Do As I Say (Not As I Do).

Italian Guy

Milforum Hitman
I would definitely buy this book if I were American. Liberal hypocrites.

http://www.nationalreview.com/interrogatory/schweizer200510250827.asp

The mother of Princeton bioethics professor Peter Singer is lucky that her son is an hypocrite. Her son is a leading proponent of excising the undesirable — the imperfect via abortion, infanticide, and euthanasia. The disabled would fall under there, also, sometimes, the elderly.

Peter Singer's mother has Alzheimer's.

Peter Schweizer reports in his new book Do As I Say (Not As I Do): Profiles in Liberal Hypocrisy that "far from embracing his own moral ethic, Singer hired a group of health care workers to look after her."

Good for him, he can't even buy his own poison. (When your ideas are destructive, at least a little hypocrisy saves a life here and there, despite the widespread damage you may be doing.)

Singer isn't the only hypocrite on the Left. Hoover Institution fellow Schweizer exposes a handful of popular Lefty hypocrites in his new book. He recently talked to National Review Online editor Kathryn Lopez about his latest book and the Left's deficiencies.

Kathryn Jean Lopez: Michael Moore makes money off oil and war? Why would he bother lying about owning stock? Is Peter Schweizer the only person who bothered checking?

Peter Schweizer:Michael Moore is constantly trying to prove his and the Left's moral superiority, so he says things about himself that are patently not true. He's pathological about it. How else to explain that he's loudly proclaimed no less than three times that he doesn't invest in the stock market because it's morally wrong while quietly picking up shares in a whole host of companies. A portfolio that includes Halliburton, Boeing, and HMOs doesn't fit the bill so he lies about it. I think he assumed that no one would poke around and investigate. When it comes to the MSM he was correct in making that assumption. He never responded to my questions. I'm dying to know how he explains away this one.

Lopez: Where did you get the idea for Do As I Say...? Did you just know the line of inquiry would be productive or did something fall into your lap?

Schweizer: I got tired of having discussions and arguments with people on the Left who operate on the assumption that they possess the moral high ground. They're not greedy, they're the only ones who truly care about the poor, minorities, you name it. Knowing quite a few people on the Left I knew that wasn't true. So I started poking around — looking at tax returns, IRS filings, court documents, etc. Frankly, it's amazing how easy it was to find examples of lefties being completely hypocritical.

Lopez: Given the hypocrisy you expose on this front, please tell me Nancy Pelosi at least isn't a Wal-Mart basher.

Schweizer: Nancy Pelosi bashes everyone who doesn't allow unions to call the shots. Everyone that is except herself. It's takes an amazing amount of gall to accept the Cesar Chavez Award from the United Farmworkers Unions while using non-UFW workers on your Napa Valley Vineyard. It takes the same to praise the Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees Union and take massive sums of money from them all the while keeping them out of your Hotel and chain of restaurants. But again, I think Pelosi correctly assumes that no one in the media will challenge her on this.

Lopez: I'm all for having a little legitimate fun with liberals. But doesn't revealing Barbra Streisand's water bill feel a little like going through her garbage? Actually: Did you have to go through her or anyone else's garbage? Where did you get this stuff?

Schweizer: I didn't go through Bab's trash. All the info in the book was obtained legally and ethically. Streisand's annual water bill of $22,000 to keep her lawn green is relevant because she made it relevant: She's constantly lecturing ordinary Americans about the need to cut back on our consumerist culture. Maybe if she turns off the taps she'll have some legitimate grounds for making the claims she does. As Kermit the Frog said, it's not easy being green.

Lopez: Um and the Clinton's underwear? Though the Clinton's claiming $4 per pair of used underwear among their charitable contributions does seem like it is begging for a New York Post cover.

I suppose there was not blue dresses. Something like that would make a lot more on ebay.

Schweizer: Ah, yes, the Clintons, who profess to pay the maximum amount on their taxes every year because it's the right thing to do. The Clintons are simply amazing in their ability to lecture Americans about their need to pay more taxes while at the same time finding lucrative tax shelters and taking outrageous tax deductions. Again, the media gives them a free pass.

Lopez: What else about the Clintons do you want to hand over to RNC op research before 2008?

Schweizer: I think their record of greed, jilting poor people out of their money, and their avarice are a sight to behold. Let people see how they have made their money over the last couple of decades and it speaks for itself.

Lopez: Tell me the great hypocrisy of that greatest of all public intellectuals according to one recent depressing survey: Noam Chomsky.

Schweizer: Noam Chomsky thinks he's the Moses of this age and even those on the Left who don't agree with him on everything accept his moral authority. But Chomsky is a socialist who practices capitalism, and an anti-militarist who has made millions off of Pentagon contracts. Wonder what his followers would think of that? Then there is his constant lecturing about "tax gimmicks" and "tax shelters" that "the rich" use to avoid paying their "fair share." He must have forgotten about that when he set up his tax shelter.

Lopez: And he wasn't a lot of fun when you got in touch with him, was he?

Schweizer: I give credit to Chomsky for responding to my questions. His excuses were something to behold. No wonder he teaches linguistics. It's amazing how he twists his words. By the way, he said it was okay to criticize other rich people for setting up trusts and setting one up himself. After all, he explained, he's been fighting for poor people his whole life.

Lopez: Did anyone ever take Al Franken seriously anyway? Why shouldn't anyone?

Schweizer: I'm not sure that most people take Franken seriously, but the media most assuredly does. He professes to be more than a comedian. He claims to be a political analyst and apparently wants to be a U.S. senator. (His former writing partner says he really wants to be president. Yikes!) His vicious attacks against conservatives as racists are not meant to be funny. He really does think that we're bigots. So questions about his absolutely abysmal record when it comes to hiring minorities should be exposed. (For those who want a hint, less than one percent of his employees have been black. That's a worse record than Bob Jones University, which Franken claims is "racist.")

Lopez: So he lies you say? At heart, he's a comedian. Does it really matter?

Schweizer: Yes it does matter. Among the liberal/Left base, they see Franken as some sort of prophet who speaks the truth. And again, the media gives him a free pass. I caught him on The Late Show with David Letterman last Friday. They chuckled a bit and Franken went on to explain his twisted and distorted view of the world. He wasn't challenged on anything he said.

Lopez: About Franken, he wanted to fight our Rich Lowry. You nervous now that your book is out?

Schweizer: I tried to get Franken to answer my questions. I wanted him to explain some of the outrageous comments he made a few years ago about disliking homosexuals and the fact that he was glad one had been killed. (Imagine if a conservative had said that?) And I wanted to ask him why he considered conservatives and Republicans racist because they hired so few blacks when he had such a horrible record himself. Alas, he never responded.

About the Lowry-Franken fight: Rich is too classy to take him up on it but I wish he had. He could have taken him easy.

Lopez: Any Lefties you checked into who came out with flying non-hypocritical colors worth lauding for at least practicing what they preach?

Schweizer: I really thought that Ralph Nader would be that man. He lives a monk-like existence and tends to shun the material things in life. But then I discovered that he fired some of his employees for trying to form a union and I realized he wouldn't fit the bill. I'm still looking....

Lopez: Another say-something-nice question: Is there anyone on the Left you admire? Or are you a hater?

Schweizer: I don't admire the ideas of the Left but there are some individuals that I think demonstrated integrity and honesty. Senator Paul Wellstone — say what you will about him, but he seemed to at least try to live a life somewhat consistent with his principles.

Lopez: Were you depressed or invigorated by the big wigs of the Left's hypocrisy?

Schweizer: Invigorated. It's another reminder that the ideas the left want to impose on the rest of us are so fundamentally bad that they don't even try to live by them. At the end of the day, when all the fun is done, I hope people view this as a book about ideas and the failure of liberal/Left ideas. They don't work for the leading lights of the Left. How could they possibly work for our country?

Lopez: One overarching kinda question: We all have our moments of hypocrisy. That we don't practice what we preach doesn't make what we preach any less valid. People are human, etc. Is there something about your book that is somewhat fundamentally unfair?

Schweizer: Yes, we are all hypocrites and I talk about that in the book. But liberal hypocrisy and conservative hypocrisy are quite different on two accounts. First, you hear about conservative hypocrisy all the time. A pro-family congressman caught in an extramarital affair, a minister caught in the same. This stuff is exposed by the media all the time. The leaders of the liberal-Left get a complete pass on their hypocrisy. Second, and this is even more important, the consequences of liberal hypocrisy are different than for the conservative variety. When conservatives abandon their principles and become hypocrites, they end up hurting themselves and their families. Conservative principles are like guard rails on a winding road. They are irritating but fundamentally good for you. Liberal hypocrisy is the opposite. When the liberal-left abandon their principles and become hypocrites, they actually improve their lives. Their kids end up in better schools, they have more money, and their families are more content. Their ideas are truly that bad.

Lopez: Is there something about the book that sums something up philosophically about the Left?

Schweizer: After researching the book I really truly believe that the leading lights of the Left — Moore, Franken, Clinton, Pelosi, Kennedy, etc. — really honestly don't believe what they are selling us. Their own experiences teach them that their ideas don't work.

Lopez: So I can't stand Michael Moore anyway. I really don't need any more anger aimed in his direction. Ditto with some others who get chapters in your book. Why should I read your book anyway? How might a Michael Moore fan get something out of Do As I Say...?

Schweizer: All I would ask a Michael Moore fan do is look at the facts. Moore professes to hate capitalism ("the last evil empire" he's called it) but practices it in spades. Moore condemns people for their racism and claims to support and practice affirmative action, but has a lousy record of hiring minorities. He outsources post-production film work to Canada so he can pay non-union wages. I could go on and on. I would ask his fans: is this really a sincere person?

Lopez: You always seem to have projects going on. What's next for you?

Schweizer: Right now I'm working to promote the book. I have some ideas for future projects but nothing set in stone. I wrote a novel with Cap Weinberger that came out a couple of months ago called Chain of Command. Cap is a class act and I enjoyed writing fiction. Maybe another novel at some point. We'll see.

Lopez: What's the funniest story you learned while compiling the book?

Schweizer: It has to be one about Michael Moore. In his books Michael Moore goes on and on about the fact that Americans are racist because they live in white neighborhoods. It's an example of latent segregationist attitudes in his mind. When I checked the demographics on Michael Moore's residence I burst out laughing. Michael Moore lives in a town of 2,500 in Michigan. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, there is not a single black person in the entire town.

Lopez: Do you like any Streisand songs?

I've lately been partial to "You Don't Bring Me Flowers." It makes me think of the president's relationship with conservatives of late. (Don't judge me for my weirdness.)

Schweizer: Yes, that song does seem fitting these days. Streisand has a pretty voice but I don't really listen to her. Not because of politics, but I like something with a strong beat.

Lopez: One more before we go: Can't you just be happy for Gloria Steinem, man?

Schweizer: I am happy for Gloria Steinem. She finally found her man. My question is why couldn't she just be happy for other women who got married? A classic example of Do As I Say, Not As I Do.
 
Wow, that is again quite something Italian Guy! Funny thing is that in Holland the liberals are on the right spectrum of the politics, but that is beside the point.

I take it you are against euthanasia? We had the entire catholic church comparing the Dutch with Josef Mengele's work. Abortion is also an issue where we probably differ, so be it.

But my main question is: Do there, in your opinion, also exist hypocrites on the right side of the political spectrum? You make it sound like there are only "leftist" hypocrites and I am curious whether this is true according to you.
 
I'm not Catholic, although I'm not a Church hater. I am agnostic, although I like the believers and I respect them a lot more so than I respect those who think the Church is just a bunch of obscurantists.
In case you want to know, I'm in favor of euthanasia.

And about hypocrites on the right, sure there are, I don't think they are on the left only.
 
Ted said:
Wow, that is again quite something Italian Guy! Funny thing is that in Holland the liberals are on the right spectrum of the politics, but that is beside the point.

When someoen from the United States says liberal they mean left wing.

LIBERAL = LEFT WING

maybe in Europe its different.

But my main question is: Do there, in your opinion, also exist hypocrites on the right side of the political spectrum? You make it sound like there are only "leftist" hypocrites and I am curious whether this is true according to you.

You must not have read the interview, the author himself adressed this.

You missed the best part of the interview:

When conservatives abandon their principles and become hypocrites, they end up hurting themselves and their families. Conservative principles are like guard rails on a winding road. They are irritating but fundamentally good for you. Liberal hypocrisy is the opposite. When the liberal-left abandon their principles and become hypocrites, they actually improve their lives. Their kids end up in better schools, they have more money, and their families are more content. Their ideas are truly that bad.

The funny part is, thats its actually true.
 
Italian Guy said:
The Cooler King said:
An Italian that is not a Catholic? :shock:

You're kidding me? Europe is way less religious than the US is. Actually half of my friends are atheist.

So very true.

gladius said:
When someoen from the United States says liberal they mean left wing.

LIBERAL = LEFT WING

maybe in Europe its different.

Speaking on Norways political system the liberals are left wing (and can be traced in traditionally social democratic systems) although the "true liberals" are so small politically speaking that they "aren't there" if you understand what I mean.
 
They are irritating but fundamentally good for you.

Their ideas are truly that bad.

Now this is an example of what I call poor debating, regardles who said it. Who is he to judge what is good foor me? Who is he to say what is bad for me? If he is for personal freedom, freedom of speech, things we in general call democratic values, he should stop and decide what is good and bad for me.
I am an individual so please treat me like one! It is his opinion and he can experss it, but let him keep it at that!
 
Ted said:
Who is he to judge what is good foor me? Who is he to say what is bad for me? If he is for personal freedom, freedom of speech, things we in general call democratic values, he should stop and decide what is good and bad for me.
I am an individual so please treat me like one! It is his opinion and he can experss it, but let him keep it at that!

You will agree, I hope that responsibility goes along with freedom. If public nudity is someone's idea of a right to free speech or personal freedom, his right ends at someone else's eyesight. Individuals cannot operate in an open society if his ideas of freedoms are diametrically opposed to what is considered acceptable by the norms of that society.
Obeying laws are good for you because your freedom to move about is not taken from you.
 
Gladius

LIBERAL = LEFT WING

Thats way too broad a definition.

How do you explain Liberal Republicans or Conservative Democrats.

Declaring yourself liberal or Conservative is about values and ideology, not political platforms.
 
Here's the one I go by;

Conservative is for status quo and against radical change.

Liberal is for constant change to suit the whims of today, such as interpreting the Constitution as being a "living, breathing document."
 
Ted said:
Now this is an example of what I call poor debating, regardles who said it. Who is he to judge what is good foor me? Who is he to say what is bad for me? If he is for personal freedom, freedom of speech, things we in general call democratic values, he should stop and decide what is good and bad for me.
I am an individual so please treat me like one! It is his opinion and he can experss it, but let him keep it at that!

I think you are trying shift away the subject again, and trying to make it something else that its not.

The end result is what matters.

The Author was saying how these left wingers, when they become hypocrites actually gain something beneficial, showing how truly bad their original ideals are, since if they had stuck to them (they had enough sense not to) they wouldn't have that added benefits.

The point is; these high and mighty, self righteous left wingers actaully did the opposite of what they preach, becuase they saw how it would benefit them.

These left wingers paint an idealistic fantasy land that doesn't work in real life, yet they sell this to the public, when they themselves don't live by it, yet expect everyone else to.

Heres another good quote from the Author:

After researching the book I really truly believe that the leading lights of the Left — Moore, Franken, Clinton, Pelosi, Kennedy, etc. — really honestly don't believe what they are selling us. Their own experiences teach them that their ideas don't work.

Again, true.
 
IG, excellent post, thanks for putting it up. It needed to be said. Hypocrisy in public figures of all shades be they conservative or liberal needs to be exposed.
 
Unfortunatly we do live in a world where money plays the center role. Almost all great crisis are about power or financial gain and both lay in eachothers shadow. If you have one you'll get the other.
I too would like a higher wage, but that is not what make my heart beat faster. After graduating from university I took a job in which I knew I would make conciderable less money then my uni-friends that went corporate.
That is why I often focus on statements of generalisation, biassed attitudes etc. I just think it is wrong to proclaim that your view are right, end-of-sentence. To you they might work, but nothing is universal.... I would post conciderable less of people would say "in my opinion" instead of "they are wrong, we are right".

I hope this explains my "shifts of focus" Gladius?
 
Back
Top