Fighting Injustice & Whining Are Not Equivalent
by Hauser, Mon Feb 12, 2007 at 01:19:51 PM EST
A diary in which I propose to unite Donohue/Catholic League, the Civil Rights Movement, and celebrating Ronald Reagan....
"Governor Deval Patrick decided not to sign a proclamation recognizing Feb. 6 as "Ronald Reagan Day." A month into his term as governor, snubbing the Gipper's birthday has left Patrick open to partisan sniping.
A prominent conservative said Democratic New York Governor Eliot Spitzer declared the holiday.
"It's the difference between a little more sophisticated guy who's governor and a guy who's still playing partisan politics after a campaign," said Grover Norquist, founder and chairman of the Ronald Reagan Legacy Project.
Thirty-three governors -- 20 Republicans and 13 Democrats -- inked the agreement to recognize Reagan's birthday in their states, Norquist said. The 17 remaining governors either didn't reply or refused outright; Patrick was a frank "no," Norquist said.
State Republican Party Chairman Peter Torkildsen said he felt disbelief.
"To me, Ronald Reagan is one of the great figures of the 20th century, and not only that, he carried Massachusetts twice, which no Republican for president had done since Dwight Eisenhower," Torkildsen said in an interview."
I think what is going on in the Torkildsen et al arguments for a Reagan Day is very similar to the phenomenon at work with the Donohue Catholic League rage [against the bloggers, and in general] machine.
Basically, GOPers hate being accused of bigotry, insensitivity, etc....
And they really want to be seen as victims, not victimizers.
And they believe that liberals only invoke those concepts for tactical purposes.
So they don't get that when, say, African-Americans (or, to be more precise, anyone of goodwill) complain about Rush Limbaugh's racism, they are... you know, right.
And so they, with some complicated admixture of cynicism and confusion, call people bigots, urge affirmative action in honoring dead politicians and within academia, etc... without realizing that their opportunism is simply qualitatively different.
They genuinely, oddly, and wrongly believe the civil rights movement was about some technocratic notion of "color blindness," as opposed to promoting justice for all, which of course includes acknowledging the consequences of genuine injustice...
All in all, they pursue a "conservative correctness" that they might acknowledge to be hypocritical after enough drinks... but I don't think they actually realize it's biggest problem is that it is, you know, substantively wrong.
[And, yes, I write this while reading hate e-mails from people who say they understand why people are anti-Semites when a Jewish organization like NJDC [ http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/2/12/142349/166 ] has the gall to criticize Mitt Romney for associating himself with an "innovator" like Henry Ford, who did indeed lead the way in American support for Nazi eugenic principles.]