Why I Left The Left

New Media Journal ^ | 7/3/2006 | Seth Swirsky

[HansGygi]

I used to be a liberal.

I was in one of the first “open” classrooms growing up in very progressive Great Neck, New York, in the 1960s. In 1971, when I was 11, I wrote vitriolic letters to President Nixon demanding an end to the Vietnam War.

My first vote, in 1980, was for Independent John Anderson, followed by Mondale, Dukakis, and Clinton-Gore. I read Thomas Friedman in the NY Times and tried to “understand” the “root causes” of the “despair” he said the Palestinians felt that drove them to blow up innocent Israelis.

I wasn’t an overtly political person – I just never veered from the liberal zeitgeist of the community in which I was raised.

But when I was about 27, in the late 1980s, cracks in my liberal worldview began to appear. It started with an uproar from the Left when Tipper Gore had the audacity to suggest a label on certain CDs to warn parents of lyrics that were clearly inappropriate for young people. Her suggestion was simple common sense and I was surprised by the furor it caused from the likes of Frank Zappa (and others) who felt their freedoms were being encroached upon. It was my first introduction into the entitled, selfish and irresponsible thinking I now associate with the Left.

In 1989, I remember questioning whether Democrat David Dinkins was the best choice for Mayor of New York City (where I lived) over Rudy Giuliani. After all, Dinkins hadn’t distinguished himself as Manhattan Borough President while Giuliani, as a United States District Attorney, had just de-fanged the mob.

But, racial “healing” was the issue of the day, Dinkins won, and the city went straight downhill. When Giuliani beat Dinkins in a rematch four years later – Surprise! – the crime rate plummeted, tourism boomed, Times Square came alive not with pimps but with commerce. Since 1993, the overwhelmingly liberal electorate in New York City has voted for Republicans for Mayor. Yet, to this day, many of my liberal friends refer to the decisive and effective Giuliani as a Nazi, even as they stroll their children through neighborhoods he cleaned up.

"What made me leave the Left for good and embrace the Right were their respective reactions to 9/11. While The New York Times doubted that we could succeed in Afghanistan because the Soviets in the ‘80s hadn’t, George W. Bush went directly after the Taliban and Al Qaeda seriously damaging and disrupting their networks."

After moving to Los Angeles in the early 90s, I watched from the roof of my apartment building as the city burned after the Rodney King verdicts were handed down. I thought what those four cops did to King was shameful. But I didn’t hear an uproar from my friends on the Left when rioters rampaged through the city’s streets, stealing, looting, and destroying property in the name of “no justice, no peace.” And it was impossible not to notice the hypocrisy when prominent Hollywood liberals, who had hosted anti-NRA fundraisers at their homes a week before the riots were standing in line at shooting ranges the week after it.

I watched carefully as Anita Hill testified during Clarence Thomas’s Supreme Court nomination hearing, claiming Thomas – once head of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission – sexually harassed her after she rebuffed his invitations to date him. At the time, I rooted, as did all my friends, for Miss Hill, hoping that her testimony would result in Thomas not getting confirmed. In retrospect, I’m ashamed that I was ever on the “side” of people who so viciously demonized a decent, qualified person like Judge Thomas, whether you agree with his judicial philosophy or not. Condoleezza Rice, during eligibility hearings for Secretary of State, also had to deal with rude people like Barbara Boxer, who seemed not to be able to fathom that a black American could embrace conservatism.

I voted for Al Gore in 2000. When he lost, I was disappointed, mostly in my fellow Democrats for thinking that the election had been “stolen” even though three other elections in the American history had been won by the candidate who had not won the popular vote (John Quincy Adams in 1824, Rutherford B. Hayes in 1876 and Benjamin Harrison in 1888). The rush to judgment by the now conspiracy consumed Left put me off. Where, I asked, were all the “disenfranchised” black voters who would have given Gore a victory in Florida? No one could produce a single name. And how exactly were the voting machines in Ohio “rigged” in 2004? I now refer to the Democrats as the Grassy Knoll party.

Still, I approached the 2004 primaries with an open mind. I was still a Democrat, still hoping that leaders like Sam Nunn and Scoop Jackson would emerge, still fantasizing that Democrats could constitute a party of truly progressive social thinkers with tough backbones who would reappear after 9/11.

