Yesterday on Meet the Press, the self-righteously indignant New York Times columnist Tom Friedman almost broke into tears over the idea that anyone could be so “stupid” as to object to Barry addressing America’s school children. And Ellis Henican, on the Fox News website offered this: “Why does Obama’s mere presence in office cause some of his opponents such distress? In their eyes, can he ever do anything right?” (Could his opponents be racists? Just asking.)
Apparently, Friedman and Henican forgot the 2000 presidential election which gave birth to the illness Charles Krauthammer labelled “Bush Derangement Syndrome.” That wacky election, a kind that seems to occur once a century or so, unleashed the left’s just-below-the-surface conspiracy paranoia. This paranoia is like the disease shingles: a chicken pox virus contracted in childhood that flares up painfully in middle or old age.
The left’s conspiracy paranoia first appeared in the wake of the Kennedy assassination as a result of the successful campaign, waged by Kennedy’s family and hagiographers, to turn a cold warrior president, who was at best ambivalent about the civil rights movement, into a civil rights martyr, despite the inconvenient fact that his murderer was a Communist pro-Castro fanatic. This produced extreme cognitive dissonance which, in turn, produced knee-jerk paranoia in succeeding generations of liberals.
The 2000 election inspired a level of irrational hatred of George W. Bush that surpassed even what the left directed at Nixon. To try to rationalize the irrational, the left rewrote the history of the post-9/11 era. The new official media version is that the country was united behind Bush after 9/11, that the left supported the invasion of Afghanistan, and that they only turned against Bush when he invaded Iraq. The truth is that the left, Susan Sontag and Richard Reeves for example, blamed American Middle East policy for producing the supposedly justifiable hatred that inspired the attacks. And the left did not support the Afghanistan invasion which the New York Times and other left wing sources, recycling their Vietnam War rhetoric of a previous generation, called a “quagmire” in which American soldiers wouldn’t sink, but instead would freeze to death during the “brutal Afghan winter.”
I don’t need to repeat the titles of innumerable books as well as columns from the likes of Maureen Dowd accusing Bush of the most heinous crimes against humanity, all a part of a campaign born in the wake of the 2000 election which lives on in the rhetoric of Barry and the actions of his attorney general in unleashing a prosecutor to investigate CIA agents for doing their job, that is, thwarting terrorists.
Liberals, excuse me, progressives have noted that both Reagan and the first Bush addressed school kids and nobody complained. Maybe so, but that was before November 2000 and the unleashing of the Bush Derangement Virus. Maybe liberals should recognize a similar virus when it infects conservatives and show a little understanding and compassion.
Here’s the answer to Ellis Henican’s question: “Why does Obama’s mere presence in office cause some of his opponents such distress? In their eyes, can he ever do anything right?”: Just substitute Bush for Obama, and it will all be clear.