http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/what-evil-lurks-the-liberals-know/article/2556802What evil lurks? The liberals know
By Noemie Emery | December 2, 2014 | 5:00 am
“Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men? The Shadow knows!”
Thus ran the opening lines of the radio thriller that enthralled people of all ages in a pre-television era when voice alone was still king.
But The Shadow had nothing on modern day Democrats, who claim entrée to the hearts of post-60s Republicans, where they see only evil of one special kind. Since the 1980s, at least, they have had a great time defining their rivals as Klansmen on stilts, starting with Ronald Reagan (a Truman and FDR backer) to his successor the elder George Bush (a Connecticut Yankee) and down to his son (the artist now known as W), who appointed two black secretaries of state in succession and is loved in Africa more than Obama for the work he did fighting AIDS.
During the 1988 election, the handlers of Bush 41 discovered (they had only to watch Al Gore during the Democratic primary debates) that Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis had gotten in hot water for defending a program that furloughed killers from prison. And they became aware of one furloughed prisoner in particular who, on a weekend break from serving his life sentence, had gone on a crime spree in Maryland, raping a woman and stabbing her fiancé.
When voters turned on Dukakis, was it because they had ample ground to distrust his judgment after he vetoed a bill denying furloughs to convicted murderers? Not to the Democrats, who, like The Shadow, knew all. They sensed that the voters were moved not by your normal aversion to rape and murder, but by the fact that the assailant was black. Even though no one knew this until after Dukakis was sunk by the issue, they remained certain that behavior itself played no part in the outcome. Had the villain been merely your typical snaggle-toothed redneck, the public would simply have shrugged and moved on.
With this as their template, Democrats went on to many more years of assigning their own thoughts to their foes or the public, claiming they knew more of what others were thinking than those others knew of themselves. On a good day, about 80 percent of the content generated by left-leaning websites will be spent explaining why Republican positions on x, y and z are really expressions of their fear and loathing of non-white Americans, and how modern conservatives descend from John C. Calhoun, Jefferson Davis, the 1948 presidential campaign of Strom Thurmond and the Ku Klux Klan in its entirety in one straight and unbroken line. MSNBC frets over the threat of the "dog whistle," by which one uses a commonplace phrase to send a sinister message to one’s fellow bigots. Only their network’s anchors are apparently able to hear them.
The row between Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates and Sgt. James Crowley began when Gates assigned thoughts to Crowley he hadn’t actually been thinking. And in similar fashion, it was only a matter of time after Michael Brown was shot by former Ferguson police officer Darrell Wilson that the literati took it upon themselves to determine what Wilson was thinking and why.
Like The Shadow, the liberals peered into Wilson's brain and found there a mare’s nest of racist invective, based on his testimony that the 290-pound Brown displayed anger that verged on demonic and displayed an indifference to danger and pain.
What it really reflects is the conduct of some people when they are on drugs — such as the naked 135-pound white college student who was shot and killed in 2012 by a black policeman in Mobile, Ala. The officer in that case found the student's behavior threatening in spite of his being both unarmed and naked. A grand jury agreed and declined to indict him, much like in Ferguson. If that student was a victim of anti-white bias, no blogger has noticed.
Who knows what lurks in the hearts of most people? It’s not likely the liberals do.
