• Choose a category
• All
• Classic-Fiction

You remember Vietnam veterans being spat upon, incidents that were called an “urban myth” by liberals, until Chicago Tribune columnist Bob Greene asked in his newspaper column if any Vietnam veterans were personally spat upon when they returned to the United States. He received more than a thousand replies, sixty of which are included in his book Homecoming.51

And you remember Tom Hayden, former SDS leader and current Occidental College professor, hoping in 2004 that liberal protesters would force New York City police into “defending the GOP convention as if it is the Green Zone in Baghdad,” so that voters would see that the reelection of Bush could “plunge the country into strife not seen since the ’60s.”52

And you remember how, in 2006, the Columbia University students violently drove conservative speakers Jim Gilchrist and Marvin Stewart from the stage, turning over tables and chairs to seize control of the event.53

Indeed, you remember hateful attacks on any conservative who shows up to give a speech on a college campus—or shows up in public merely to dine at a restaurant or go to an art show.

You also remember delegates and cops at the 2004 and 2008 Republican National Conventions being beaten and sprayed with foul substances by liberal protesters.54

Is it becoming clearer now who that old woman who spat at Elizabeth Eckford was? What kind of person would engage in an ugly physical confrontation with a stranger? It’s always a liberal.

What’s confusing is that liberal historians keep telling us that those angry, contorted faces screaming at black people are “Southerners”—probably someone like Phyllis Schlafly. Only when you realize they are all Democrats—usually liberal, “progressive” Democrats, in the mold of Wilson, Faubus, and Ervin—do the pictures make sense.

It’s always liberals: Like Robespierre, they commit violence for the greater good.

THIRTEEN

RAPED TWICE:

LIBERALS AND THE

CENTRAL PARK RAPE

In 2006, when the Duke lacrosse players were accused of gang-raping a stripper—falsely, it turned out—mobs of students appeared outside the players’ homes to bang pots and pans. One of these blithering idiots, Manju Rajendran, explained on MSNBC that the “symbolic” banging of pots and pans was borrowed from Latin American protesters:

Women in Lima, Peru, initiated this as a way of surrounding the houses of women who were being assaulted by their husbands or by their partners. And it was a very confrontational way of saying, “We demonstrate solidarity with the women who are being attacked in this way or by anyone who’s being persecuted in this fashion.” We challenge the racism and the sexism and the classism implicit in these actions. We want to shame the attackers, and we want to invite the witnesses to step forward and come clean.1

In America—unlike Peru, evidently—we have a system of justice based on rules, a presumption of innocence, and a fair hearing. The fact that the Duke lacrosse players later turned out to be completely innocent of the charges illustrates one of the benefits of that system compared with mob lynchings. But as Le Bon says, Latin people are easily whipped into a frenzy on the basis of the most tenuous facts. Crowds, he says, “are everywhere distinguished by feminine characteristics, but Latin crowds are the most feminine of all.”2

Liberals despise the rule of law because courts interfere with their ability to rule by mob. They love to portray themselves as the weak taking on the powerful, but it is the least powerful who suffer the most once the rule of law is gone. The only purpose of government—as opposed to the state of nature—is to replace “might makes right” with a system of justice. The Left’s relentless attack on the judicial system is yet another example of their Jacobin lunacy in opposition to calm order.

One of the main differences in the political systems to emerge from the French and American revolutions is the prominence of the judiciary in America. While this has had malignant effects, such as John Edwards, the idea was that the courts would