As IF Times

link Scientists Find Liberal Gene | NBC San Diego.

I suppose it’s all possible.  There seems to be a genetic root cause to explain lots of strange behaviour these days. Once this particular affliction is classified as an illness as it should surely be, the next step is to get reparations or supplements from the government for medical treatment.  Predictably, you can bet that another study will determine that only with wine and expensive brie will the condition abate.  I would argue that wine and expensive brie are symptoms of the affliction, but unfortunately, I can’t just make things up.

In our lifetime, many ‘deviations’ from what is considered normal have been diagnosed as having some roots in genetic predisposition, or even classified as a clinical illness.  Recently, there has been a push to classify obesity as an illness, as has been generally accepted for alchoholism.  For years, the notion of attention deficit has been pushed as a disorder requiring pharmaceutical treatment of innumerate young children.   Depression is widely accepted now as having a genetic root and so does promiscuity and excess risk taking personality (though some may argue the last two are the same thing).  There has even been some discussion as to the causes of homosexuality.  Is there a gay gene?  There’s no doubt that hoarding behavior and obsessive compulsive disorders must be a result of  some mental or even biological crossed wires.  What this all really means is that people are different and normal is an elusive notion.

Evolutionists will argue that certain human behavioral characteristics, manifest extremely by some individuals, are present in most people albeit in smaller doses.  Being partial to risk taking for instance may serve well when survival issues are paramount.  This can be the case in the instance of some physical ‘abnormality’.  Certain groups of the population are Thalassemic for example which means that red blood cells are smaller than normal and therefore not as able to process oxygen.  While this may at first seem to be a handicap, people with this condition are better able to survive malaria in areas of the  world where this problem exists.

Liberalism as a pathology is a tricky one.  Not the notion of liberalism itself, at least not its stated principles of tolerance, the acceptance of diverse thought etc etc. That’s a philosophical position.   I’m referring to the behaviour most often associated with liberals, such as intolerance and nonacceptance of differences of thought.   This feature makes it easy to spot people with this sad affliction.  Another glaring symptom is the unwillingness to accept and digest a logical argument in the face of all evidence.  The most insidious aspect of this ‘malaise’ is the need for the afflicted to control others or at least dictate how others should behave.  Most often, sanctimony is a flagrant tipoff symptom of liberal malaise in a person.  Now that a gene has been isolated as a cause, is there a cure?  Perhaps a minor lobotomy procedure is all that’s needed.  If sufferers are lucky, perhaps altered states drugs will help. 

Oh wait!  The big push to legalize pot!!  The penny drops.

link Why is Karl Rove taking shots at Sarah Palin and Christine ODonnell? – CSMonitor.com.

The same kind of affliction that savages the left also exists on the right.  That is to say, neither side are completely monolithic in their worldviews and certainly strong personalities within the groups will differ on specific philosophies.  While the left claim to represent the common working man, the truth is, the dominant figures are unabashedly elitist and have as much to do with the common man as sweet breads have to dough. 

When you have uber rich people like Nancy Pelosi, James Cameron, Warren Buffet, Al Gore and George Soros telling people how to best conduct themselves, it’s a head scratcher as to why people who are actually working class,  would identify with them.   As if Warren can identify with paying a mortgage or feeding the kids.  As if Al burns fluorescent bulbs in his villas.

While they claim the high roads of compassion and tolerance, their most vocal proponents in the media have never travelled them.  Many couldn’t find those roads with a box of GPS’s and a guide dog.  It’s great TV to watch the insane outbursts of a Joy Behar or a  Bill Maher or the more subtle guffaws offered by nonsensical people like George Stephanopolous or Katie Couric. 

But no doubt, many saner residents of the left cringe when someone who claims to represent them spouts off with some irrational outburst; Keith Obermann comes to mind.  As well, the antics of the Black Panthers and SEIU are sure to send lefties scurrying to hiding their membership cards.

On the other side of the political fence, conservatives no doubt grimace every time Meghan Mccain, with her valley girl lilt,  deigns to speak for the right.  At the moment, there is an obvious rift between the ‘established’ right, represented by Karl Rove and the ‘new right’, represented of course by Sarah Palin.  Conservatives like Rove have to be careful because much of the elitist accusations that have been thrust at Democrats apply to the GOP as well.  I wonder how Karl felt about Ronald Reagan in his time.

Rove, while certainly a political genius, has spent all of his life in this space.  The disdain he shows for upstarts such as Palin and Christine O’Donnell smacks strongly of  elitism.  Like the other side, he is in danger of proposing that politics become a club for professionals only and that common people need not apply. 

This kind of mentality is what led to the decimation of the Republican party and which perception lingers in the minds of voters despite the reality.  Not everyone can be a professional BS’er.  Occasionally people with real lives are valid candidates.  The last thing we need are two elitist parties.