"Use Your Inside Voices"

There is a school of thought among some ‘conservatives’ that if we are just nicer, and more compliant, and try and get along better with others, we will be successful. Governor Mitch Daniels of Indiana said we should have a moratorium on social issues because we are perceived as too mean. David Brooks argues we should incrementally work with his boyfriend Pres. Obama to get some of what we want and avoid looking unreasonable. The 2008 presidential nominee John McCain believed that by gagging our side from using Obama’s middle name we’d escape being called racist. In every case the squishy Republicans gave ground, conceded points, and generally just politely demurred.  We used our inside voices like they asked.  What did their brilliant strategy bring?

We ended up with a radical socialist in the White House, exploding deficits and debt, enormous regulatory burdens on our economy, rising gas prices, an inefficient energy policy, and the complete loss of respect in the world. We lost every little piece of influence we had in 2006 and 2008 by listening to these accommodators and their theory on being liked and people thinking well of us. Conservatives and pragmatists throughout the country said, “Enough” and we fought back. 

In the 2010 elections we lit a firestorm throughout the land. We dragged these Republicans kicking and screaming over the finish line. We began getting resistance from the accommodators and that’s when things went awry. Once the Democratic Party-run media got the narrative that Republicans were divided and fighting among one other, our success reversed. We stood up and fought and won the hearts of our fellow citizens, that is, until the collectivist Republicans started whining and kvetching.

Enter Mitch Pearlstein of the supposedly free market and conservative “Center for the American Experiment” and his enervating, accommodating, elitist argument. In this example, he chastises conservatives on same-sex marriage. “All that being the case, there simply is no way for the opponents of same-sex marriage to prevail if they are seen as motivated, not by what they genuinely see as the best interests of society, but rather by insufficiently good hearts.” – Mitch Pearlstein, ‘Conservatives must be first to banish hate,’ StarTribune, May 24, 2011. That this refers to gay marriage is immaterial. Regardless of the issue, if we try to be ‘nice’ about it and tiptoe around the issue, we get blasted. If we argue the merits, we get called racist, bigoted, homophobic yahoos who are just too stupid to understand the complex paradigm shifts and emerging advancement of the human condition.

Speaking of yahoos, Pearlstein sets up a beautiful argument at the beginning of his piece showing the abject hypocrisy of the Left. He starts off:

“On the chance you’re ever of the mind that yahoos have a special affinity for what some people think of as the political “right” — I’m alluding most immediately here to the ugly invocation at the Minnesota Legislature last Friday — try Googling “Bush” and “Hitler” together.

I did so the other morning and up popped 19.3 million citations, led by a series of graphics depicting the American president as the genocidal Nazi.”

This is fantastic. Pearlstein points out that the Democrats and their hatred is far greater than anything demonstrated by conservatives. They have been the vicious ones. We have been greeted with daily accounts by Party-run media who publish every criticism of Republicans and conservatives, true or not. But for wild-eyed liberals, they hide or obscure outright vile lies and actions by their Fellow Travelers. So, Pearlstein grasps the importance of making the case in regards to actual hate as a part of the mainstream of the Democratic machine and the marginal impolitic actions of a few on the right.

Then he turns it into a condemnation of the entire conservative movement. “For conservatives to acknowledge that it’s morally unacceptable for people like Dean to say the things they do and then assume that all is fine doesn’t cut it. Political reality demands we deal with the fact that conservatives routinely shoulder heavier burdens in matters like these.” Pearlstein just eviscerates conservatives because when someone says something outlandish or rude, we are supposed to all condemn them to the fiery bowels of hell.

However, if the Party-run media sends dozens of investigators to Alaska to find out if Sarah Palin’s child is her own, Pearlstein is silent. If Bill Maher publicizes a goofy talk show moment of a very young Christine O’Donnell, we hear crickets. When Gloria Allred drags an illegal alien housekeeper out of some cellar somewhere and howls about Meg Whitman firing her, we hear nothing.

What’s even worse is, he doesn’t write a piece condemning the liberal elites because they haven’t spoke up against pejoratives like ‘teabagger.’ Are Larry Jacobs and Howard Dean going to stand up today and condemn MSNBC’s Ed Shultz for calling Laura Ingraham a slut? Of course not. Will Pearlstein urge his socialist friends at the Humphrey Institute or Aspen Institute to condemn and ostracize Schultz? Of course he won’t. He basically gives the left a complete pass on their abdication of responsibility and lambast the right for even the most marginal of offenses.

No, Pearlstein is concerned that given the media attitude toward conservatives, and the general behavior of the elite toward Republicans, we need to change our behavior. Never mind that the fricking Secretary of the Treasury and the Democratic former chairman of the House Ways and Means committee are tax cheats. Naw. Pearlstein takes us to the woodshed over a prayer that was questionable.

No wonder we have such trouble winning anything. We have people like Pearlstein feeding lines to the Party-run media encouraging them to label, marginalize and smear us all. Pearlstein’s little finger wagging exercise gives fodder to the socialists to continue lying about us.

I don’t know if it’s because Pearlstein, and others like him, are members of the Humphrey Institute or the Aspen Institute or academia has conditioned them to submit. I don’t know if, for instance, Larry Jacobs discusses some weighty issue with Pearlstein and then afterwards pats him on the arm and says, ‘if only all conservatives could be as reasonable as you,” and this make Pearlstein believe Jacobs is sincere. Of course this is mere conjecture, though I’d bet dollars to donuts it has happened.

We don’t need validation from collectivists. We don’t need to ‘use our inside voices.’ We’ve watched as our ‘conservative’ intelligentsia has been effectively neutered and made tools of the left. We listen to the Party-run press excuse Obama’s bumbling incompetence and then pretend it didn’t happen. We’ve watched them excoriate Bush and Cheney for simply trying to keep us safe and free. We’ve seen the brightest and the most genteel on our side plot and weave when the issues are clear.  

Mr. Pearlstein. I must respectfully tell you this. We let you talk us into Dole, McCain, and various other accommodators and it didn’t work. We allowed you to make sophisticated, complex, and generous arguments on our behalf. We took your advice to just make sure we let people know we’re not mean. We’ve lost our country. If we have to be a little mean, so be it. Quite frankly, we couldn’t be as vile, vicious, disingenuous, conniving, slimy, or despicable as the Left, even if we tried.

We are done using our inside voices. Thank you very much.

 Crossposted at Looktruenorth.com