Here is the passage that really got my attention:
Americans hate hypocrites most of all. When you meet a guy from the Chamber of Commerce or insurance association, you pretty much know that what you see is what you get: comfort with American culture and values, an upscale lifestyle that reflects his ideology and work, and no apologies for success or excuses for lack of same.Hansen sums up what, in my view, is the the Left's main problem: They appear to be inconsistent hypocrites, and the American public doesn't either like or trust them as a result.
But if you listen to Dr. Dean and his class venom, it hardly seems comparable with how he lives or how he was brought up. John Kerry's super power boat, Teresa Kerry's numerous mansions, Arianna Huffington's gated estate, George Soros's jet, Ted Turner's ranches, Sean Penn's digs — all this and more, whether fairly or unfairly, suggest hypocrisy and insincerity: Something like, "High taxes, government regulation, racial quotas, and more entitlements won't hurt me since I have so much money at my own disposal anyway, but will at least make me feel good that we are transferring capital to the less fortunate."
Worse yet, such easy largess and the cost of caring often translate into contempt for the small businessman, entrepreneur, and salesperson who is supposedly illiberal because he worries that he has less disposable income and is less secure. And when you add in cracks about Wal-Mart, McDonald's, and the "Christian Right" — all the things the more cultured avoid — then the architects of a supposedly populist party seem to be ignorant of their own constituencies.
How do they appear to be hypocrites? Consider the following:
They're for stopping terrorists, you see. They're just against i.d. cards, increased border security, killing large numbers of terrorists, and all manner of aggressive tactics designed to get information from jihadis before they kill Americans.
In fact, they care very much about "torture". They are very, very upset about the panties-on-the-head activities that occurred at Abu Ghraib -- which were, in fact, not torture. Yet, they say hardly a word about Americans being slaughtered like animals by Islamic terrorists.
They claim to support our President in a time of war, but when have they ever praised a thing he has done in the prosecution of the War on Terror? Rather, their rhetoric indicates that in fact they believe that President Bush is more of a threat to national security than OBL or Zarqawi.
They claim to support the troops, but they incessantly talk down the troops' missions and the progress made in Afghanistan and Iraq ... even after two democratically-elected governments have been installed.
They say they are all for the advancement of women and minorities ... unless we are talking about conservative women (i.e., Sec. State Condi Rice and Janice Rogers Brown) or minorities who will be hard on terrorists (i.e., AG Alberto Gonzalez) ... or women for that matter who are mistreated by liberal institutions, such as the U.N.
And you know that the National Organization for Women was all torn up and making lots of noise about Terri Schiavo's estranged husband with two kids from another woman deciding that Terri would starve to death. I mean ... the crickets were deafening. Womens' rights or bust, baby.
But they say they believe in utilizing every procedural safeguard and using all means necessary to save a life, as long as we are talking about a convicted murderer or an animal. To extend such protections to innocent human life amounts to the establishment of "theocracy", you see.
Speaking of theocracy (which they do often these days), they're misunderstood to the extent that people understand them to be down on "people of faith", in particular conservative evangelicals and Catholics. Yet, they rail and actually scream "jihad" about ... Christians, while real "jihad" is being carried out by radical Muslims. They seem to see more of a threat to the republic from fundamental Christianity than radical Islam.
And our liberal friends in Congress are all for people being able to decide where to send their kids so as to escape failing public schools and also to make choices in their retirement accounts ... people in Washington, that is.
Oh, and they're all for gay rights, too ... except for conservatives or supporters of the President. Then, they support all manner of personal attacks and "outing".
That's just a few, folks. Ah, but don't think by pointing these out that any will be remedied. These flaws are structural and likely fatal.
That is, they must be hypocrites ... to at least have a chance of winning by fooling some of the people some of the time. For exposing the Left's real agenda behind the hypocrisy is certain disaster -- it means losing all the time.