In which we go from “good news is bad news” to “bad news is good news”

Last August, I wrote a post about the left’s negative attitudes as they relate to good news, especially when it’s good news related to the war on terror. More recently, we’ve seen this attitude when it was noted by several mainstream media outlets that prominent war critics were changing their tunes on Iraq, thanks to the success of the surge. The Usual Suspects didn’t and don’t want to hear anything that might contradict that their day in and day out bashing of the administration’s change in strategy in Iraq as a “failure.” And just yesterday, the Daily Kos blog couldn’t even bring themselves to admit that the surge had anything to do with the dramatic fall in casualty figures – both civilian and troop – in Iraq. They gave credit to …Muqtada al-Sadr.

But another tactic the left routinely uses which is just as appalling as the one mentioned above is the one where they celebrate bad news, because it equates to “good news” for them and, in some cases, the advancement of their warped ideas. Back in February, when the MSM recycled old news about then-PM Tony Blair’s plan to start pulling UK troops from Iraq, the far left couldn’t contain their glee, because in their minds an eventual full pull out of UK troops of Iraq might put increasing pressure on the Bush administration to cut and run because, after all, if they can’t keep their strongest ally around in Iraq, then all hope surely must be lost for victory! And it goes without saying that the only time the anti-war left get excited about something that’s happened in Iraq is when it involves 1) US casualties, 2) civilian casualities, and 3) civilian casualities “deliberately” caused by the “evil, uncontrollable brutes” in our armed forces. Any one of those three arguments are routinely used by the far left as supposed examples of “proof” that the Iraq war is “wrong” and “illegal” and consequently our troops should come home, yada yada.

I got to thinking about the left’s “bad news is good news” attitude tonight after reading a report about a study on sex education which concluded that abstinence-only education had only little positive impact on the sexual behavior of teenagers, while so-called “comprehensive” sex ed programs generated “positive outcomes.” I’ve read studies like this one before, and the reaction I typically see from the pro-“comprehensive” sex ed crowd is almost celebratory in nature, as if they are actually happy to find out that abstinence education, at least according to certain studies, doesn’t lead to teenagers saying no to sex. Tonight is no exception, with the usual gang unable to contain their excitement.

Shouldn’t their beliefs that teens aren’t influenced by abstinence-only education be beliefs that they wished they were wrong about? I know that sounds crazy, but there are a number of issues out there we have beliefs on that we hope we’re wrong about. Like, for example: I believe that this country is trending towards Socialism. I hope one day to be proven wrong. Trust me, if, in a few years, the tide changes and more and more people turn turn away from the nanny-state policies of the left, I’ll be dancing in the streets with happiness. I won’t sulk one bit about being wrong.

On the other hand, the far left pro-sex ed brigade don’t want to be proven wrong about abstinence education, which is bizarre, because if it were me, I’d hope that kids were abstaining from sex, and if I found out they weren’t, I’d be very disappointed, not ecstatic like the left gets when they read studies about sex ed that seem to confirm their beliefs. However, in a personal sense, how much do you want to bet that that same happiness over being right about something wouldn’t apply to some of them if they suspected their young teen was engaged in a sexual relationship, and then found out later that their suspicions were accurate? I somehow doubt that the attitude would be a smiling, “I knew I was right!” If they had an ounce of concern in them as to how having sex at an early age could negatively impact their child, they’d be furious. On the other hand, on a national scale, their “being right” about abstinence-only education elicits knowing smiles, nods, and winks.

Essentially, the left have positioned themselves as not just against abstinence-only education, but against abstinence in and of itself. Why? Because with the far left, it’s more about “proving conservatives wrong” than anything else – the physical and psychological well-being of young teens be damned.

Comments are closed.