TNR: Ball Fake [The Loony Left Loses Another Liberal]

The New Republic ^ | 01.21.05 | Tom Frank

[West Coast Conservative]

wasn't supposed to be here. I was supposed to be at a ball, a genuine inaugural ball with tuxedos and presidential-seal-emblazoned square napkins and succulent miniature crab cakes. Regrettably, we're a liberal magazine and, consequently, many of us are less than perfectly organized (although, at TNR, some of us prefer to think of ourselves as neo-disorganized)--and, well, I failed to honor certain press-credentialing deadlines. Now, instead, I would be covering "counter-inaugural events." As a result, last night I was sitting in a low-budget church on G Street in downtown Washington listening to speakers at an International Socialist Organization-sponsored gathering by the name of "Town Hall: Empire and Resistance."

Needless to say, this wasn't much fun. I could have thrown a stone as far as my strength allowed and still have been certain of not hitting a crab cake. On the other hand, everyone else seemed to be having a good time. The hundred or so people there frequently applauded and hollered, and, as expected, phrases like "exposing Bush for what he is--a cold-blooded killer" were particular hits. I didn't even think there was much to report on. After all, who cares what the ideological fringe of the losing side has to say? But the more I heard, the more I became convinced that I had discovered something truly threatening: This band of socialists was the most effective recruiting tool for the Republican Party I'd ever encountered.

To begin with, there were the posters on the wall: MONEY FOR JOBS AND EDUCATION, NOT FOR WAR AND OCCUPATION. Let's leave aside that the meter is somehow dissatisfying (nine syllables followed by eight--no flow at all). The main point is, if the shallowness of this statement bothers you, to what party do you look for comfort? To the Democrats, many of whom condemn building firehouses in Baghdad and closing firehouses at home? Or do you say to yourself, in that moment, "I don't much care for Newt Gingrich--nor does anyone else--but I bet he hates that goddamn poster as much as I do"? I know where I was leaning.

Then there was the pooh-poohing of elections--any elections. Former soldier Stan Goff (supposedly of the Delta Force, Rangers, and Special Forces) spoke at length about the evils of capitalism and declared, "We ain't never resolved nothing through an election." This drew loud, sustained applause. Nothing to get worked up about, I thought; just a leftist speaker spouting lunacy. But today it seemed particularly bad. It wasn't just that I was missing what might be lovely canapés (or perhaps spring rolls being brought about on trays with delectable dipping sauce); rather, it was the thought that the speaker was dismissing something that Afghanis of all ages had recently risked their lives to participate in, something Iraq's insurgents view as so transformative that they are murdering scores of Iraqis to prevent it. No, what I needed to counter this speaker was not a Democrat like me who might argue that elections were, in fact, important. What I needed was a Republican like Arnold who would walk up to him and punch him in the face.

But the worst came with the final speaker, a woman by the name of Sherry Wolf, who is supposedly on the "editorial board of International Socialist Review." She talked, and talked, and talked; terms like "architects of the slaughter," "war criminal," and "Noam Chomsky" wafted about the room; and my eyes grew so bleary that I ceased taking notes. But then she brought up the insurgents in Iraq. Sure they were bad, she admitted: "No one cheers the beheading of journalists." But, she continued, they had a "right" to rebel against occupation. Then she read from a speech by the activist Arundhati Roy: "Of course, [the Iraqi resistance] is riddled with opportunism, local rivalry, demagoguery, and criminality. But if we were to only support pristine movements, then no resistance will be worthy of our purity." In sum, Wolf said, the choice boiled down to supporting occupation or resistance, and we had to support resistance.

So there it was. I even forgot about the Constitution Ball for a minute. Apparently, we were to view the people who set off bombs killing over 150 peaceful Shia worshippers in Baghdad and Karbala as "resistance" fighters. And the audience seemed entirely fine with this. These weren't harmless lefties. I didn't want Nancy Pelosi talking sense to them; I wanted John Ashcroft to come busting through the wall with a submachine gun to round everyone up for an immediate trip to Gitmo, with Charles Graner on hand for interrogation.

I left early (I couldn't stomach the question-answer session) and made my way to the Metro. In the station were people wearing fur coats and tuxedos and lovely gowns and shiny shoes. I assumed they were in town to celebrate Bush's reelection, and, for a moment, I wanted to join in. After my session with the ISO, they suddenly looked--well, so appealing.