I was wrong. The Left got nuttier, more extreme, less contributory to the public debate, more obsessed with their nemesis Bush – and it drove me further away. What Democrat could support Al Gore’s ‘04 choice for President, Howard Dean, when Dean didn’t dismiss the suggestion that George W. Bush had something to do with the 9/11 attacks? Or when the second most powerful Senate Democrat, Dick Durbin, thought our behavior at the detention center in Guantanamo was equivalent to Bergen Belsen and the Soviet gulags? Or when Senator Kennedy equated the unfortunate but small incident at Abu Ghraib with Saddam’s 40-year record of mass murder, rape rooms, and mass graves saying, “Saddam's torture chambers have reopened under new management, U.S. management"? What Democrat could not applaud the fact that the President had, in fact, kept us safe for what’s going on 5 years? What Democrat – even those who opposed the decision to go into Iraq – wouldn’t applaud the fact that tens of millions of previously brutalized people had the hope of freedom before them?

What made me leave the Left for good and embrace the Right were their respective reactions to 9/11. While The New York Times doubted that we could succeed in Afghanistan because the Soviets in the ‘80s hadn’t, George W. Bush went directly after the Taliban and Al Qaeda seriously damaging and disrupting their networks. Although many on the Left claim to have backed the President's actions, the self-doubt leading up to it, crystallized my view of the Left as weak and terminally lacking in confidence.

I supported President Bush’s hard line against the father of modern terrorism, Yasir Arafat, remembering that Bush’s predecessor hosted Arafat at the White House 13 times, more often than any other world leader. I applauded Bush’s unequivocal support for Israel, which every day faced (and faces) suicide attacks against its people. But I was most disappointed with liberal Jews who don’t understand that their very existence is rooted in Israel’s existence and that George W. Bush has been the best friend that Israel has ever had. But because they are less Jewish than they are liberal, they didn’t reward Bush with their vote in 2004.

Finally, I supported President Bush’s decision to oust Saddam and make possible the only democracy (other than Israel) in this crucial region of the Middle East. Post 9/11, we had to figure out a way to lessen the chances of more 9/11s. Democracy is a weapon in that war. If people are free to build businesses, buy homes, send their children to schools, pursue upward mobility, live their lives without fear, read newspapers of every opinion, vote for their leaders, resolve differences with debate and not bombs, they will have no reason to want to harm us.

In response, the Left offered bumper-sticker-type arguments like, Bush lied and thousands died. But Bush never lied. He, like Clinton and Gore and Kerry and the U.N. and the British and French and Israeli intelligence services affirmed that Saddam’s WMD were a vital threat – a threat, that post- 9/11, could not stand. An overwhelming number of Democrats voted for the war – but now the Left says they were “scared” into their votes by Bush. What does it say about Democrats if the “dummy” they think Bush is can scare them so easily?

Iraq is the “Normandy” of the War on Terror. The hope, once Iraq and Afghanistan are more stable, is that the nearly 70 million people in Iran will look at those countires (on it's left and right borders) and say: “Why do these people get to enjoy the fruits of freedom and we don’t?” – and then topple their Mullah’s dictatorial regime. The President understands the big picture -- that if the U.S. doesn’t help to remake that volatile region, we will face a nuclear version of 9/11 within the next two or five or 10 years. He is simply being realistic in his outlook and responsible in his actions. Iraq is succeeding, slowly but surely, but that’s not a sexy enough story to lead the news with: the relatively small amount of casualities are. Don’t forget, we occupied Germany and Japan for seven years and we still have troops there, more than 60 years after World War II ended.

And what have the Democrats contributed to the war effort since 9/11? Democrat Sen. Russ Feingold has suggested censuring our president; Former President and Vice President Bill Clinton and Al Gore, while visiting foreign countries, have blasted President Bush – acts of unconscionable irresponsibility; Democrat Sen. John Murtha, has invoked a cut-and-run policy in Iraq, supported by Democrat Senate Minority leader Harry Reid and Democrat House Minority leader Nancy Pelosi. Do they think the Middle East and the World would be safer if we had cut and run, as Murtha’s plan wanted us to do? Under that plan, our troops would have been out of Iraq by May 18th and al-Zarqawi wouldn’t be dead, but pulling the strings in an Iraqi civil war. With these kinds of ideas and behaviors, I just don’t trust Democrats when it comes to our national security.

And so, as any reader of this article can well understand, it became impossible for me to relate to the modern Democrat Party which has tacked way too far to the left and is dominated by elites that don’t like or trust the real people that make up most of the country.

