Liberals who now work for Putin

Remember Ed Schultz, the liberal talker on MSNBC, who praised all things Obama and Clinton, and who ridiculed Trump and condemned Vladimir Putin (whom he called derisively “Putie”)?  Well, now he works for RT America, Putin’s propaganda cable network.  Now he has nothing good to say about Obama and Clinton and is now, at his new master’s behest, praising Trump.

Larry King, the former CNN icon, also works for Putin.  So does Jesse Ventura, former governor of Minnesota, professional wrestler, and radio talk show host.  (He is arguably not a liberal, but was something of a populist precursor to Trump, on the state level.)  Also working for Putin is, disturbingly, Michael Flynn, former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Pentagon’s equivalent of the CIA.

Michael Crowley has a story about this in Politico, excerpted and linked to after the jump.  He also discusses the connections between Putin and Trump. [Read more…]

When being pro-life was a liberal issue

Not only did liberals used to be pro-life, opposing abortion used to be a progressive principle.  So shows a new book on the origins of the pro-life movement before Roe v. Wade, reviewed in the Atlantic. [Read more…]

Where is your town on the political spectrum?

A “political technology” company called Crowdpac has analyzed the campaign contributions of nearly 5,000 towns and cities in the United States and has ranked them on a liberal/conservative spectrum.  Thus we can determine the ten most liberal and the ten most conservative cities in America.

But most fun is a tool that enables you to enter the name of any town with a population over 6,000, whereupon you can see how it ranks on the scale.  (I found, though, that it doesn’t include every town over 6,000.)

Go here, type in your town’s name, and see how liberal or conservative it is. [Read more…]

The Pope’s sermon to America

Pope Francis addressed a joint session of Congress, taking the opportunity to preach against tenets of both liberalism and conservatism.  Liberals were zinged by his remarks opposing abortion, redefining the family, and infringing upon religious liberty.  Conservatives were zinged by his remarks on the necessity of supporting immigrants, measures to combat climate change, the elimination of the death penalty, tempering the excesses of capitalism, offering help for the poor, and (interestingly) opposing “fundamentalism.”

To his credit, the Pope twice mentioned “vocation” in a more or less Lutheran sense (as opposed to the medieval Catholic application of the term to church professions alone):

A political society endures when it seeks, as a vocation, to satisfy common needs by stimulating the growth of all its members, especially those in situations of greater vulnerability or risk.

“Business is a noble vocation, directed to producing wealth and improving the world. It can be a fruitful source of prosperity for the area in which it operates, especially if it sees the creation of jobs as an essential part of its service to the common good” (Laudato Si’, 129).

Here is an annotated text of the speech (click the yellow highlights for the annotations).  After the jump, a detailed account of what the Pope said and how Congressmen and Senators reacted. [Read more…]

Liberals vs. Leftists on political correctness

Both liberals and leftists share the goal of social and economic equality and other progressive ideals.  But liberals believe those can be attained in terms of the Enlightenment ideals of liberty, human rights, and democracy.  On the other hand, Leftists (think Soviet Union, Maoists, other Communists, etc.) believe that liberty, human rights, and democracy must be restricted in order to attain those goals.

That’s one takeaway from a fascinating study of “political correctness” by William Voegeli in The Claremont Review of Books, who begins by discussing an article on “How the Language Police Are Perverting Liberalism.”

Notice how those who want to punish opponents of gay marriage, restrict religious liberty, not allow certain opinions to be argued, and in other ways emulating the tactics of the Soviet Union, are leftists.  Which covers quite a few people today who present themselves as liberals.

Read Voegeli’s article excerpted and linked after the jump.

[Read more…]

Evolution vs. liberalism

In the course of a discussion about an article by a feminist attacking transgendered folks like “Caitlyn” Jenner, saying that these men can never know what it is to be a woman, Andrew Klavan makes the point that evolution and feminism are incompatible.  Which made me realize that evolution is incompatible with lots of other ideas of the liberals who believe in it.

UPDATE:  I do not intend to confuse “what is” with “what should be” or to try to deduce from evolution any moral conclusions.  I do see the problem with that, but let me frame this differently.  If behaviors limit reproduction, aren’t those less likely to contribute to natural selection?  Wouldn’t there be natural selection against them?   Wouldn’t ideologies and policies that result in individuals not reproducing be an evolutionary deadend?  I am not asking whether this would be good or bad, and am quite willing to be instructed on the matter.

The original post was not so much about evolution but about liberalism, so perhaps we could ask this:  Isn’t it true that “traditional family values”–that is, beliefs and practices that result in more children being born and cared for–have an evolutionary advantage over “progressive values” such as those supporting feminism and non-reproductive sex?  Not as a moral position but as a “what is” description?

[Read more…]


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X