Having attended college in New York City, I know what it's like to be confronted with some of the more irritating forms of campus leftism. Yet I never quite understood why, ultimately, such leftism should drive sensible people away from liberalism. But yesterday's display made it a little more understandable: Maybe sometimes you just want to be on the side of whoever is more likely to take a bunker buster to Arundhati Roy.

[Stultis]

Tom, don't you get the memos? Mainstream liberals have a perfectly reasonable method for dealing with seditious extremists like this. They pretend these wackos are really just slightly-left-of-mainstream "progressives" (using the word "socialist" is "red baiting" which is always wrong) and they never, ever publish or broadcast anything which reveals the actual views of these communi, er, progressives. What were you thinking!?

[T. Buzzard Trueblood]

the disintegration of the Democrats is not good for this country...this will leave the Republicans with no opposition and will inevitably lead to widespread corruption

I agree that a strong opposition is necessary to maintain a truly vital Republic. But I don't think that that opposition is the Democrats. Their ideas are all stale as hell. Their last idea was the New Deal. Personally, I wish the two parties in the USA were the Republicans and the Libertarians. That would be a juicy political contest to watch.

[stands2reason]

Is it too much to hope that some of those who challenged Kristinn Taylor in his Q&A with the WP by stating "How dare do you call the protestors anti-Americans!" get to read this?

[rwfromkansas]

This man is still a Democrat, but he seems to have a brain on his head, and I salute him.

I am sure I would disagree with his pieces on Bush though. :)

[CyberAnt]

In my first answer - when I said - "I don't agree" I left off the word "either" - I'm sorry.

[CyberAnt]

That percentage may not be what's left now that the election is over, but in watching all the polling data it turned out to be a consistant number for the Bush-haters. Actually, the real ultra-left wing radicals are about 17% of the party.

[conservativecorner]

Can it be that some on the left including journalists at least see a glimmer of reality in their thoughts?

[doug from upland]

This is great. Thanks for finding it.

[Redbob]

"I can't believe that most democrats in this country are traitors and believe the things the loony left believes."

I can.

[lowbridge]

No, what I needed to counter this speaker was not a Democrat like me who might argue that elections were, in fact, important. What I needed was a Republican like Arnold who would walk up to him and punch him in the face.

Bwahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!

These weren't harmless lefties. I didn't want Nancy Pelosi talking sense to them; I wanted John Ashcroft to come busting through the wall with a submachine gun to round everyone up for an immediate trip to Gitmo, with Charles Graner on hand for interrogation.

Oh, my sides.

[Katya]

Thank you, I laughed so very hard. The author is a supreme example of Limousine liberalism...oh, the shabbiness of it all and no ball to warm the soul. The author of course, pays taxes in order to avoid, ever having to deal with "those" lefties. However, this IS your base.

[elwood]

Don't worry. Republicans will have plenty of opposition soon enough. The tens of millions of voters in this country who still depend on Big Government everyday will make sure of that.

Do you really think the Republicans are still the party of small government? Jeez...

[libertyman]

I agree w/ you...in addition to that, the further to the Left the Dims go, then the same will happen to the GOP: the Dims who consider themselves to be not-so-liberal, or kinda even conservative, will join the GOP instead, thus pushing the GOP slowly towards the Left. The GOP is no longer the party of Barry Goldwater, Pat Buchanan, or former Sen. Robert Taft.

Consider the former Dims that are now in the GOP (William Bennett is one example): there are a lot more of them than there are former Repub's in the Dim Party.

[Cooda]

Stan Goff was, in fact, Delta Force and Rangers (you could try to read his two books: "Full Spectrum Disorder" and
"Hideous Dream") It is glaringly obvious that Goff has far more brains and guts than Frank. I would challenge any of you to read Goff's essay: "There's No There There - Debating a Neocon"
http://www.counterpunch.org/goff11102004.html
C'mon it can't hurt too much!
By the way, his son is serving in Iraq.
By the other way, he is no friend of the Democrats or Liberals or Progressives. He has blasted past all that crap.

[Big Guy and Rusty 99]

hello? openly marxist! he blew right past the liberals to the left.