Partisanship, we’re told, is always wrong. What is “partisanship”? Superficially, it’s the difference between Republicans and Democrats. The deeper issue implied is: Principle. The assumption (a false one) is that Republicans and Democrats have different principles. It’s wrong to be consistently one or the other, according to this view, because principle is always wrong. Principles are wrong because (they claim) there is no absolute objective reality, there is no right or wrong way of doing things, and therefore on any matter of principle the only solution is to split the difference.
Of course, in practice it means something different. According to liberals and socialists, when a policy is liberal or socialist it is always and absolutely right. To oppose ObamaCare, for example, is to be “extreme” and therefore wrong. The rational alternative, according to liberals, is to be “bipartisan” and “moderate” and support ObamaCare in principle, and therefore in practice.
The interesting thing about liberals and socialists is how they never apply their own rules of logic to themselves. Case in point: The recent remarks of guru-in-chief Oprah Winfrey. Oprah recently told MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” that it’s time for Barack Obama’s critics to “show some level of respect.” She said, ‘I feel that everybody has a learning curve, and I feel that the reason why I was willing to step out for him was because I believed in his integrity and I believed in his heart.” To those who dare complain that Obama is doing anything wrong, Oprah added, ‘I think everybody complaining ought to try it for once.’ She added that the presidency is a position that ‘holds a sense of authority and governance over us all,’ and that ‘even if you’re not in support of his policies, there needs to be a certain level of respect.’
“Authority and governance over us all” — is that a threat, Oprah? What happens if the critics you oppose don’t fall into line behind Mr. President?
It’s interesting how liberals and socialists bypass questions people have about their ideology and replace them with issues of competence. Oprah is responding to charges that Obama is incompetent by saying, “Give the guy a chance. It’s a hard job — you ought to try it!” This neatly bypasses the objections that most of Obama’s critics actually have: About his ideas, and his policies.
Of course Obama has a hard job. He’s trying to do the impossible — and the immoral. He’s trying to turn America’s semi-socialist/semi-capitalist democracy into a mostly or totally socialist nation. In his first two years in his office, he went about this as decisively and calmly as anyone in American history has ever done. By the standards of expanding socialism in the United States, Obama has been quite competent. This is precisely why his opponents oppose him. Oprah is either too stupid or too evasive to respond to the real reason that so many Americans don’t like Obama: They resent, or even despise, his ideas and his policies. To speak in the language of Oprah: Oprah doesn’t get it.
Oprah is doing what liberal partisans typically do. They bypass ideological issues and respond with personal ones. Oprah relies on people assuming that both parties are more or less the same, and that you get more or less the same thing when either one is in office — so it’s merely a matter of personality, style, competence and patience. Sadly, this is all too true. Republicans have been expanders of and tax collectors for the welfare state no less than the Democrats, for many decades now. But none of this changes the fact that widespread opposition to Obama has come from people who oppose conventional Republicans just as much, for their enabling of the massive socialist, authoritarian democracy America has slowly become.
Partisanship is considered wrong because “taking a side” is wrong. But Oprah, one of the most prominent liberal socialist celebrities of all time, is most decidedly taking a side. Imagine any other celebrity of her stature taking the side of a Tea Party Republican, calling for the election of a President who wants to abolish the Department of Education, massively cut taxes for everyone, and privatize Medicare and Social Security. The resulting outrage and screams against the “lack of bipartisanship” would be immense. This is because “bipartisanship” is not about compromising of principles; it’s about siding with what liberals and socialists consider the right principles.
Oprah’s politics are no accident. For years, on her television show, she has promoted the views, books and snake oil of various and sundry folks who preach the virtues of what they consider spirituality. “Spirituality” by this definition consists of the underlying philosophical view that there are no absolutes, there is no objective reality, and all that matters are feelings. Of course, any person who preaches the absolutism of feelings can only subscribe, in practice, to the absolutism of his own feelings. You can’t say, “Feelings are all that matter and people have different realities” unless, at the end of the day, you support someone’s version of reality.
Notice how in her MSNBC interview Oprah starts her sentences with “I feel.” She adores Obama for his “heart,” not for his thinking or ideas. Undoubtedly she wants to convey the view that she’s bipartisan and not trying to impose her views on anyone. But she’s more than happy to use every ounce of influence she has to ensure that Obama gets to impose his view of things on what’s left of private property, private industry and private association in America. Her feelings, under the socialism and Big Government of the man she defends, will be YOUR reality in the coming years as his policies continue to expand and replace the relative freedom we once enjoyed.
Thank you for that, Oprah.