I came back to this question over the weekend. It appears I missed something big in the State of the Union last Wednesday. I mean, it happens. Actually, I have an excuse, though. I was putting my daughters to bed during the last part of the speech. On Saturday, though, Fred Barnes of Fox News' "The Beltway Boys" reset two powerful images from Wednesday night that caused me to wonder all over again about what is really driving the Left.
First, there was the incredible encounter of the mother of the fallen Texas Marine and the Iraqi mother who had lost a son at the hands of Saddam Hussein. This scene of the two women embracing was remarkable enough, but then the camera panned to the President, who was struggling to hold back tears. This image encapsulated seemingly everything about the President and the Iraq War in one moment.
But there was more. As the President was leaving the House Chamber, he was approached by Sen. Joe Lieberman. As he went to shake the President's hand, Pres. Bush pulled Sen. Lieberman, a man who could very well have been starting his second term as VP, close around the neck and hugged him. What must have gone through the minds of the two men at that moment? One a Republican, the other a Democrat, both of whom have steadfastly defended the action in Iraq from the outset. Both, in spite of their political differences, respect each other and are squarely allied in the battle against Islamic terror. It was a great and hopeful image.
In viewing these images, though, one has to wonder how the Left (and I obviously don't include Sen. Lieberman in this description. He is not too popular with the hard Left that dominates the Democratic Party, either) can hate Pres. Bush so much. I mean, what is it? Surely you don't doubt that they do in fact hate the President. But why do they feel this way?
The juxtaposition of the President's decency with the venom and lunacy that has come to dominate the Left is startling. And the commencement of the second Bush term has unleashed a torrent of insanity by the Left that draws into question what they are really about. A couple of recent incidents are illustrative of this point.
First, witness the bilge spewing from the towers of academia, namely "Some People Push Back", by Colorado Professor Ward Churchill, wherein 9/11 victims are called "little Eichmanns inhabiting the sterile sanctuary of the twin towers". Take a few moments to read the entire, despicable essay by Prof. Churchill and see poisonous, anti-American Leftist thought in full flower. It is no secret that Churchill has numerous colleagues in academia that may not use the same harsh language, but they appear to harbor the very same hatred for Pres. Bush and, I believe, for the nation that has twice elected him.
The Leftists in the MSM continue to grow ever more shrill, too, with their power increasingly threatened by Fox News, talk radio, and the blogosphere. The true colors are flying. That is, before raising the white flag, they are first trying the Jolly Roger.
For instance, CNN's Eason Jordan, at last week's World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, charged that the U.S. military had killed a dozen reporters in Iraq, and that they had been deliberately targeted. Of course, the assembled Leftists and media throng made nary a peep at this outrageous, slanderous charge.
However, Jordan was eventually challenged on the charge. Not surprisingly, he could provide no supporting evidence. Then, it was learned that he had also falsely charged the Israeli military of targeting journalists, as well. And in case you have forgotten, this is same Eason Jordan who failed to report atrocities by the Saddam Hussein regime in the early 90's. Somehow, though, the MSM hasn't been able to bring themselves to investigate Jordan's slander and his alarming propensity to apparently promote the efforts of America's enemies and denigrate the efforts of this nation's allies.
Yet, the Leftist allies of Jordan in the MSM breathlessly covered the remarks of Marine Gen. James Mattis, who last week called fighting and killing the woman-hating jihadis "a hell of a hoot". Uh, memo to the MSM: Most Americans said, "Right on, General!" to this remark. And ... every Marine said, "Ooh-rah!!"
So, it's clear that the Ward Churchills and Eason Jordans of the world don't care for Pres. Bush. No, they hate him. Let's be honest. But the real question remains: Why? Why can't they simply have a dialogue with the President over political differences? Is this possible? Why not simply debate and discuss, without impugning the opposition's motives and character? This is what we do in a free society.
But alas, you see, when one side believes that the other is evil, then dialogue is not possible. Rather, conflict of some type is inevitable. That is, you can not discuss policy differences with evil. You must fight it. Good can not dwell with evil.
I have said on many occasions, and I say again, that there are many liberals of goodwill who disagree with me on a whole host of issues. But the goodwill of the vitrolic Left, by definition, is missing in action.
To the Left, Pres. Bush and all that he stands for is apparently Evil. Where these moral relativists acquire the righteous indignation that they seem to possess is beyond me. But, Pres. Bush appears to the real deal in their eyes, in spite of the above-described images from the State of the Union.
The Left's hatred makes me wonder: Do they hate Pres. Bush because is a good man? Do they hate him because he takes his Christian faith seriously? As I recall, they seemed to have no problems with Pres. Clinton's brand of Christianity. Do the Eason Jordans of the world want America to fail in its war with Islamic terror? Why do they seem to relish news that casts our military in a bad light? Do they think America is a force for evil in the world?
I can't say what's in the hearts of the Left, or any person, for that matter. All I can say, though, is that I see hatred in their actions and it makes me wonder why. I also see contempt for the President, the country, and the military that I love, as well. So, they shouldn't be surprised, as Prof. Churchill ironically put it, when "some people push back" and ask who they really are.
Addendum: I should note that one of the people in attendance in Davos, Switzerland who challenged Eason Jordan on his slander against the U.S. Military was ... yes ... it's true ... Rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts. Every one please make a note of this for your archives: DC says, "Way to go Barney Frank."