Rob's counterpoint to whomod and JQ bring up another aspect of thsi whole "liberal hate" or "liberal double standard" question.
It seems like there is growing inability among members of the left to be able to draw reasonable distinctions, preferring to judge behavior simply on whether or not they like the actor.
For example:
- To a liberal, Ted Kennedy driving drunk and leaving a woman to die (an act for which he plea bargained to a lesser charge) is no worse than George Bush driving drunk and not hurting anyone, or Laura Bush running a stop sign (which nearly EVERYONE has done) and causing a fatal accident.
To a liberal, Al Sharpton leading a chant against, and urging violence against "Blood Sucking Jews" is no worse than Trent Lott saying something nice--albeit not particular well thought out--about 98 year old Strom Thurmond.
To a liberal, Bill Clinton ignoriing the UN and acting unilaterally in Bosnia is way better than George Bush ignoring the UN and acting unilaterally in Iraq.
To a liberal, Bill Clinton (allegedly) dodging the draft by going to Oxford is fine, but George Bush (allegedly) dodging the draft by serving in the National Guard is desertion.
To a liberal, calling the guy trying to guard your life a "son of a bitch" to his face is no worse than calling a hostile reporter an "asshole" in a private conversation.
To a liberal, a movie director screwing his step-daughter--or raping a 13 year old is irrelevant to the director's "genius," but a director who made a movie about Jesus Christ is a "kook," "anti-Semite" or worse.
To a liberal, flying jets into populated buildings is no worse than bombing an enemy during war.
In each, to a liberal, any transgression by one "their own" no matter how serious is indistinguishable, or even preferable, to an objectively more minor transgression by a member of the opposition.
Is that because of "hate"? Maybe.
Or maybe it's the logical consequence of that "who am I to judge" mentality that has been so prevalent among the left. The mentality that excuses bad behavior by arguing that, somewhere, somehow, there's worse behavior out there. The mentality that looks at criminals as victims, the police as bullies and crime victims as part of a bourgeois capitalist system.
In either event, I think it's time to call them on it, I think people ARE calling them on it more and more...and I think they are freaking out because of it.
And the double-standard continues.
To a liberal, the mere allegation of sexual misconduct against Herman Cain (never proven, by women who have a history of financial problems combined with false allegations and lawsuits) is far worse and warrants multiple times the media coverage given to the absolutely proven sexual indiscretions of Rep. Anthony Weiner.
To a liberal, W. Bush's going to war in Iraq with the authorization of a Senate vote in late 2002 (and almost every Democrat voted for the war) is far worse than President Obama going to war in Libya with absolutely no authorization or following of lawful process.
To a liberal, Rush Limbaugh calling Sandra Fluke a "slut" for wanting the government to pay for her birth control, subsidizing her sex life because she feels it's too expensive while she's a college law student, is far worse than Ed Schultz calling Laura Ingraham a "slut" for no reason other than he disagrees with her conservative political views.
And it's okay for Barack Obama to likewise endorse Bill Maher's similar uncivility, publicly condemning the uncivility of Rush Limbaugh's remark about Sandra Fluke, even as Obama endorses the same behavior by Maher, taking a $1 million-dollar campaign donation from Maher, who has repeatedly called Sarah Palin a "cunt" and many other misogynist insults.
Anything that advances liberals politically becomes moral and acceptable.
Anything that opposes it is immoral.
And any facts that contradict that self-righteous liberal stance simply go unreported and are selectively omitted from the record.
