Jim Scarantino is an odd duck. He’s an environmentalist AND a Republican. No, seriously, stop laughing! He’s a Republican AND he dislikes Bush — lots more of those around, not that they stopped Bush from retaking power. He’s not afraid to confound expectations — remember, he calls himself a “moderate Republican” (the more popular term is RINO). He’s like a silver minnow at a Republican fish-fry.
Now, I can say that we ought to conserve more energy and the world would benefit in countless ways. But I’m a known liberal, so no one would be surprised. But when a REPUBLICAN says:
“Global warming, or more accurately global climate change, is real and we’re causing it. Only wackos, idiots, Exxon, Peabody Coal and corrupt politicians are still in denial. Feel free to insert ‘The Bush White House’ anywhere in that list, unless you think I’ve got it covered.”
You’ve got to draw a breath — a Republican wrote that?! Kudos. But before we start to wonder if maybe there was a problem at voter registration or he’s just trying (weakly) to rebel against hippie parents, make sure you see the full context.
Not only is Jim gung-ho for nuclear power (uniting him with Dick Cheney, no moderate), not only does he
worship St Pete, er, like Domenici more than I do…, who sold his own fiscal conservatism for cheap, but Jim seems to be a disciple of John Leo. Leo, you shouldn’t care, is a one-man army fighting against the greatest scourge since Communism: “Political Correctness.” Leo has countless examples of liberal universities and others showing just what idiots they are. “Political Correctness” is one of so many strawmen used by conservatives to keep political passions inflamed. It’s money in the bank for them.I’m not saying that there is no such thing as “Political Correctness.” However, I am saying that it doesn’t dominate liberalism, and using it to tar other facets of liberalism is not valid or even bright. 80% of complaints about PC would be eliminated by this: think more about what you say about others and less about what they say about you. Doesn’t sound quite as threatening as gay-enviro-communism.
Still, the Radical Right, the frightened Right, has made an art of accusing people of things they don’t do.
It wouldn’t be a Republican attack piece if it didn’t skewer some liberal icon. His choice: Ed Abbey, the late curmudgeon and misanthrope. Conservatives can’t stand liberals respecting someone with flaws — in spite of their own worship of Goldwater, Nixon, Raygun, and the Bushes. Abbey was the antithesis of the forces that destroyed Glen Canyon to create Lake Foul — the same forces that have brought the Republicans to power. Abbey is deeply connected to an American tradition of love of wilderness, wildness, frontiers and independence, with a mistrust of conformity and corporate homogeneity. Like him or not, he was a great American, closer to Teddy Roosevelt than George Bush (any way you want to parse that).
In an article that will mostly be read by progressive thinkers, Jim has the laudable guts to say: maybe you’re close-minded about something. But he has to wrap that useful message in such dim-witted right-wing terms as to make it even harder to take. Why bother? Of course, what conservative journal would allow him in print?
If we are going to start talking about Nuclear Power, I have some questions. Which countries are the biggest consumers of nuclear power? I’d guess Germany (or some country in Europe) and Japan. But I understand that Germany is closing nuclear plants — why?
How is opposition to nuclear power proof of moral bankruptcy or hypocrisy? Why must we choose to rape ANWR, Valle Vidal, Otero OR build nuclear plants? Aren’t there other options, like conservation, that we might try for consensus on?
Jim knows as well as the rest of us: when someone comes to your door to haul you off for what you’ve said, that person won’t be a liberal. It’s politically incorrect to observe that our country is far less secure, financially and politically, than it was before the Radical Right assumed power. mjh