Based on the left-leaning media coverage of Mark Levin’s interview of Attorney General William Barr, the left is presented with a significant problem.
Generally the left thinks of themselves as party of and for intellectuals in America. This is well rooted in the University and Public School systems around the nation as overwhelmingly liberal in their politics. They think of the right as containing all of the undereducated, redneck, hicks in the country and attribute the right’s decision to support conservatives like President Trump as the vote of ignorance. They see everything through this lens and create narratives that follow suit.
Ultimately this is one of the reasons that in many ways liberals adore Donald Trump. They can interpret and point with pride to their own intelligence by focusing on his tendency to be blunt and at times crass as feeding the appetite of the ignorant conservative masses. As intellectuals, their interpretation is that they have the education and pedigree to know right from wrong, and clearly their adversary must not have that capability. Riddled with moral narcissism, it is much easier for them to satisfy their arrogance and pride if the adversary can be dubbed unintelligent. And so they do.
Barr’s interview with Mark Levin was so articulate that the left had no idea how to respond. As a result, The Hill’s article is actually pretty fair (at least compared to their normal stance). However, it leaves out some of the meat of the interview, which included Barr citing the media is doing significant damage to the political system and Barr’s support of completing a fair and complete investigation of the surveillance of a presidential campaign and the Russia connection. The only response they could provide to Barr’s interview was to fall back to attack mode, twist the quotes, or completely disregard the content. Their playbook tells them that the tone of intellect is to be believed; any level of boorishness is to be chastised, admonished, and insulted, no matter the content. Case in point, the left adores celebrity goddess Rachel Maddow, who makes a good stab at sounding fairly intelligent and she of course fits their political narrative.
The exception to that is no matter how unintelligent someone is, if they lean left it’s okay to tolerate them. If the message fits, they’ll align. Otherwise how in the world would they be able to tolerate Jim Acosta (a Rachel Maddow wannabe on a good day) who is the epitome of a fragile snowflake, serving the party as the whining correspondent in chief, with zero reporting skills? Worse yet, the left tolerates Brian Stelter who yesterday asked a guest, “When you see entire media companies essentially exist to tear down Joe Biden, is there an equivalent of that on the left, tearing down Trump?” CNN, one of the most liberal ‘news’ outlets presents one of the most ridiculous, hypocritical interactions imaginable. The guest replied by of course saying, “there really isn’t.”
Comparatively, Barr puts them all to shame. “I think the left has essentially withdrawn from this (classically liberal) model, and really represents a Rousseauian revolutionary party that believes in tearing down the system,” he said. “They’re interested in complete political victory, they’re not interested in compromise, they’re not interested in dialectic exchange of views.” Just those two sentences were enough to set poor Brian Stelter off balance, swiveling off his Office Depot anchor’s chair, clamoring for his online dictionary, breaking into a cold sweat, and landing squarely on his juvenile rump.
The cognitive dissonance is immense for liberals when listening to Barr. Upon hearing him speak, all they have to fall back on is name-calling and insults because they simply can’t keep up with him intellectually. And the very idea that a conservative would have a brain in his head casts doubt on one of the most fundamental tenants of liberalism – the left is smarter than the right.
None of the left-leaning media bothered to mention Barr’s commentary on the media’s role in creating the current state of social unrest, but it was covered by Washington Examiner. The article discusses Barr’s input on the willful attacks on the current administration by left-leaning media.
The Washington Post presented a story that was fairly truthful in its quotes, but countered Barr’s statements with their own OPINION, twisting the reality of the interview (because if you can’t beat them, then just lie). And, they used their own in-house, in-bred fact checking team to validate their misstatements.
(photo by Sincerely Media on Unsplash)