“Honesty is relative.” That was the precept I got from a campaign manager when I questioned why he was running a Marxist and communist party activist as an “Independent” candidate for mayor rather than on the communist party line. Why not just be who you are? I asked. He then explained the moral relativism of the left. In their minds, their world view is the truth; its opponents are evil. There is thus nothing wrong with lying if that is what it takes to defeat the evildoers. The ends justify the means.
Later, this “Independent” party mayoral candidate, in a moment of relaxation, spilled the beans in an interview with a reporter. He answered honestly a question about his favorite book, the one that influenced him the most. It was Karl Marx’s Das Capital. His campaign manager sent me over a copy of the newspaper article, with this handwritten scrawl: “We’ve blown our cover.”
I was very young then, idealistic and vulnerable, as many youth are today, to being seduced by the rhetoric and lies of the left. Youthful ignorance is the reason President Barack Obama prefers the community college and university campus as venues for speeches. Students can be counted upon to clap at claptrap.
Yes, I was once a lefty. I had cocktails with Tom Hayden and Jane Fonda (I once helped bodyguard Fonda on a visit to Connecticut). I met farm worker activsit Cesar Chavez, and opened up my home to his staff. I met (and again bodyguarded) Leon Trotsky’s grandson when he spoke at Harvard. In Dublin, my leftist cred got me treated to lunch and a tour at Sinn Fein headquarters, ordinarily strictly off-limits. (For that, I suffered a little airport hassle in returning to Dublin from Paris, not realizing that visitors to Sinn Fein were monitored).
There is much truth in the saying that if you are not a liberal at age 20, you have no heart, and if you are not a conservative at age 40, you have no brain. But that is far too simplistic. Many liberals I know have a great deal of brain matter — too much to seriously believe in much of what they preach. Beneath the veneer of altruism is always naked self-interest. Behind the liberal litigator preaching about and suing for “diversity” is a Fagin-like character for whom counting the liberal judge-awarded fee dollars is better than sex.
They remind me of the 1960′s male liberals leading the charge for unrestricted abortion rights, sexual equality and “reproductive freedom” for women. Gloria Steinem was too smart not to understand that her male supporters saw her agenda as one that would get them laid with more frequency and less hassle. It took me 30 years to get that male support for women in pants was more about getting into their pants.
Similarly, behind the liberal Democrat’s obsession with “diversity” and “minority” status is not altruism, but self-interest and greed — greed for money, status, advantage, a free pass, and a free lunch.
In a recent column, I spoke of a Yale professor who looked downright crestfallen at learning that I was Italian, and not Hispanic. He had fawned over me up until he realized I was not a minority charity case for him. There would be no liberal feel-good in patronizing an Italian-American student.
It is thus with great amusement that I watch Massachusetts Democratic Senate nominee Elizabeth Warren twist in the whirlwind of her own lies about her ethnicity, and watch Harvard squirm in embarrassment over its use of Warren’s false claim of being part “Cherokee” to brag about having its first “woman of color” on its law school faculty.
Warren is getting justly skewered over this, with blogger comedians and pundits having a field day. Some of the funnier new names she has: Lieawatha, Fauxcohontas, Professor Pale Face and Dances With Lies. Her lack of candor and her current backpedaling on previous outright denials respecting what she reported to Harvard and other schools regarding her ethnicity expose serious character flaws.
In perpetuating that lie for years, Warren fell victim to liberals’ addiction to “diversity,” to “minority” status, and to their very moral code that allows for fabrications for the cause. Identity politics is, as political analyst Charles Krauthammer observed, the “mother’s milk of the democratic party.” That explains how Pale Face can be transformed into a “woman of color” at Harvard, and excite the Democratic base in seeking elective office.
Even in my early leftist life, there was something about the “honesty is relative” thing that bothered me greatly. If you have truth on your side, I should imagine people can be convinced of it by reasoned argument, not by lying and deception. If you are the best candidate for a job or an elective office, there is no need to pretend to be something that you are not.
While I laugh at the bumper stickers that say, “Liberalism is a mental disorder,” I always thought that line a bit extreme. But now I am starting to believe that liberals, with some exceptions of course, are a very disturbed bunch of people.
Of course, should Professor Lies Like A Rug lose the election, she can always return to law school teaching, although probably not at Harvard. Hey, the squaw would fit right in at Quinnipiac. And I’m sure Connecticut’s liberals would welcome her. After all, they elected to the Senate a man who lied about serving in Vietnam. This is, after all, a blue state, where honesty is relative.•