Liberal Leanings

L.A. Times Columnist, Patt Morrison, wrote a recent piece titled Recent Conservative Outcry Reeks of Liberal Leanings in which she attempts to convince us that conservatives who aren't perfect have somehow become... Liberals? Of course, her first attack is on Rush and his recent admission of drug addiction. I guess, based on her reasoning, that since he once (and still) condemns those who walk the path of substance abuse, that he is now a hypocrite and must either join the ranks of liberals, or else commit his soul to the great conservative radio god in the sky. For anyone to plead tolerance for his case is tantamount to speaking with forked tongue. Well, maybe she has a point. If Rush tries to weasel his way out and push the blame on Republicans... then I guess she would have a strong point. But what you have to watch out for is the subtle, or not so subtle, bait and switch that she plays with, "The old saying is that a conservative is a liberal who's been mugged. The new saying - because I just made it up - is that a liberal is a conservative who's been indicted. Iran-Contra leading man Oliver North - patriot, conservative, talk-show host - invoked that pinko 5th Amendment in that radical Bill of Rights..." Uh, let me get this straight now... conservatives consider the Bill of Rights to be "pinko"?... as in red?... as in communist? Whoa, that's a new one on me. Hang on folks because it gets even better. She closes with, "Limbaugh and his radio empire will survive his confession. Schwarzenegger did. William Bennett, author of "The Book of Virtues" and "The Death of Outrage," the man who gambled reported millions compulsively, 'fessed up and is still on the rubber-rooster circuit. Lawrence Kudlow, who was Ronald Reagan's chief economist at the Office of Management and Budget, acknowledged in the 1990s that he was a recovering alcoholic and drug addict, and he's got a show on CNBC. Just about the only difference between their vices and Bill Clinton's seems to be that it's not whether you do it, but that you confess to it." Herein lies the rub with the Liberals and their blindness when it comes to the difference between people and virtue. Notice that her conclusion is the difference between the likes of Bill Clinton and Bill Bennett is whether or not the immoral act committed was confessed. Is it really beyond Patt Morrison to understand that an immoral act is immoral regardless of whether it was confessed, and certainly regardless of who committed it? Is it a stretch of the imagination to understand the simple reality that regardless of whether Bill Bennett is a perfect human being (oxymoron there) that virtues remain virtues? Dietrich Bonhoeffer certainly recognized this when, comparing the difference between the Declaration of Independence of the United States and the Declaration of the Rights of Man of France, he said, "The American democracy is not founded upon the emancipated man but, quite on the contrary, upon the kingdom of God and the limitation of all earthly powers by the sovereignty of God. It is indeed significant when, in contrast to the Declaration of the Rights of Man, American historians can say that the federal constitution was written by men who were conscious of original sin and of the wickedness of the human heart." - from Ethics.