Buoyed by their success in persuading students to “get involved,” left-leaning college professors have overlooked a fundamental law of physics that can apply to human relations as well: For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
“I realized I was conservative in college, and that I was a Republican just after graduating (when I cashed my first paycheck and saw so much of it go to the government),” S. E. Cupp, the co-author of Why You’re Wrong About The Right, recalls. “I became what I’d politely call ‘fervent’ after 9/11.”
“I’m sure many can relate.” Incidentally, the college that she went to was not a recognizably conservative institution such as Hillsdale but the anything-but-right-wing Cornell.
“I recall being turned off by the ‘in your face’ public protests and coerced celebrations of the Left, like ‘wear jeans if you’re in favor of gay marriage’ day,” Cupp’s writing partner Brett Josephe writes in the book’s conclusion. “Although I have always been passionate and intense, many of my political impressions were somewhat tepid before 9/11.”
“Even when a Cornell professor told my class that Jimmy Carter was a good president because relatively few people died during his term, I managed to keep my blood pressure at a fairly normal level.” Currently, Josephe labors at a Manhattan law firm while Cupp works for, believe it or not, The New York Times.
Their maiden effort at bookwriting is an admirable one, subtitled Behind the Myths: The Surprising Truth About Conservatives. They tackle these misconceptions in chapters with titles such as:
• Republicans Are Racist;
• Republicans Are Elitist WASPs;
• Republicans Are Humorless;
• Republicans Don’t Care About Education;
• Republicans Are NASCAR-Loving Rednecks; and
• Republicans Hate The Planet.
“Astonishingly, anecdotes and impressions seem to constitute a large measure of the evidence people cite when fervently asserting their global warming arguments,” the authors astutely note. “The ‘expert’ declarations are usually handed down during an uncharacteristically warm day in mid-winter, when someone says with an indignant huff, ‘And there are still people who don’t believe in global warming!’”
“When it snows in April, however, as it did in 2006 and 2007 throughout the country, the statements are not rescinded, nor are the science-by-impression methodologies questioned.” Actually, about the only questioning of that impressionistic approach that this reviewer has seen has been in the Senate floor speeches of U. S. Senator James Inhofe, R-Okahoma, and on the Facebook page of yours truly.
The conservative writing duo offer up some other sage observations as well. “The woman who is looked down upon by liberal feminists for getting married or going to church may become [italics the authors’] a Republican if she wasn’t already,” Cupp and Josephe write. “In admonishing women for making their own decisions, liberal feminists are often sending them right into enemy territory.”
“For good.” Again, this writer has seen that happen repeatedly as apolitical or even left-leaning women become conservative stalwarts after the feminist leaders who allegedly want to expand their choices get irate when they finally make a choice.
Malcolm A. Kline is the executive director of Accuracy in Academia.
