Liberals and Conservatives

I loved the "genteel" column by Ross K. Baker "The Overbearing Bush: Factory Outlet Candidate" (Op-Ed Page, Sept. 27). It is fun to watch the liberal community drop its veneer of civility when all of a sudden a candidate has the gall to disagree with the liberal orthodoxy and what's even worse, the polls are beginning to indicate that the whole kooky coalition might once again be soundly rejected at the polls.

Since once again, hopefully, the liberal agenda could be going down the tubes, old Ross is now doing what liberals have always done best when anyone has the audacity to challenge the obvious truths espoused by these great intellects . . . go for the jugular. Shout him or her or them down on the campuses like the loony left has been doing for years (getting involved, as the lefties like to call it) or take poisoned pen in hand as Baker has done and just hurl insults at one who dares to disagree with revealed truth. A few gentle quotes from the barrage of insults . . . "transform him from Ronald Reagan's dutiful mastiff" . . . "a truculent and often muddled backbiter" . . . "the utter banality of Bush's intellect . . . " etc.

The sad part of all of this is that I'm sure no card-carrying liberal sees anything nasty or uncivilized about the Baker attack on George Bush. Since all liberals know that anything they believe in is absolutely morally, ethically and intellectually correct, then it logically follows that anyone who disagrees obviously has a banal intellect, is a bully and a scold, has empty programs and whatever other nasty things that can be said (and many will be said before the election). Following this twisted logic, it's also just as true that if anyone were to say the things about Dukakis that Baker has said about Bush, this, of course, would be gutter-level politics.


Dana Point

Copyright © 2019, Los Angeles Times
EDITION: California | U.S. & World