Although I haven’t always agreed with President Bush, I proudly voted for him in 2004 (the only one of the four presidents not elected by the popular vote to win re-election). And I now fully understand Ronald Reagan’s statement, when he described why he switched from being a liberal to a conservative: “I didn’t leave the party – It left me!” ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (Seth Swirsky is a songwriter, author, recording artist and memorabilia collector. His hits include "Love Is A Beautiful Thing" for Al Green, "Tell It To My Heart" and "Prove Your Love" for Taylor Dayne, "Instant Pleasure" for Rufus Wainwright amongst others. His trilogy of bestselling books consisting of his correspondence with baseball players are called "Baseball Letters" (Crown, 1996), "Every Pitcher Tells A Story" (Times Books, 1999) and "Something to Write Home About" (Random House, 2003). His personal collection consists of the ball that went through Bill Buckner’s legs in the 1986 World Series and the letter banning “Shoeless” Joe Jackson from Baseball. His own CD, "Instant Pleasure", won Best Pop Album at the 2005 L.A. Music Awards. Currently, he is making a bookumentary called Beatles Stories. His eclectic world can be seen and heard at his site, Seth.com.)

[HawaiianGecko]

"I used to be a hippie liberal as well. My first vote for President was in 1972 at the tender age of 19, I voted McGovern."

I hear ya there, though I voted for President Nixon in '72.  Only Democrat I have ever voted for was Jimmy Carter and I was so embarrassed of my vote by 1980 that I actively campaigned for Reagan and have been in the GOP camp ever since.

This article expresses my feelings to a 'T'.

 

 

[DarthVader]

"Their hatred of this country is stunning."


It has grown to the point where it has become a danger now where it must be confronted and destroyed.

[randita]

The clincher, IMO:

The President understands the big picture -- that if the U.S. doesn’t help to remake that volatile region, we will face a nuclear version of 9/11 within the next two or five or 10 years.

[sachem longrifle]

I am Reagan Democrat. I did vote for RR in 84, Bush in 88, Clinton in 92 and 96(you have to admit dole was not a good candidate), sat out 2000, and voted for gwb in 2004. Will i ever vote for a Dem as Pres, possibly, but not in their current state I think my mother is weakening. If my mom, a dyed in the wool democrat, is weakening, how many more of the dem's traditional voters do they plan on losing

[spanalot]

"I was surprised by the furor it caused from the likes of Frank Zappa"

"Why are we outlawing words - they are only WORDS".

[NotJustAnotherPrettyFace]

This book says much the same thing and is a VERY good read. Every American should read this book:

100 People Who Are Screwing Up America (And Al Franken Is #37) - by Bernard Goldberg

[allen08gop]

Nope.

Truman and Ike were there. Though some say that Ike sending the Military Assistance Advisory Group in November 1955 marks the official start of our involvement.

Vietnam War Memorial casualties numbers 1 and 2 were back in 1959.

Kennedy and Johnson dramatically ramped up our troop levels.

Perhaps someone else can comment on Ike's advice to Kennedy when JFK took over. I have heard he had a word or two about it.

[humblegunner]

But I was most disappointed with liberal Jews who don’t understand that their very existence is rooted in Israel’s existence

Not if they dont live there it isn't.

[Puckster]

It goes all the way back to Truman:

Letter to President Harry Truman, February 16, 1945. The letter was never answered and was not declassified until 1972

DEAR MR. PRESIDENT:

Our VIETNAM people, as early as 1941, stood by the Allies' side and fought against the Japanese and their associates, the French colonialists.

From 1941 to 1945 we fought bitterly, sustained by the patriotism, of our fellow-countrymen and by the promises made by the Allies at YALTA, SAN FRANCISCO and POTSDAM.

When the Japanese were defeated in August 1945, the whole Vietnam territory was united under a Provisional Republican Government, which immediately set out to work. In five months, peace and order were restored, a democratic republic was established on legal bases, and adequate help was given to the Allies in the carrying out of their disarmament mission.

But the French Colonialists, who betrayed in wartime both the Allies and the Vietnamese, have come back, and are waging on us a murderous and pitiless war in order reestablish their domination. Their invasion has extended to South Vietnam and is menacing us in North Vietnam. It would take volumes to give even an abbreviated report of the crisis and assassinations they are committing everyday in this fighting area.

