Conservatives, who more often than not sing the praises of the Consititution, “original intent”, and “strict constructionalism”, seem to want to take the concept of self-incrimination to its furthest possible conclusion.
Once upon a time “watch what you say” was a Republican mantra, attributable most famously to Ari Fleischer in the immediate aftermath of 9/11.
While the stakes certainly are different now, and the issues in which conservatives are ignoring their own advice cannot be truly raised to that level of importance, it might behoove them to pay more attention, if only because they might stop their own tendencies to political self-destruction once more endemic to their opponents.
The recent primary victory of Rand Paul in Kentucky and the immediate aftermath of his commentary on Rachel Maddow are a case in point. While there might be some truth to the assertion that the “liberal”/”MSM” would like nothing more than to portray tea-partiers as inveterate racist corporatists, it doesn’t help when the conservative quarry walks right into the trap. Sarah Palin can [almost] be forgiven for the “ambush” perpetrated upon her by Katie Couric re Supreme Court decisions, names of periodicals, etc. No one else has an excuse.
Its possible that questions about the Civil Rights Act were legitimate would be laughable—if Paul hadn’t tried to allow for the notion that it MIGHT have been at cross-purpose with his political principles. If he felt compelled to open his mouth and muse aloud that it might not have been the greatest idea, only he can be held responsible for the ensuing opprobrium, as he invited it. Similarly, when he feels compelled to defend corporate interests such as BP and the mining industry at a time like this, while he might be the victim of bad timing, any defense of those interests are ill considered, and he then pays a political price for defending them, it’s no one fault but his. Unfortunately for conservatives, their interests will only further suffer as a result.
In a similar vein, conservative carping about “affirmative action” regarding the first-time crowning of an Arab-Muslim woman as Miss USA are truly fighting the wrong battle. For one thing, if there’s any chance of the emergence of a “moderate” Islam, this is where it was going to come from: where a self-identified religio-ethnic fully participates in an event according to the rules of THAT EVENT. I’m sure al-Qaeda and the mullahs aren’t overly heartened by a bikini-clad co-religionist serving as the icon of everything they profess to be wrong with the world. [Funny, they haven’t blamed the Jews yet].
Now, if Miss USA had either a] worn a chador and insisted that she still be allowed the same chance to win, or b] had manifested some other sartorial item that served as an iconic support of Dar-al-Harb [say, a sword, Islamic flag, or dynamite vest], then accusations of affirmative action might have been salient.
On that note, it behooves a true Judeocentrist like this writer to weigh in on the controversy surrounding the purported offensiveness of Comedy Central’s I.S.R.A.E.L. robot/game. Until someone at Comedy Central has the brass to develop a suicide bombing robot game called I.S.L.A.M., the Jews are right.
If you target everyone equally, you may be funny. If you don't, or can't, you're either racist or spineless. Or both.
