"The View's" Joy Behar did a masterful job of revealing her political ignorance when she grilled co-host Meghan McCain on why Republicans still support President Donald Trump, given his "treasonous behavior."
Behar was referring to Trump's friendly relationship with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un and his taking Kim at his word when Kim denied any responsibility for the imprisonment and torture of University of Virginia student Otto Warmbier, who died in 2017.
I can't explain Trump's remarks on Warmbier, but it is preposterous to argue that they were treasonous. Why can't Behar be content with, say, "outrageous" as a descriptor? Why must Trump haters insist that this most conspicuously pro-American president be tagged as a traitor because he says things they consider offensive?
Advertisement - story continues below
I suppose it's partly because liberals have swallowed whole the malicious myth that Trump colluded with the Russians to win his presidential election. Despite two years of failed attempts to prove Trump's collusion, liberals cling to this fiction the way an older child, who should know better, clings to his belief in Santa Claus. If Trump is the traitor they imagine, why did he walk away from the negotiating table in Vietnam when Kim insisted all sanctions be lifted without his agreeing to dismantle his nuclear program?
These same liberals most certainly didn't call President Obama treasonous for being caught on an open mic telling Russian President Dmitry Medvedev that he would have more flexibility to deal with missile defense after his re-election. They didn't accuse him of selling out the country in the disgraceful Iranian nuclear deal, when he gave away the farm, America's national security interests and pallets of cash that were guaranteed to be used to sponsor terrorism – all without getting much of anything in return.
McCain, no defender of Trump's, succinctly explained that Republicans support Trump because the alternative is a party advocating socialism, late-term abortions and other things she could never get behind. Behar, apparently resentful of being cast as an enabler of socialism and late-term abortions, condescendingly countered that "those two things are being used as cudgels against Democrats, because there are nuances to socialism and infantilism. It's not what's really happening, so people need to understand what those words really mean."
The truth hurts. How dare Republicans use the Democrats' socialism and pro-abortion policies against them? In addition to their pathological apoplexy over Trump, those two issues have come to define the modern Democratic Party. Socialism is now the face of the party, and abortion is its exposed rear end. Each of the many Democratic presidential candidates is trying to outmaneuver the others to the left.
Advertisement - story continues below
Republicans aren't making any of this up. They don't have to. They're just minding their own business, eating their popcorn and watching this generation's version of "It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World," with Democratic politicians – young and old, north, south, east and west – starring in all the leading and supporting roles.
McCain didn't take Behar's implication that she lacks nuance sitting down, explaining to Behar that she is an educated woman who knows the meaning of those terms and that she knows what Bernie Sanders is presenting and she doesn't agree with it.
Behar and other dissembling liberals tried to explain away the recent New York and Virginia abortion legislation and the proposed federal Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, saying the bills didn't mean what even the sponsors admitted they meant. Assuming Behar is being honest here, I think we can infer that she's the one who lacks nuance if she doesn't understand, for example, that the Virginia legislation would permit infanticide. (I realize the wordsmith Behar used the term "infantilism," but I'm going to go with the word I think she meant.) Democrats may pretend that subtle nuances in this legislation make their support of late-term abortion and infanticide justifiable, but the bills were straightforward and morally indefensible.
Behar and other liberals are demanding that we trust their lying eyes, which perceive that only fringe Democrats support full-blown socialism – but Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is not the only one mouthing this craziness. Many of the Democratic presidential candidates have expressed varying degrees of support for the Commie-inspired Green New Deal, and rank-and-file Democratic supporters are still infatuated with card-carrying socialist Bernie Sanders. Democrats have never found a socialist thug dictator they didn't glamorize, and their economic agenda – from taxes to spending to regulation to universal health care to using environmental concerns as a pretense for expanding government control over all areas of our lives to their calls for social justice, income equality and racial reparations – is galloping further left every day.
If liberals don't want to be accused of socialism and infanticide, they should start opposing – instead of roundly embracing – them. Behar might think conservatives are too uneducated to grasp the meaning of words, but it is their understanding of the words, not their confusion about them, that stands in the way of the radical Democratic agenda. And thank God for that.