Blinders

David Brooks, a conservative columnist for the New York Times, has a lot of walking around sense. He recently wrote a column taking on the ultra conservative talk show hosts and their spittle-flecked furor. His point was that these guys summon up great sound and fury signifying nothing. They tried to throw McCain out of the Republican presidential nomination by summoning their troops, only to find that the real world is not as enthused with them as they seem to be with themselves.

Here in Tennessee we seem to have a group that thinks they are all powerful as well. The Tennessee Right to Life organization not only broke ranks with the Republican Party, they are actively dissing the Republican candidate as a way of supporting the Democrat they endorsed. They asked "questions" as a way of showing how bad the Republican really is:

Why did the candidate initially refuse to meet with Right to Life while every other major candidate did?
Why did the candidate publicly endorse destructive embryo stem cell research at the final candidate forum during the primary?

Why is the protection of life not on the candidate’s palm card or web site?

Nobody knows how the election will end. My bet is that the right to life folks will find themselves in much the same position as the spittle flecked crowd; making great sound and fury, signifying nothing. People who are stridently committed to a single cause and point of view end up with only themselves as a reference point to the rest of the world. They are surrounded only with like minded people because no one else is worthy. As a result, they slip the surly bonds of reality and revel in the certainty that they are right and that they must appear that way to everyone else.

The right to life folks are not the only ones susceptible to this syndrome. Liberals have a long tradition of such carrying on. While - at least to my memory - such behavior used to the be exception, it now seems to be the norm. No one can compromise on issues anymore because their loyal troops are entrenched to the point that any deviation means betrayal.

At least that is they way it might seem to be. As Mr. Brooks pointed out in his column, appearances may well be deceiving. It might well be that the majority of us are tired unto death of hearing invective instead of constructive conversation. I know I am anyway.