Friday, January 14, 2011

What if...?

Over at The American Spectator, Justin Paulette tackles what for conservatives is an extremely important question:  "What if [Jared] Loughner wasn't a tin-foil-hat lunatic, but a card-carrying member of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy, a disciple of Sarah Palin and full-throated, tea-dumping critic of Obama's taxation-nation?"

I've been wondering about this myself almost from the moment I first learned of the shooting.  How would the fallout have been different?  How would conservatives have reacted?  (We know how liberals would have reacted:  Exactly the same, only more so.)  Should it have made any difference?

While I steadfastly believe it should not have made any difference at all, I'm just as sure that it would have.  In fact, I'm certain that it would have made a huge difference.  That fact is one of conservatives biggest problems and liberals greatest advantages.

We conservatives need seriously to chew on this question because some event parallel to the one in Tucson--not, we pray, involving violence--will find its way to us whether we like it or not.  We need to be ready.


  1. A more difficult problem: Analogous to this is a comment by the odious Bill Maher, who said on the George Will Sunday show (whatever it's actually called) something like: not all Republicans are racists, but all racists are Republicans. I was/am disgusted, but I suppose he's right. (We speak of anti-black racists, only.) We are going to have in our ranks dubious people. Well, after all, it is a democracy, rule by the dubious. And one could say that there are evils worse than racism (socialism, for one). This is a great challenge for Republican statesmen.

    Bush revealed the problem when he expressed his hurt in his memoir that someone called him a racist. Republicans are sensitive but not very prudent.

    Racially gerrymandered districts (demanded by black Dems) are part of this problem. Republican politicians aren't accustomed to talking with blacks.

    I don't have much confidence in our Republicans in Congress or many of the candidates. Frankly, the one who can do the best job on this score is Sarah Palin. Perhaps this is why the left is so anxious to destroy her.

  2. I guess one could just as easily respond to Mr. Maher with not all Democrats are traitors, but all traitors are Democrats.

    The Left, like Mr. Maher, will accuse us of bigotry no matter what. It's not only pointless, it's foolish to try to appease them.

    My point is that we must find a way to remain faithful to our principles even if a crazy bigot finds some common interest with them. The Left never even thinks of abandoning theirs when it is revealed that there are countless America-haters among them.
    The Left, like Mr. Maher, will accuse us of bigotry no matter what. It's the hearts and minds of

  3. But in our case we do have irrational haters on our side, who may well hate Clarence Thomas for his race as well, despite their agreement with him on other issues. (Not that I've actually met such--maybe this isn't a significant number worth noting at all.) The point here, as you say, is to articulate these principles and make sure they are the focus of the debate, not some peripheral kooks (who may be more in number than we wish).

  4. I'm not sure what happened with my original comment. Poor editing no doubt.

    Anyway, I do think the actual number is quite small, insignificant even. The proof of that is in how strident the Left is in accusing us of it. If it were self-evident, they wouldn't feel the need to yell/smear as much as they do. They yell/smear because they are actually making an argument, not highlighting some fact. The average American does not think us bigots. In fact, the average American agrees with us.

    He is only tempted not to agree, and to worry that perhaps we are in fact bigots, when our leaders get gun-shy when accused by the Left.

    Had Jared Loughner been a card-carrying Tea Party organizer instead, that which would have hurt us the most would have been an apologetic response by our "leaders". When they do that, they look like they don't actually believe in what they've been spouting.

    Stubborn resolve is what is called for. Not because we're stubborn, but because we're right!