So a reader sent a link to Mark Shea\u2019s Facebook page<\/a>.\u00a0 I swore bushy tail on that site, and to be honest, I\u2019ve been the happier for it.\u00a0 Nonetheless, he sent it to me and observed that this post explains a lot.\u00a0 And indeed, it does:<\/p>\n \u201cInteresting. Dreyfuss is an old Lefty. But lots of old Lefties are people who, like Rachel Maddow, self-identify as people who would have been happy voting for Eisenhower. People who, like Dreyfuss, owe a huge amount of their outlook to such dangerous Communists and America-haters as Frank Capra and Jefferson Smith. They are, in short, flag-waving patriots every bit, if not more so, than a Tea Partier. They are quite sincere about hoping that the GOP finds its way back fro\u2026<\/span>m the abyss of nihilism into which it has hurled itself. And, I am sad to say, with rare exceptions like Robert P. George<\/a>, it would be extraordinary to see somebody from the Right make a similar visit to see what the Dems are up to. The fear of contracting Liberal Cooties is too great. Good for Dreyfuss for venturing on to foreign soil to try to make common cause with fellow Americans. This is light years from the spectacle of Trump urging his brownshirts to beat up protesters. Gives me hope.\u201d<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n Mark comments on the story about Richard Dreyfuss going to the GOP and looking for the Old GOP<\/a>.\u00a0 Now what he means by Old GOP is not explained.\u00a0 It could be he wants that pre-Goldwater, pre-Reagan GOP that didn\u2019t concern itself with social issues, and in fact, was often pretty far to the\u00a0left as we understand it today.\u00a0 I don\u2019t know.\u00a0 I like Mr. Dreyfuss, and admire his willingness to do homework when it comes to American history.\u00a0 Even if I disagree, I can respect someone who\u00a0has gone the extra mile and studied what he is talking about.\u00a0 That doesn\u2019t mean he hasn\u2019t had his moments of crazy<\/a>.\u00a0 But on the whole, I like him. <\/p>\n But Mark\u2019s post is revealing.\u00a0 One of Mark\u2019s major themes is that liberals are ultimately better than conservatives.\u00a0 At least nowadays.\u00a0 In fact, apart from a couple unfortunate sins that cry out to heaven for vengeance, liberals are right and awesome and hip and cool and swell and caring and kind and pure and fun and on and on. Conservatives, on the other hand, are the gun totting, Bible clinging racist, bigot Neanderthals that such esteemed publications as Huffington Post and Daily Kos suggest they are. <\/p>\n It\u2019s worth noting that, on his blog CAEI, Mark insisted that part of the proof for this assumption was all the mean and horrible things conservatives said to him, and all of the terrible accusations they made against him.\u00a0 More than once, for example, he insisted that conservatives accused him of being secretly pro-choice.\u00a0 For my part, I could say many things about Mark, but I would never say he was pro-choice, secretly or otherwise.\u00a0 And yet Mark accused me of doing just that.\u00a0 No matter how I protested that I never thought of such a thing, Mark held his ground.\u00a0 So I often wonder just how accurately he portrayed other cases where conservatives supposedly accused him of such things.\u00a0 Did they?\u00a0 Or did he simply say they did, in a way similar to what he said about me?<\/p>\n But factual or not, this is one of the main reasons Mark justifies his warmness toward liberalism and liberals \u2013 even those who are passionate defenders and champions for abortion or gay marriage, blaspheme or heresy.\u00a0 They\u2019re just more swell than those rascally mean and hateful conservatives.\u00a0 <\/p>\n But note the post. This is the revealing part of it all.\u00a0 Mark uses Mr. Dreyfuss to demonstrate some sort of unstated fact that liberals are the sane ones and good ones who really love our country and would gladly reach across party lines.\u00a0 I don\u2019t know if Mr. Dreyfuss has reached out at other times or not.\u00a0 And I don\u2019t have any numbers on just how many liberals would gladly support a Republican president, then or now.\u00a0 I only have the example in this post of Mr. Dreyfuss (and a nod Mark gives to Rachel Maddow).\u00a0 Mark also presents Mr. Robert George.\u00a0 I don\u2019t know Mr. George, but Mark presents him as an example of Conservatives willing to reach across the aisle.\u00a0 But here is the telling part: Mark presents the two differently.\u00a0 Mr. Dreyfuss represents the best of the \u201cGood Old Days\u201d as well as, not too subtly, the best about liberals.\u00a0\u00a0 Mr. George, on the other hand, is presented as some freakish exception to the unfortunate rule that most Conservatives would never be so good or awesome.\u00a0 Two examples, each used differently to sustain the narrative.<\/p>\n And that, kiddies, is how Mark does it.\u00a0 Just why Mark now aligns with the Left is beyond my ability to guess.\u00a0In fairness, that doesn\u2019t put him too far from the leadership of the Church as a whole. \u00a0But he justifies it in large part by insisting that it\u2019s conservatives and their wicked ways that have all but shoved him over the aisle, as opposed to liberals who are just nicer, sweller people.\u00a0It\u2019s never hard to besmirch a group\u00a0 of people if you see one bad example as proof of their badness, and any good examples as nothing more than some strange exception. <\/p>\n BTW, we should realize that Mark\u2019s entire premise about the superiority of liberals is obviously wrong, if not downright stupid.\u00a0 Liberals, just like conservatives, are no better or worse as people because of where they stand on the issues.\u00a0 You get good.\u00a0 You get bad.\u00a0 They may be different in how they act or tend to react based on their beliefs, but the goodness and badness is going to be the same, at least on a personal level.\u00a0\u00a0In fact, it\u2019s almost childish to say \u2018they\u2019re just nicer people than those people there\u2019\u00a0based on politics or issues.\u00a0 People are far more complex than red state\/blue state.\u00a0What adult would even listen to such a thing?\u00a0 For every case of good liberals, I can find as many bad.\u00a0 And for every case of bad conservatives, I can find as many good.\u00a0 <\/p>\n If you embrace liberalism as the best\u00a0method for living out\u00a0the Faith, then say so.\u00a0 Don\u2019t base it on the laughably inane notion that, Jesus notwithstanding, where you fall in a media\u00a0generated political narrative dictates the kind of person you are. \u00a0That a leading Catholic apologist rests his case on something so clearly false is troubling enough.\u00a0 That he continues to be lauded and praised and called to represent the Faith says more about the state of Catholic apologetics today than I care to admit. <\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" So a reader sent a link to Mark Shea\u2019s Facebook page.\u00a0 I swore bushy tail on that site, and to be honest, I\u2019ve been the happier for it.\u00a0 Nonetheless, he sent it to me and observed that this post explains a lot.\u00a0 And indeed, it does: \u201cInteresting. Dreyfuss is an old Lefty. But lots of […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2805,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-930","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"yoast_head":"\n