Est. May 2008

06 March, 2013


Dissonance: lack of agreement; especially : inconsistency between the beliefs one holds or between one's actions and one's beliefs
In music, a dissonance is a combination of notes which tends to grate upon the ears; they just don’t sound as if they’re supposed to be put together as they were.

And we’re getting a lot of dissonant notes coming from politicians and political talking-heads these days, it seems: people blithely combine opposing ideas and/or viewpoints and they seem to have little or no sense that they’re doing so.  And we really can’t call it cognitive dissonance, since they don’t seem to have any psychological conflict over this.

Case in point: Ms S.E. Cupp’s recent interview with The Blaze on her decision to boycott PAC over the latter’s decision to bar GOProud from sponsorship.  The article begins with this:
Her decision was rooted in the notion that CPAC reportedly allows gay groups to attend, but does not permit them to sponsor the event — something she called a “cop-out” of sorts.
Note that she pejoratively calls what CPAC did a ‘cop-out’.  This is important for what follows.

Here’s a selection of quotes from Ms Cupp.  Remember, now, she just called CPAC’s decision a ‘cop-out’.
What we can’t do, as a party, is castigate or marginalize the conservatives whose support we already enjoy for their positions on gay rights.”
Yet you’ve got no problem castigating CPAC organizers over their decision (they ‘copped-out’), and have no problem going on national TV to do so.

Just as she has defended the notion that the party should embrace gay conservatives, Cupp also spoke about the importance of not disparaging those who disagree with these unions. She noted her personal qualms with the Republican Party’s official stance on gay marriage, but said that she has no intention of speaking out against conservatives who stand in opposition to these rights for homosexual couples.
Except, of course, those conservatives who organize CPAC – I guess they’re fair game.
We should allow for differences of opinion on gay marriage as well.”
Except, of course, if you’re S.E. Cupp – then you go on national TV and castigate those who disagree with you.
“Republicans (and Democrats, for that matter) who disagree with gay marriage shouldn’t be forced or bullied into accepting it…”
So what is telling the organizers of CPAC that you won’t be coming to the party unless they change their opinions, other than trying to bully and/or force them to change their minds, just to get you to show up?
Rather than speaking out against event organizers, she reiterated positive feelings about the annual conservative conference, noting that it’s not her intention to use the bully pulpit or to attack CPAC.
If it’s not your intention to use the bully pulpit to attack CPAC, here’s some advice: QUIT DOING ALL THE DAMNED INTERVIEWS WHERE YOU CLIMB UP ON YOUR BULLY PULPIT TO CASTIGATE CPAC FOR THEIR DECISIONS.

That said, there's one last thing.  Ms Cupp saw this as a decision between two things: supporting gay marriage and supporting conservatism.  I think, by boycotting CPAC, she's shown us which of those two things is more important to her.

No comments: