| May 2012 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
| 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 | ||
In this previous post, I noted that Liberals like to attack the successful, and reward the unsuccessful. I discussed the ideological grounds on which Liberals do this.
More recently, Evan Sayet has brilliantly discussed the root causes among Liberals for this behavior.
The fiasco of the firing of Don Imus this week provides the latest example of Liberals attacking the successful - even the most successful among their own supporters.
From the LA Times:
Democratic politicians lose a mouthpiece with Imus
His show gave many of them a way to reach a national audience of white males - a critical voting bloc.
...with Imus' career in tatters, the fate of the controversial shock jock is stirring quiet but heartfelt concern in an unlikely quarter: among Democratic politicians.
That's because, over the years, Democrats [...] came to count on Imus for the kind of sympathetic treatment that Republicans got from Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity.
Equally important, Imus gave Democrats a pipeline to a crucial voting bloc that was perennially hard for them to reach: politically independent white men.
With Imus' show canceled indefinitely because of his remarks about the Rutgers University women's basketball team, some Democratic strategists are worried about how to fill the void. For a national radio audience of white men, Democrats see few if any alternatives.
Hillary went out of her way to slam Imus as hard as she could, saying, last Tuesday:
I've never wanted to go on his show and I certainly don't ever intend to go on his show, and I felt that way before his latest outrageous, hateful, hurtful comments.
In doing so she helped to harm her own party.
Conversely, prominent Conservative Ann Coulter went out of her way to defend Imus.
The left is so devoted to attacking anything that is successful, that it strikes at the most successful things in its own party. Lieberman was turned away by his own party and had to run (and win) as an Independent. Cindy Sheehan slams leading Libs, such as Hillary Clinton, Barrack Obama, and John Edwards. And now Imus, who per the LA Times was the closest thing the Dems had to Rush Limbaugh, has been taken off the air, because the Dems wouldn't stand up for him.
The results show the error of the Libs' approach. Those who promote the unsuccessful, and attack the successful, are harming all of us, and that includes - themselves.
