Liberal Political Opportunists

"You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before." -- Rahm Emanuel

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Political Pistachio has a wide range of readers. Among those readers is a significant group of liberal progressives. You rarely see those comments liberals leave on this site because they are usually filled with profanity, vitriol, and insane points of view, so I don't approve them. On occasion I will decide to bicker with one of them, and you will see the back and forth banter in the comments section of this site, but that is rare not only because in truth it is a waste of time, but because time is not a commodity I posses a great amount of.

A few weeks ago, Tom the Neurotic liberal lunatic out of Texas (I use "neurotic" because "neurosis" is a part of his URL), made a comment regarding a pair of photographs I put on Political Pistachio of me and my grandchildren that said I was a sunken chested, big gutted, out of shape slob, or something to that effect. He added a comment like "Twinkies, yum." This is not the first time he has tried to hit me with "you are out of shape" comments.

In all honestly, I really don't care if people think I am in shape or not. I am not like Michelle Obama where I think all Americans have to conform to some fascist fitness standard, or be controlled by the government on what they can eat, or how much exercise they must engage in. This article is not about the shape I am in, or whether or not it is important that I stay fit, or not. Nor is it an article of the heyday of youth. But to provide context with a few facts, let me give you a quick rundown of my own, personal history.

When I was young I played baseball. As I got older, I became a long distance runner. I also ran in a couple marathon-type races - one of them at Torrey Pines against world class runners where I fared fairly well. In those days I ran an average of 20-30 miles per day. My mom still tells the story of how she would drop me off at the high school 12 miles away, drove home stopping quickly at the grocery store, and was beat by me running home.

When I was in the United States Navy, a couple hundred push ups, staying afloat for long periods of time, or running with weight on my back, was no problem to me.

When I was nineteen I suffered injuries that included the near destruction of my left knee. My running regimen decreased significantly.

After a few years of rehabilitation, I worked to improve the strength of my knee, and I kept fairly busy physically. Some of those activities included dancing. In the mid-90s I actually won a dance competition.

I did run when I could, but long distance was no longer something my knee would allow. As a result, my running consisted of just a few miles. Sometimes my exercise regimen included riding my ten-speed. The bike has since succumbed to old age, and I have not since replaced it.

My last hurrah in fitness was in 2005 when I participated in a "mud run." A mud run, or at least the one I ran, is a five mile course filled with obstacles, hills, and muddy situations. The pits filled with muddy water up to the waist, and muddy mounds at the end of the pits, were a large part of the muddy obstacles. On the course there were also wooden walls with ropes to use to climb over, among other fun stuff.

The mud run I ran was put on by the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department out in Vicentia, California. I was invited by an old employer, and a friend of mine who is a kick boxer. He knew I could run, even in my old age with the old messed up knee, because I often ran with him when he was training for a fight. On occasion he would use me as a grappling partner, as well, an activity that most often wound up with me tapping out pretty quickly.

During the mud run I injured my ankle. I finished slower than I hoped, and I was unable to finish with my group.

A year after that injury, I decided to begin running again, only to re-injure the ankle.

Now, a mile or two here and there, along with basketball games with my friends, is the length of my physical activities. The days of being the super fit guy is a thing of the past. And as I have slowed down, the tummy is no longer flat, and the muscles are no longer firm. I still am in fairly decent shape compared to most people I know that is my age, but being fit as a fiddle is a thing of the past.

One of the surprising parts of my busy past is that I performed all of those activities while being a smoker for 21 years. I was a very curious case when it came to being a smoker. I would play basketball with my friends, and after the game they would all be huffing and puffing, and I wouldn't be. . . as I lit my cigarette. No one could figure me out, on that one.

When I had my accident in 1985, doctors claimed my healthy lifestyle was a factor in my survival. I had aspirated, or thrown up and it had gone into my lungs. If my lungs had not been as strong as they were as a result of being a long distance runner, my survival hopes would have greatly decreased.

I am not saying that today I am a perfect model of fitness. I am not. Though I don't have a huge gut, my stomach is definitely not flat anymore. Do I have a sunken chest? I don't know, I really don't look at it much. I have never been one to have big arms or a huge chest, anyway. Remember, I was a runner. The power was in my legs.

All of that, however, is not the point.

The point is, despite the fact that I am in okay shape, the liberal commenter decided I was a sunken chested, big gutted embarrassment, anyway. He figured it would get under my skin, and probably had his own predetermined ideas about what my fitness history was. And, being a liberal, he probably assumed that he is somehow on some higher level, hence, the reason for the down the nose ridicule.

How could he deduce what he believed to be my current fitness conditioning, or lack thereof, from the photograph? I don't know. But the fact is, the truth had nothing to do with his comment. And my tale of my past, though interesting to some, means nothing to him. Which means, Tom probably had an ulterior motive.

As we saw in the attacks against the Right after the Tucson shooting, the truth means little to these people. They have spent the entire time since that shooting trying to place blame on Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, and the Tea Party. Rightwing extremism, claimed the rhetoric of the Left, was at fault - despite the fact that the shooter was more of a Leftist than anything (considering his love of the Communist Manifesto). The shooter, Loughner, according to his friends, in fact, is quite apolitical. He doesn't read political websites, watch the news, or even care what the political discourse in this nation truly is. The liberals ignored those facts, because the true nature of who Loughner is turns out to be not very beneficial to their blame game.

The liberal left does not argue the point, or debate the issues. Liberal progressives seek only to destroy through ridicule, and personal attacks. They do it against Republican politicians, as well as conservative bloggers, talk show hosts, and the like. They have no interest in what the truth is, just as Tom in his comments on my site, has no interest in what the truth is. It is all about censorship through ridicule, until the opposition is shut down, and then the liberal troll will move to the next conservative website.

They can't argue the issues. They are too busy getting hung up on splitting hairs that don't matter, rather than argue the true politics of an issue. They would rather argue about how broadband works, than about how dangerous it is to give the federal government (unconstitutionally, I might add) power over our free speech rights through net neutrality.

The issue is not the point, when liberals debate.

Their goal is to attack, and ridicule, in the hopes of censoring, and ultimately shutting down, their opposition.

If you think about it, that makes the Left guilty of what they accuse the Right of being guilty of. They accuse the Right of using vitriolic political rhetoric, when it is them that actually regularly engage in that kind of discourse. It is liberals that use baseless accusations, and lies that have little to do with the truth.

I bring this up not because I am trying to pinpoint Tom for any particular reason, but to show how typical these liberals are. Censorship through ridicule because the issues don't truly matter to them is their modus operandi. When it comes to a debate of ideas, they know that they don't have a leg to stand on. The only way they can win an argument is to avoid discussing the issue at hand, and instead personally attacking and destroying their opponent. . . even if it means attacking what the opponent looks like, how fit (or unfit) they are, in the hopes it will get under that person's skin.

That is how liberalism works, and that is why they came completely unhinged when the Tucson shooting happened. The shooting didn't matter to them, the truth didn't matter to them, the fact that it was an opportunity to further their political agenda while ridiculing the Right (and somehow attaching them to the shooter) was what mattered to them. My real fear is that nutcases exist in all walks of life. That means that it is inevitable that someone claiming to be on the Right will do something stupid, and the Left will get exactly what they want.

Trying to take advantage of a political opportunity to destroy, is what the Tucson shooting is all about, to them. The opportunity to ridicule the Right, and position themselves in a manner of looking good while shutting down their opposition, was their goal. The Left is unable to debate the issues, so they use ridicule and attacks, in the hopes that will give them the upper hand.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary