Liberal elite defies U.S., shatters Golden Age

The decades-old straw-man arguments in conservative editorials aren’t entirely appropriate. But we ought to make one exception to this rule: the “liberal elite,” a ridiculous cadre of wealthy trust-funders who seek to impose their unpatriotic beliefs on the rest of us. These America-haters lie awake at night, plotting the imposition of the truths they have gleaned from the media’s propaganda. Liberalism has decreed the necessity of total control of state property and the destruction of American values, lest the country become controlled by corporations; so the unquestioning hordes of minorities flood the polls on Election Day.

The many who are at Yale know that we won’t tolerate their heterodox ideas, so they present a moderate facade. But it is so unconvincing that they might as well go home. Ask them why they are pro-abortion, and they claim the authority of reason for the proposition that life in our species doesn’t begin at conception. Apparently they can make the distinction between the soul inherent in the oocyte and the soul inherent in the newborn. Ask them of their pro-gay agenda, and they suggest that a country with a 50 percent divorce rate won’t be affected by allowing gays a government-issued license that can be bought in Las Vegas for $55, cash. It’s as if they think a sexual sin should be allowed to absolutely destroy our society’s families.

But if that is bad, it is nothing compared to their certainty and self-righteousness outside of politics. They pretend to be concerned with our quality of life, and lament our lack of social responsibility. Little do they know that our salvation isn’t pie in the sky, by and by, but a present reality, here on Earth. We need not lament those left behind, for the election of our candidate will cure the disease of the welfare state. We need not delude ourselves with unsupportable promises, for our candidate is a man of honor. We need not worry that our Limbaugh-inspired animosity go unforgiven, for the Hero has taken upon Himself the mantle of policy inertia. And we need look only to his second coming, for we can empower Him in this dispensation to make the world the same as it has been. Look, the liberal elite can worship however it likes, but they ought to stop expecting us to take their objections seriously. John McCain is good enough for us.

The elitists seem to be supporting Barack Obama. Funny, since he isn’t one of them. He has the best judgment on the use of the nation’s military, and his stance against torture was not hedged to shore up conservative support in the election season. I suppose he has worked on campaign finance and immigration reform, demonstrated independence from corporate interests and refused money from lobbyists. Oh, and he was an early critic of the Rumsfeld strategy in Iraq. But he was a vocal opponent in Congress against the entire war, which is working because higher levels of troops than before the surge are still in Iraq indefinitely. Never mind that Baghdad is now ethnically segregated or that the Iraqi government has still brokered no compromises — Obama is simply a pandering elite from Harvard, which explains his bizarre denial that everything is fine.

The bottom line is that we believe in the same old policies, and Obama won’t unquestioningly continue them. But from our Hero, we have received good news: we don’t need to change anything. What a profound idea! Why elect an intelligent man with a record of bipartisan accomplishment, fiscal restraint and military judgment, when his opponent offers the same military and economic policies that have worked so well for the last seven years? The elitists reject the notion that America is not in peril, but can it be possible they haven’t heard that Obama may be so as well? Our Hero is: experienced, wizened and a former prisoner of war, the same siren song of tax-cutting-while-deficit-spending-on-military-ventures flowing from His lips, lamentations of thousands long-suffering, disappointment not ever registering, but ready, ready, ready, to lead on day one!

It is practically tautological to say that the critic of our Hero therefore is fanatical. It is our duty, while elitists dominate Yale, the media, government and American business, to protect them from that horrid fate.

What will we do when they do not listen to reason and willfully reject our Hero? We must draw them out of their ivory tower, invite them to our rockin’ McCain fiesta, and help them to fit in, however hard, to make of them proponents of our Hero, that they too may recognize that the country has been headed down the right track all along. For if we won’t change Yale, we won’t change New Haven; if we won’t change New Haven, we won’t change America; if we won’t change America, we will sit by while the world changes.

And in that day of global transformation, liberal elitism fading away, the trumpets shall sound and we shall experience in ourselves the glorious continuation of our progress by doing nothing to change Bush’s policies and thus remaining here, in this golden age.

Jacob O. Iversen is a graduate student at the School of Forestry & Environmental Studies.


  • Everyone but Peter Johnston

    Thank you for this.

  • Old Blue '73

    Is this satire?

    Is this a reworking of a WFB column substituting "liberal elite" for "communist"? Sorry, that is an insult to WFB's memory, since it is not well written or argued.

    If this is real, it is sad to see someone so young parrot the straw man arguments of Limbaugh. I lean toward satire, though, perhaps because the lack of a diatribe against global warming alarmists suggests that the author couldn't stomach going that far, given what he's studying. But those at Yale who know him know whether or not it's real.

  • Not Peter Johnston

    What a piece of condescending drivel. Many conservatives are profoundly unhappy with John McCain (see: Limbaugh, Coulter, Hannity, Ingraham). To throw the charge of religious zeal on conservatives in this election is nothing less than the worst kind of psychological projection. Obama supporters have been dogmatic and irrational in their support of their candidate (a trend many major commentators on both sides have even picked up on: see Joel Stein, Paul Krugman, Joel Klein, David Brooks).

    I don't like McCain very much, but to suggest that his followers are fanatic (when in fact most are holding their noses), is simply absurd.

  • foryale

    "Liberalism has decreed the necessity of total control of state property and the destruction of American values, lest the country become controlled by corporations; so the unquestioning hordes of minorities flood the polls on Election Day."

    This statement can be broken up into two parts. First, I am not sure whether he says "lest the country become controlled by corporations" in jest or not. It is the very real rhetoric of Obama and Edwards that assails the purportedly corporate control over our society. Second, by mentioning the "unquestioning hordes of minorities", he establishes the typical liberal notion that conservatives are racist and somehow afraid of minority votes. He also engages in a bit of messianic undertones - to wit: conservatives seek to oppress minority votes and therefore only liberals can give you poor colored folk (I'm sorry: people of color) a right to vote.

  • Old Blue '73

    OK, Jacob, I get it now. I just read the antecedent article. I should have been clued in by commenter #1, but I didn't catch the reference.

    It's a bit clumsy, but I see you were working on top of the previous structure, which being plenty clumsy itself cannot support the parody very well. Good effort anyway. Sorry I was being snide before.

  • Anonymous

    From the byline:
    Jacob O. Iversen is a graduate student at the School of Forestry & Environmental Studies.

    Was the byline an intentional part of the satire too?