The Theocons Are Coming!

by Mark Steyn - November 24th, 2006 - SteynOnline
(from National Review, November 6th 2006)

More and more, I wonder whether lefties mean it, any of it. Take Rosie O’Donnell. The other day, one of her co-hosts on “The View” was musing on current events and opined, “If you take radical Islam and you want to talk about what is going on there you have to…”

And at this point Rosie interrupted. “One second. Radical Christianity is just as threatening as radical Islam in a country like America where we have a separation of church and state.”

Does she really believe that? That “radical Christianity” is “just as threatening” as “radical Islam”? These terms are imprecisely defined. You get the feeling that to Rosie O’Donnell “radical Christianity” is pretty much Christianity – or at any rate any Christian denomination without an openly gay bishop. Still, it’s hard to imagine even Rosie would feel “just as threatened” by an evangelical Protestant church opening up next door as by, say, a Wahhabi madrassah.

But who knows? The left’s preference for phantom enemies over real ones is such a feature of the current scene one assumes that for a few of them at least it has to be genuine. To the likes of Miss O’Donnell, “radical Christianity” affords opportunities for moral equivalence theory unseen since the Cold War. Pierre Hassner of the Center for International Studies and Research got the ball rolling shortly after 9/11. “It’s nonsense to say, ‘We’re the force of good’,” he scoffed. “We’re living through the battle of the born-agains: Bush the born-again Christian, bin Laden the born-again Muslim.”

This war of leftists against average Americans came home in the recent elections. Still many average Americans voted to give political power to people who believe that local pastors Wallace Phillips and Ralph White are as evil as Osama Bin Laden and Ayatollah Khoemeni.

Haven't heard about the planes the followers of Wallace and Ralph have had flown into buildings in American cities? According to Rosie O’Donnell you must not be paying attention. She says with great sincerity they are "just as threatening as radical Islam ". Forgive me if I think that such extremist rhetoric is idiocy. I thought it would be viewed as such by the majority of Americans. A vast majority. Yet it is part and parcel of the rhetoric of Democratic party leaders.

So why is it that many people who agree that Wallace and Ralph are no threat go into the election booth and align themselves with Rosie and her party?

People who are voting in America appear to be voting without understanding what is happening in our nation. Political parties have suffered from a growing disenchantment and this illusion is actually strengthening the party insiders. As more and more people declare themselves independent of party, the core insiders, who are never at risk of losing elections and are significantly more corrupt than those who are not insiders, acquire seniority and power.

Many Republicans feel their own people elected from 1994 through 2004 have failed to support what the core voters believe in. They also believe, and it has proved true, that the more secure insiders assumed that corruption would not be punished. At first that was true but after a while the corruption grew so blatant that it spilled out into public knowledge. Now many people believe Republicans are corrupt.

However the belief that putting Democrats back in charge will fix the problem was instantly negated as John Murtha and Alcee Hastings were promoted as party leaders. It will not be long before the large litany of people that Bill Clinton pardoned also regain their leadership roles in the Democrat lexicon.

And while all of this is happening, there is a battle over ideas taking place that is lost from public view. Comments about the hatred of the left for decent people on the right, as exemplified by Rosie O'Donnell's comment, never make the press.

It would be easy to lead this criticism into a denunciation for the left wing press that is still the main stream media in our nation. However there is now a clear right wing press large enough that anyone who is seriously concerned with our nation can find out both sides of any argument. Anyone seriously concerned with our nation cannot claim that the positions taken by power brokers of either party are difficult to know.

When did the intelectual discussions of our nation become so trite and ignore so much that is important? We ignore issues and where the party leaders stand! At gatherings of family and friends here in the Inner Banks, often even in gatherings of political party insiders, I find it an astonishing reality that no discussion of "issues" or "leaders stand on issues" is popular. Such discussions always engender taking sides and are considered "controversial" and thus to be avoided.

We talk about their personalities and how well liked they are. If they are in the other party we condemn them with insults that have become meaningless. However we never get down to specifics of what they believe, or even more important what they will actually be allowed to do by their party when in office. Governor Easley campaigned on a limit to government speding that sounded great on the campaign trail. Who was allowed to ridicule the very idea that his party would allow him to implement it? He has never even tried.

This article by Steyn is a great breakdown of some of the key positions on issues that will affect our lives in the coming years. Yet I doubt one in a hundred citizens can even follow the article on first reading . . . as it alludes to concepts and issues and values that are so rarely discussed in public. I recommend that you read it. I recommend that you discuss it with your friends. I predict that few will. And I believe that is why this nation is in serious trouble.

Want to save our nation? Have the audacity to actually argue with someone about what is needed and which party can do it. If you don't, then at least honestly concede that whatever happens, you don't care.