|
Once upon a time in the 'sixties, there was a singer/songwriter named Phil Ochs who described himself as a "singing journalist". Among his many great songs -- some serious, some humorous -- about the social problems of the day was one from his 1966 Carnegie Hall concert called "Love Me, I'm A Liberal," sung to the tune of "Rosin the Bow". (I remembered it when I saw the John Kerry photo caption contest at a blog called Captain's Quarters.) The song was supposed to be a parody, poking a little fun at the skin-deep Liberals who were all in favor of social change... except when it came close to home. He described them as being "ten degrees to the left of center in good times... ten degrees to the right of center when it affects them personally." I have a feeling, though, that Mr. Ochs would be horrified to find that the hypocritical skin-deep Liberals are now the leaders of the Democratic party. A prime example is the Democrats' continuing calls for clean, renewable energy sources, including wind power... and Senators Ted Kennedy and John Kerry refusing to allow a wind farm within sight of the Kennedy compound at Martha's Vinyard. "People want to look out and see the same sight the Pilgrims saw," said lawyer Robert Kennedy. Not In My Backyard! Many Democrats in Congress are against school choice, which would make public schools more competitive by allowing parents to choose which schools their children attend... but how many children of Senators and Congressmen attend public schools? (Hint: not too many.) Not In My Backyard! They decry the evils of corporations yet own and invest in them; they favor gun control for everyone except their bodyguards; they complain about the waste of irreplaceable fossil fuels and dependence on foreign oil as they drive their SUVs and fly in their private jets. The hypocritical NIMBY attitude of many leading Democrats today is perfectly captured in the lyrics of "Love Me, I'm A Liberal".
(Medger Evers was a civil rights leader who was assassinated in Jackson MS. Les Crane was a Liberal talk-show host in NYC, and Lerner and Golden were columnists with a definite Left-leaning attitude.) |
| Robert McClelland February 24, 2004 08:27 PM PST This is off topic but I have a question that I need answered by hardcore RWZ. If bin Laden is captured just prior to the election (around Sept. or Oct.), will you dismiss the timing of his capture up to coincidence or will you have any suspicions about it (ie. that there may be some truth to the hypothesis that he's already been captured and the announcement is being withheld until it benefits Bush's election campaign the most or [insert whatever other current similar theories are out there here])? | ||
| JM February 24, 2004 08:43 PM PST Since I expect them to try harder to capture him as the summer wears on, the later it gets the more likely it is that he's captured. You're already trying to set up an "argument" that his capture will have been staged if he's captured pretty much anytime after August but before November... no matter what. You're completely ignoring the fact that the military KNOWS that Bush is up for re-election and will try extra-hard as November approaches. Your prejudices are simply annoying. | ||
| Robert McClelland February 24, 2004 10:41 PM PST I'm not trying to set up an argument for anything. You could rightly assume that of an American Democrat, since they have a stake in the election, but since I don't care one way or the other who wins the election, you can't reasonably lay that on me. I'm merely curious as to whether or not you can even honestly entertain the notion if bin Laden is captured close to election time that there is some funny business going on or if you are so locked into your ideological beliefs that you would refuse to even consider the possibility. Although you didn't really answer my question, can I assume that you would not even consider the possibility? | ||
| StarkTruth February 24, 2004 10:49 PM PST Didn't the singer from the Dead Kennedy's redo this song for a more modern touch? | ||
| JM February 24, 2004 10:54 PM PST Robert, you seem to have already decided that any answer I give is wrong. No one knows when he may be captured, but if he's captured anytime near the election, you'll automatically assume it's a stunt. Knock yourself out. | ||
| JM February 24, 2004 10:59 PM PST Yes, Jeff... Jello Biafra. But it could never equal Ochs' original. Too full of hate and "gotcha" lyrics. | ||
| Robert McClelland February 25, 2004 09:54 PM PST Joe, there is no right or wrong answer to my question. It's just a question. Why are you afraid of answering it? >you'll automatically assume it's a stunt. Normally I don't put much stock in conspiracy theories that are put forth by either side, but I have to admit that if he's caught in time for what is known as the October surprise, I'll certainly be giving this particular theory some credibility. Of course, it means nothing to me when he's actually captured, since as I said earlier, the outcome of your election has no meaning to me. | ||
| JM February 25, 2004 10:01 PM PST There is no way to know the circumstances of Osama's eventual capture. When he's captured, we can then examine when and how and make up our minds. But until that day, speculation is a complete waste of time. Is it POSSIBLE that they might not give out the info on the instant? Sure. But if so, will it be for some kind of "campaign stunt", or because they're waiting to round up as many others as possible before they scatter? The difference between us is that I'm willing to give the administration the benefit of the doubt. | ||
| Name February 28, 2004 07:27 PM PST Great song. It has a little ring of sinister commie though-- ie those damn liberals who give up on the party when it hurts them. In other words the writer wants them to be more socialist, not more reasonable (and so less socialist). Either way it makes a very good point. | ||
| Leave a Comment: |