This aggression is contrary to all principles of international law and the pledge made by the Allies during World War II. It is a challenge to the noble attitude shown before, during, and after the war by the United States Government and People. It violently contrasts with the firm stand you have taken in your twelve point declaration, and with the idealistic loftiness and generosity expressed by your delegates to the United Nations Assembly, MM. BYRNES, STETTINIUS, AND J.F. DULLES.

The French aggression on a peace-loving people is a direct menace to world security. It implies the complicity, or at least the connivance of the Great Democracies. The United Nations ought to keep their words. They ought to interfere to stop this unjust war, and to show that they mean to carry out in peacetime the principles for which they fought in wartime.

Our Vietnamese people, after so many years of spoliation and devastation, is just beginning its building-up work. It needs security and freedom, first to achieve internal prosperity and welfare, and later to bring its small contribution to world-reconstruction.

These security and freedom can only be guaranteed by our independence from any colonial power, and our free cooperation with all other powers. It is with this firm conviction that we request of the United Sates as guardians and champions of World Justice to take a decisive step in support of our independence.

What we ask has been graciously granted to the Philippines. Like the Philippines our goal is full independence and full cooperation with the UNITED STATES. We will do our best to make this independence and cooperation profitable to the whole world.

I am Dear Mr. PRESIDENT,

Respectfully Yours,

(Signed) Ho Chi Minh

[Puckster]

One last item:

"Truman never replied to at least eight appeals by Ho Chi Minh for American support of independence and cooperation on the Philippine model. Ho was then compelled to turn to Beijing and Moscow for material aid against returning French troops."

http://hnn.us/roundup/comments/11737.html

[Erik Latranyi]

To be a Liberal you must......

1) Believe that social programs work and that tax cuts fail, no matter how many times you are proven wrong.

2) Believe that getting tough on crime is wrong, but criminals need tolerance from an evil society.

3) Believe that terminating a pregnancy is a choice, but carrying a firearm for self-defense should not be a choice.

4) Believe that one President's sex with an intern is a "personal matter" while another President's previous possible drug habits should be investigated thoroughly.

etc, etc, etc.

[GregoryFul]

Nixon did his best to try to end the Vietnam war with a victory, by doing the unthinkable - releasing the "dogs of war" and bombing the enemy capital! The Dummies who prosecuted the war through the 60's just "sacrificed" Americans rather than use our maximum force to bring the war to an end.

It wasn't the Dummies' way. But it was also too late for Nixon to save the day. The left had won the propaganda war, and millions died when American military protection was withdrawn from the region. It is amazing to me that any thinking person would put their life in the hands of Dummies.

Of course, in recent years, "Moron Trivia" has opened my eyes. We are plagued by a plethora of ignoramuses in this country.

[P.O.E.]

My first vote, in 1980, was for Independent John Anderson

Me too. But that was only because I was a big Yes fan. Really.

[conservativehusker]

An example of the old saying ...If you are not a democrat in your youth you have no heart..if your not a Conservative when your older you have no brains...

[babydoll22]

Welcome to FR.

I left the Democrat Party, when Iran released our hostages 30 minutes after Presiden Reagan was sworn in.

[joe fonebone]

I left the left in 1977, after only 1 year of Carter ( yes, i voted for him, the last democrat i ever voted for )

[reaganbooster]

But I was most disappointed with liberal Jews who don’t understand that their very existence is rooted in Israel’s existence and that George W. Bush has been the best friend that Israel has ever had. But because they are less Jewish than they are liberal, they didn’t reward Bush with their vote in 2004.

Exactly! This to me is one of the world's greatest mysteries. A race of people clearly targeted for death, and they willingly vote for leftist politicians who aide and assist their eventual destruction.

Welcome to the good guy side, HansGygi!

[divine_moment_of_facts]

Excellent post! 9/11 was the wake-up call for me. I watched as the Democrats talking points grew closer and closer to the words of OUR ENEMY's! They are on the same Script and it's down right frightening!

[agere_contra]

I never was a liberal, but I used to be a subtly anti-American Briton.

It was your guy Eagleburger, offering Britain an Aircraft Carrier during the Falklands war, who converted me. We (luckily) didn't need it, but the generosity of the offer made me realise that the BBC had long been yanking my chain.

[GOP Poet]

Welcome home to FR!! Great post. Thanks. Have a joyous 4th of July.