Liberalism is the art of pretending to say something profound while saying nothing intelligent.
The proof? There’s tons of it… pretty much any time a liberal opens his or her mouth, actually. Like the following four examples, all concerning the Boston Marathon bombers, who were originally suspected Muslim extremists and are now confirmed as such.
Apparently that’s the kind of people who deserve some kind of a free pass, kid-glove treatment or no real analysis, depending on what non-intelligent liberal you’re talking to.
Ruth O’Brien, a professor – a supposed academic – at the City University of New York, writes:
“Now we have captured the two terrorists from Chechnya who come from the troubled region that is Muslim, but we cannot understand their motives, not yet. And Obama encourages us to refrain.
“This said, the mortuary pictures of the older brother of the two are extremely disturbing, raising questions as to whether the Boston Police Department captured him with too much force.”
Chris Matthews, a TV host – a supposed professional – on MSNBC, says:
“I know we’re filled in this country with some strange thinking people – truthers, birthers – that have off-the-wall theories. I don’t know how anybody could look at this evidence presented so far and have some other theory of the case besides the indictment itself.
“Why is [knowing the Boston Marathon bombers’ motive] important? Why is that important to… to prosecuting? I mean, what different does it make why they did it if they did it?”
Keith Ellison, a Democrat and Muslim politician – a supposed man of the people – in the U.S. House of Representatives, asserts:
“Well, you know, it is too early for me to second-guess the FBI. I think we need to know more about what they knew… There is just not enough information. What I will says is this: we don’t know what [the Boston Marathon bombers’] motivation was yet. Those facts may come clear. There is some indication that this had to do with Chechnya and their dispute with Russia. And… it is not necessarily the case that anyone should jump to the conclusion that there was any religious motivation here. I think again, prudence and clam is the order of the day.”
And Richard Falk, a Human Rights Council member – a supposed expert – with the United Nations, declares:
“The American global domination project is bound to generate all kinds of resistance in the post-colonial world. In some respects, the United States has been fortunate not to experience worse blowbacks, and these may yet happen, especially if there is no disposition to rethink US relations to others in the world, starting with the Middle East…
“Should we not all be mediating on W.H. Auden’s haunting line: ‘Those to whom evil is done/do evil in return’?”
Thing is, they’d all be singing an extremely different tune if – as they all so desperately, nastily and irrationally hoped – it was a Tea Party member who had bombed he Boston Marathon.
Which makes them hypocrites on top of being weak-minded, self-glorified hacks… exactly what we’ve come to expect from our academics, our entertainers and informers, our politicians and our supposed experts.
A pitiful lack of character.