creators.com opinion web
Liberal Opinion Conservative Opinion
Mona Charen
Mona Charen
25 May 2012
Obama's Education Hypocrisy -- Again

    If you were a child in the District of Columbia school system (51st in state rankings for … Read More.

22 May 2012
Is Your 5-Year-Old Transgender?

A 5-year-old child with large dark eyes, full lips and a button nose stares out from the front page of the … Read More.

17 May 2012
Obama, Barnard and Women

The president dropped by Barnard College (my alma mater) this week to deliver the commencement address. It wasn'… Read More.

Democrats Hate That Tea Parties Are Peaceful

Share Comment

Former President Clinton reminds us, on the 15th anniversary of the bombing in Oklahoma City, to police our discourse so as not to incite the "delirious" and "unhinged." Timothy McVeigh, he notes, "took to the ultimate extreme an idea advocated … by an increasingly vocal minority: the belief that the greatest threat to American freedom is our government … "

This is only the latest and most high profile installment of a long-running campaign by Democrats to malign their opposition. It worked very well for Mr. Clinton in 1995 — the baseless insinuation that right-wing radio hosts had ignited murderous rage with their intemperate rhetoric — and he's reaching into that seedy toolbox again.

By citing "the belief that the greatest threat to American freedom is our government" as the chief motive of murderous terrorists, the former president implies that resistance to government overreach and encroachment is illegitimate; the province of extremists.

There are two problems with this. First, it is perfectly true that government can be a threat to liberty. This is so obvious that it hardly bears rebutting. Two examples: Alien and Sedition Acts, internment of Japanese Americans. No one understood government's capacity to constrain freedom better than the Founders, who designed a system so diffuse and balanced that power would be difficult (though not impossible) to abuse.

The second problem with Mr. Clinton's intimation is that his pious concern about a "vocal minority" protesting government threats to freedom was nowhere in evidence during the Bush administration, when many liberal commentators were caterwauling that President Bush was "shredding" the Constitution. A "vocal minority" certainly believed that the government was the greatest threat to American liberty (they thought Bush a far greater threat than Islamic extremism) — but their saying so didn't trouble Mr. Clinton.

Nor was Clinton moved to speak out when anti-Bush protestors labeled him the world's "worst terrorist" and carried posters of the president wearing a Hitler moustache.

You can delegitimize all political speech you dislike by suggesting that it may inflame the violence-prone. The press attempts this again and again. Rather than openly debate, they smear.

The 1994 election, which unseated the Democratic majority, was described by the press, without any evidence, as the eruption of "angry, white, male" voters. One fan out of 8,000 at a McCain/Palin rally was reported to have shouted "Kill him" in reference to Obama. Rafts of stories dwelt upon this revelation of the "ugly" side of Palinmania. A later investigation found no evidence that it had even happened. And of course the tea party movement, a spontaneous, widespread upwelling of grassroots dismay at the direction of government policy, has been falsely and savagely maligned as racist, violent and primitive. (The best poster spotted at a tea party rally: "It doesn't matter what I put on my sign because you will accuse me of racism anyway.")

Actually, Democrats are reduced to warning that certain attitudes can lead to violence because there hasn't been any actual violence at the tea party rallies. All have been remarkably orderly and even friendly. You can almost feel the Democrats' frustration at this.

By contrast, many, many left-wing protests and demonstrations have sparked violence. Just last year, at the G-20 meeting in Pittsburgh, rampaging protestors broke shop windows and scuffled with police, who used batons and tear gas to subdue them. A 1999 meeting of the World Trade Organization in Seattle was so badly disrupted by anti-globalization fanatics, who smashed windows and shut down the center of the city, that the governor had to declare a state of emergency and call out the National Guard. (President Clinton failed to assail those who criticize corporations as inspiring the violence.)

In 2007, several hundred protesters who descended on Washington, D.C., during the International Monetary Fund meeting turned over trash cans, smashed windows, threw bricks, and pushed a police officer off her motorcycle.

In 2008, as John Hinderaker of Powerlineblog recalls, anti-Republican protesters at the convention in St. Paul: "threw bricks through the windows of buses, sending elderly convention delegates to the hospital. They dropped bags of sand off highway overpasses onto vehicles below." The violence was only fleetingly covered in the press and went unmentioned by leading Democrats.

Republicans have been very quick to condemn violent acts or even intemperate words by right-wing individuals or groups. They've even condemned some that didn't happen — like false account of racial slurs shouted at members of the Congressional Black Caucus. While it's important to police one's ranks, it's also necessary to expose the Democrats' persistent and malignant libels.

To find out more about Mona Charen and read features by other Creators Syndicate columnists and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2010 CREATORS.COM


Comments

3 Comments | Post Comment
Your editorial, while well written, plays loosey goosey with History. Yes, it is true that liberals were out protesting GWB, and had caricatures of him painted him to look like Hitler. But, when did those caricatures start?? Not until late 2002 when it became obvious to anyone with a brain that he had already made the decision to start a war. The caricatures didn't even really become prominent until 2005 when it became obvious to the unthinking Americans that we were tricked into a war of choice. Contrast that with the Tea Partiers who started painting Obama as a Nazi, a voodoo witch doctor before he even took office. FYI, I was a Repbulican until 2003 when I started thinking for myself, and did research on policies, and actually looked at history. I still find it funny that all of these Tea Partiers and "Constitutionalists" don't even know the articles or the ammendments to the Constitution. They also don't know much about U.S. History specifically the Articles of Confederation.
Comment: #1
Posted by: craig
Tue Apr 20, 2010 6:20 AM
yes craig ,we believe you were a republican and in global warming.you would have thought that when the draft was eliminated that the war protesters would find something else to be afraid of but now they are humiliated by thier refusal to stand up for thier country.
Comment: #2
Posted by: CLYDE
Tue Apr 20, 2010 6:13 PM
Clyde, I fail to see your logic. What does global warming, the draft, and war protestors have to do with my argument? Nothing. FYI....Vet here, and current member of the Armed Forces.
Comment: #3
Posted by: Craig
Wed Apr 21, 2010 12:58 PM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
Mona Charen
May. `12
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
29 30 1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31 1 2
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Author’s Podcast
Roland Martin
Roland S. MartinUpdated 20 Jun 2012
Marc Dion
Marc DionUpdated 28 May 2012
Steve Chapman
Steve ChapmanUpdated 27 May 2012

15 Mar 2012 Is Liberalism Lazy and Immoral?

8 Aug 2008 Teenagers

16 Feb 2007 Is It All About Britney?