff on Senate letterhead, even as he and fellow Democrats released ethics overhaul proposals.
That's got to sting, having to swallow words of that sort. But it's nothing compared to what Teddy Kennedy, as well as other members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, have had to swallow. Kennedy publicly accused Judge Alito of belonging to a sexist Ivy League organization, only to be exposed himself as a current member of a sexist Ivy league organization. Kennedy said Judge Alito was "itching to overturn Roe v. Wade," only to have the National Enquirer expose an "itch" of his own that fully explains why the senator is so passionately devoted to legal abortion. Kennedy and his committee colleagues have also been subjected to disciplinary treatment of this sort:
On the other side of the aisle, Republicans treated the confirmation hearings like some kind of incredibly arduous burden that might prove impossible for the judge to endure. Some Republicans seem to be amazed that Alito has survived at all.Mean? Is it really possible that liberals can be characterized as mean? According to the Washington Post, yes:
For example, Senator Orrin Hatch said, "I don't think you've been fairly treated and it makes everybody wonder why would anyone want to do these jobs."
While I am amazed that Alito managed to stay awake the whole time, let's not get carried away here.
Granted, sitting in any kind of forum and being forced to talk to Kennedy, Durbin, and Schumer is a borderline violation of Geneva Convention rules against torture. You'll get no argument from me, there. But it's not like these people are destroying Alito’s self-esteem.
For Alito, being lectured by these three goons on character and morality is like having Manson, Bundy, and Dahmer chairing a committee that criticizes your "sketchy people skills and inability to play well with others." I seriously doubt that Justice Alito goes home crying at night because Ted Kennedy was mean to him.
The Washington Post shut down one of its blogs Thursday after the newspaper's ombudsman raised the ire of readers by writing that lobbyist Jack Abramoff gave money to the Democrats as well as to Republicans.
At the center of a congressional bribery investigation, Abramoff gave money to Republicans while he had his clients donate to both parties, though mostly to Republicans.
In her Sunday column, ombudsman Deborah Howell wrote that Abramoff "had made substantial campaign contributions to both major parties," prompting a wave of nasty reader postings on post.blog.
There were so many personal attacks that the newspaper's staff could not "keep the board clean, there was some pretty filthy stuff," and so the Post shut down comments on the blog, or Web log, said Jim Brady, executive editor of washingtonpost.com.
"We're not giving up on the concept of having a healthy public dialogue with our readers, but this experience shows that we need to think more carefully about how we do it," Brady wrote on the newspaper's Web site. "There are things that we said we would not allow, including personal attacks, the use of profanity and hate speech."
At the risk of trampling further on already bruised liberal toes, I'm going to suggest that there's a pattern in all this. If the libs involved in all these instances had simply remembered what it is to be polite, none of these unfortunate after-effects would have occurred. Imagine what the week's news would have been like if George Clooney, Harry Reid, Teddy Kennedy, Chuck Schumer, Patrick Leahy, Dick Durbin, Joe Biden, and the passionately liberal readers of the Washington Post had observed the following simple rules from the child's tutorial above:
Do not use Bad Language.
Do not Bully; only Cowards do this.
Be Pleasant, and not Quarrelsome.
Do not Jeer at your Schoolmates, or call them Names which they do not like.
Do not make Fun of Old or Crippled People, but be particularly Polite to them, as well as to Strangers and Foreigners.
Never be Rude to anybody, whether older or younger, richer or poorer, than yourself.
Never Interrupt when a person is speaking.
Always mind your own Business.
I'm well aware that manners is an old-fashioned and outdated subject, which means that George and Harry and company will merely snort if the word is mentioned to them, but there might be a way to help the liberals through this and many future rough patches nonetheless. It's called Sensitivity Training, a mandated program of education that is generally required in any mixed environment of the demographic regarded as the most overprivileged of the group. When black and white conflict in an organization, the whites are consigned to sensitivity training. When men and women conflict in an organization, men are sent to sensitivity training. When black and hispanic and muslim conflict in an organization, whites are ordered to sensitivity training. And so on.
Now if the liberals really believe that they are smarter, better educated, and more enlightened generally than the rest of us, they should be able to see that it is they who are obligated to learn how to get along with the rest of us, not the other way around. The course can be called whatever it has to be to procure their participation, but I'm pretty sure the most effective content would be the one-pager shown above.
I'm sure they'll want to thank me later.