How about this for a convenient switcheroo, courtesy of the progressives over at Salon? “Harvey Weinstein certainly claimed to be a liberal and a supporter of feminism. Yet if there is one example of a phony liberal that no one can dispute, it would be Harvey Weinstein.”
See how that works? A life-long leftist, who donated handsomely to the campaigns of Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and even gave former President Bill Clinton $10,000 to help in his battle during the Monica Lewinsky scandal, is magically disconnected from the Left by a few keyboard strokes.
Salon writer Matthew Rozsa even has the nerve to lump Bill Clinton into this “phony liberal” category when he points out this inconsistency:
There is a brazen hypocrisy in stating, on the one hand, that the women accusing Trump should be believed (which they should) while implying that it was OK for the Democratic nominee's spouse to engage in comparable behavior with no consequences.
He even uses an example from his personal experiences as an undergraduate student when he noticed several men on campus act like feminists but that were real “creeps… or worse.”
Can "liberal" and "creep" not indwell in a single person? Is Rozsa suggesting that a true leftist is indeed the pinnacle of humanity; a perfect creation? It seems so:
As for liberals, we need to acknowledge that simply saying the right words or donating the right checks means nothing if you allow cognitive dissonance to distance you from your own behavior. This shouldn't be limited to women's rights either. If you're a self-professed economic egalitarian who mistreats people that make less money than you, or a Black Lives Matter who instinctively crosses the street when you see an African-American man walking toward you, or a Trump critic who exploits undocumented immigrants for profit -- in short, if your personal behavior would embarrass you in public, then you too are a phony liberal. We don't need more of those.
That’s a rather handy magic wand to have on hand, don’t you think?