| | Advanced Search


Friday Financial Five - August 29, 2014—The Tax Foundation has put together a helpful…

5 Live Music Musts - August 29, 2014—We’ve got Rhythm and Roots and a whole…

The Cellar: Late Summer Values—While this week saw some fantastic weather there…

URI Ranked in Top 50 of LGBTQ-Friendly Universities in the Country—The University of Rhode Island has been ranked…

RI Politicians Who Sought Redemption from Misdeeds—See the Rhode Island politicians who have bounced…

Fall’s Best Foodie Events—Something that's different now -- much different than…

Brian Counihan Joins Iron Works Tavern as Executive Chef—Chef Brian Counihan has joined the team at…

Narragansett Bay Ranked #5 as Best for Boaters in US—Providence has ranked as the #5 best region…

newportFILM To Present Last Two Outdoor Screenings of the Summer—newportFILM will host their last two outdoor screenings…

Trinity Rep to Debut Great Writers Series for 2014-2015 Season—Trinity Rep will present the Great Writers Series…


Travis Rowley: Why are Progressives so Ridiculous?

Saturday, August 04, 2012


“I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offense to anybody out there, but that’s how I was raised.”

That was the response that Carrie Prejean (Miss California 2009) gave during the 2009 Miss USA pageant – an opinion that likely cost her the crown, and definitely earned her a torrent of liberal ridicule. “[She’s] an ignorant disgrace and she makes me sick to my stomach,” blasted E! News anchor Giuliana Rancic, neatly summing up Hollywood’s overall feelings concerning Miss Cali.

“I think any Christian should spend much time in prayer before refusing to vote for [Mitt Romney], a family man with high morals, business experience, who is against abortion, and shares Christian conviction concerning homosexuality…[Barack Obama] is a liberal who supports the killing of unborn babies and same-sex marriage. I hope all Christians give their vote prayerful consideration because voting is a sacred privilege and a serious responsibility.”

These were the outlandish remarks of Jane Pitt, mother of movie star Brad Pitt, who offered her point of view in a letter-to-the-editor several weeks ago. Mrs. Pitt “received death threats” for her candor while liberals stormed the social media platforms, writing statements such as “Kill the Bitch” and “Fuck you, brad pitt’s mom, the gay community made your kid a star, you whacko."

President of Bishop Hendricken High School John Jackson also suffered leftist attacks for his own letter to the Providence Journal several months ago, a letter that amounted to a simple recapitulation of the Catholic Church’s official teachings regarding gay marriage and homosexuality. Jackson had the gall to write that homosexual activity was “immoral,” “disordered” and – get this – “wrong.”

Progressives responded by vowing to hold Jackson “accountable.” While insisting that he “reconsider [his] words and offer an explanation,” progressives pressured Jackson to do so by vilifying him as “hateful” and “pathetic” and “sickening.” They called him a “demented old crank,” an “example of a Catholic ghetto educator's…intolerance,” a “made man within the…Church's Band of Bigots,” and a “fascist puppet [of] an outmoded child-raping organized crime enterprise.”


In the midst of similar progressive barbarism, many people may be surprised to discover that the full tone and context of the comments made by Chick-Fil-A president Dan Cathy were just as bland and boring as the run-of-the-mill social conservatism expressed above.

Asked to comment on the “crisis of fatherlessness that we have in this country,” Cathy expounded on the importance of the traditional family unit, ultimately saying that he believes “we’re inviting God’s judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at Him and say, you know, ‘We know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage.’ And I pray God’s mercy on our generation that has such a prideful, arrogant attitude to think that we would [have] the audacity to redefine what marriage is all about.”

The outpouring of disgust with Cathy’s remarks has absolutely nothing to do with his donations to an allegedly “anti-gay” organization, as some progressives are now disingenuously contending in order to defend their hostile and hypocritical boycott of all Chick-Fil-A locations.

By now it is perfectly clear that this is how progressives are going to react to any degree of opposition to gay marriage – no matter how polite or peaceful.

Everything that conservatives have long said about modern liberals is true, that there is no political sect more thuggish and closed-minded; that the anti-intellectualism of the American Left has resulted in a decrepit subculture of political correctness that only serves to evade honest discussion and shield people – including liberals themselves – from dissenting viewpoints.

While most are left either brainwashed or intimidated, the worst thing to occur from this society of silence is the solidification of liberals’ confidence in their own moral and intellectual superiority – something that they believe ultimately licenses them to commit any unethical act that may advance what they consider to be for the “greater good.”

We have recently learned that this includes governmental discrimination against private companies whose owners’ personal opinions might offend the powers that be. (I know, I know. Where’s the ACLU, right?)

Liberal Elites

While liberals never fail to portray themselves as highly ethical and academic – “inclusive” and “tolerant” – it has been glaringly obvious for decades that the worst of consequences often awaits anyone who would position himself as a threat to their political desires.

According to liberals, it’s alright to be a Christian. As long as you don’t actually believe in, you know, Christianity.

And you certainly can’t espouse Christian beliefs in public. That kind of talk’ll get ya banned from Boston!

Of course, the way in which liberals excuse themselves of such sinister hypocrisy is to impugn the character of their political opponents. The only thing liberals won’t tolerate, liberals say, is your intolerance. Your “hatred.” Your “hate speech.” Your “racism.” And the “anti-gay” organizations that you contribute to. As Miss USA judge Perez Hilton once clarified, “Now, let me explain to you, she lost not because she doesn’t believe in gay marriage. Miss California lost because she’s a dumb bitch!”

Gotcha, Perez.

This is how liberals enable themselves to sleep at night – simply by convincing themselves that they’re the good people. Despite their bad behavior.

If there’s anything to be learned from the Chick-Fil-A controversy, it has to do with exactly who progressives are – the most ridiculous people on Earth.

Bound by no moral or intellectual standards, they inflict themselves with ignorance and oblivion at the hands of the very political correctness that they enforce – all while achieving power over the lives of others.

Resulting from their dishonest and Machiavellian outlook is a dangerous escape of truth and tradition, the dissemination of lies, and the establishment of myths from which a society will always fail to prosper.

Modern liberalism (progressivism) is a powerful disease upon the American mind, determined to eradicate everything that remains of a once-great American society.

Travis Rowley (TravisRowley.com) is chairman of the RI Young Republicans and author of The RI Republican: An Indictment of the Rhode Island Left.


Related Articles


Enjoy this post? Share it with others.


This is a very liberating column, Mr. Rowley'. Liberals are the kind of people who hold their beliefs despite any and all facts. just look at local issues. RI is last in business climate, and second to last in high unemployment. Not only do liberals NOT see any link between the two; they do things that make the situation worse, like passing a budget that actually increases spending significantly. Then they lay off the people who process the unemployment claims. Finally, we have Governor Potemkin, talking about our beaches. Pretty soon, none of us will beable to afford to go!

Comment #1 by Michael Trenn on 2012 08 04

Hee hee heee!
As a particularly ridiculous Liberal and Progressive, I found myself giggling over the weak venom and ineffectual vitriol in your common. Dredging up a Californian Miss America swim-suit baby from three years ago to prove a point in Rhode Island today? Quoting a few unnamed liberals and progressives as examples of the whole? Using "quotation marks" to create the "effect" of "irony"? (And when did Perez Hilton become the go-to-guy for liberal views and progressive policy?)
In my experience, the main problem most liberals and progressives have is that they prefer not to use tool of government to impose their views, opinions and religious beliefs on the lives of fellow citizens.
Oh, we might want to redistribute the wealth a little, or provide decent public transportation, or protect the environment we live in.
We might even get over-protective and say that children should wear seat belts or cigarette boxes ought to have warnings that smoking causes cancer. We might even strive to provide all children, including illegal immigrants, an excellent public education that teaches revolutionary theories such as "evolution."
But when two people come together, we're not going against God; we're working with her to allow two loving people to form a legal family unit—no matter who they are.
Next, as someone who has zero capacity to carry any child to term, I think that you and I have zero god-given "rights" to force her to do so.
It's amusing that your "article" completely missed the point.
The most ridiculous thing about liberals is that we listen your views, support your right to say them, do our best not lump you into a group of "ignorant" "demagogues" and will go about our business, pretending that you aren't diverting the debate from important issues, like how are we going to pay the heating bill if the coming winter is cold?
- Mark Binder, Independent Candidate for RI House, District 4

