Being at AU for four years now, I'm no stranger to rolling my eyes when another misguided "progressive" colleague, seemingly unaware or indifferent to the eugenics, racism, social planning and contempt for individual freedom synonymous with the word's history, proceeds to attack conservatives for being both "mean" and "stupid." Watching progressive ignorance embarrass itself can be fun, but the absurdity of Jacob Shelly's most recent column simply cannot be exaggerated, largely for the same reason infinity cannot be exaggerated.
First and foremost, Shelly shows his own "meanness" and "stupidity" when he throws all substance and seriousness to the wind by willfully embracing an ignorant caricature of former President Bush's term in office. Surely, our 43rd president's term in office was filled with failings, and we should be honest about what they are and what they are not. Seeing the federal response to Hurricane Katrina, our economic hard times and the war in Iraq as the result of President Bush being one-big meany-pants hardly is the mark of someone whose accusations of "stupidity" can be taken seriously.
Many of Shelly's assertions also go a long way in disqualifying him from making stupidity calls. For one thing, President Obama is hardly "wildly popular." His approval rating is about average for a president within his first 100 days, according to Gallup polls taken of presidents going back to Eisenhower. For another, the stimulus is hardly "wildly popular." At the end of January, CNN reported support for the stimulus dropped nearly 12 points in a week, finishing off at about a 51 percent approval rating. This of course says nothing of the more than 30,000 phone calls the offices of Sens. Snowe, Specter and Collins against the stimulus bill from their constituents, forcing them to shut off their office phones.
While it's clear Shelly is titillated by the stimulus (even with the contraceptives funding removed, curiously enough), I'd love to know one "poor" person that will actually be aided by the stimulus, unless of course he means those 1.2 million additional recipients of Medicare as a result of the stimulus, which could even include Wall Street CEOs. Then again, seeing as the Dow has lost nearly 20 percent of its value since Election Day, nearly half of it coming since Obama's inauguration, they may need our tax dollars after all.
Shelly should also be more concerned about making sure the provision in the stimulus to override governors' decisions to refuse stimulus money is actually constitutional before he starts questioning the motives of those against the money. And, given Shelly's logic that any governor refusing stimulus funds is clearly plotting a presidential run, he might want to talk to Gov. Phil Bredesen, D-Tenn., who is considering turning down stimulus money.
Fiction can be fun, or "awesome" as Shelly alludes. But without facts, the only person left sounding mean and stupid is Shelly himself.
William J. Haun Senior, School of Public Affairs and former president, AU College Republicans