Comment #2 by Mark Binder on 2012 08 04

These same weak and logic-less arguments were used to defend our country not granting equal rights to women and black people. Also, these same anti-human rights positions will continue to be the death of the Republican party in this state until we turn a new leaf and face reality.

I support the Chick-fil-a CEO's right to his free speech. I don't support the ridiculous boycotting that some of these liberal wackos insist on doing that end up always causing more harm than good. However, the opinions of individuals and their right to free speech should have no bearing on the providing of equal rights and privileges to all US Citizens. Everybody has the right to free speech, but no citizen should have more rights and privileges than another citizen.

I think there's some confusion between those financially-irresponsible liberal progressives who want to tax people through the roof and redistribute the wealth, and the people (many of whom are conservative fiscally, but more responsible socially) who want to keep the books balanced and the taxes fair, but want equal (not separate-but-equal, just equal) rights for all US Citizens.

Comment #3 by Russ Hryzan on 2012 08 04

Just some more of Rowley's weekly regurgitated, tired, old, right-wing-nut talking points, cleverly borrowed from limbaugh and the good conservative Rev Fred Phelps. Rowley has never in his life, had a original thought of his own.

Comment #4 by Sammy Arizona on 2012 08 04

“we’re inviting God’s judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at him" ~ Dan Cathy


Comment #5 by Sammy Arizona on 2012 08 04

Im a writer, who am I? Hint: " " " "

Comment #6 by tom brady on 2012 08 05

Judging by the comments, Estimado Rowley hit not merely a nerve, but a branch bundle. Keep it up.

Nothing like a little light to disinfect the hundred-year festering sore of leftist subversion.

Paul Vincent Zecchino
Manasovietskiya Ortova, Florida
05 August, 2012

Comment #7 by paul zecchino on 2012 08 05

"The United States is unusual among the industrial democracies in the rigidity of the system of ideological control - “indoctrination,” we might say – exercised through the mass media."
Noam Chomsky

"[Obama] wouldn't have been voted president if he weren't black. Somebody asked me over the weekend why does somebody earn a lot of money have a lot of money, because she's black. It was Oprah. No, it can't be. Yes, it is. There’s a lot of guilt out there, show we're not racists, we'll make this person wealthy and big and famous and so forth.... If Obama weren't black he'd be a tour guide in Honolulu or he'd be teaching Saul Alinsky constitutional law or lecturing on it in Chicago."
Rush Limbaugh

There. I can do it too. But unlike Mr. Rowley, I needn't waste so much propagandist jargon. How did this get published? I was under the impression that articles and op-eds had to make sense to be published here.

Comment #8 by Jonathan Jacobs on 2012 08 05

Just my take: I believe mr. rowley had to fully quote these individuals above in order to show just how "bland" their comments were...Comments that received hostile backlash from progressives. That was the whole point of the article. Maybe you guys missed it?

Comment #9 by Gip H. on 2012 08 06

Of course they missed the point, Gip. They're all liberals and (just like Rowley illustrated) have no idea how to argue. They've sheltered themselves from this type of thought for decades. JONATHAN JACOBS merely put up some quotations and then called Rowley's analysis of his own quotes as "propaganda jargon"....Or, you could refer to Rowley's other words as "analysis" - Or how about an actual "argument"???

Once again, no liberals down here want to actually ARGUE against what was said. Just more sarcasm and ridicule. Seriously, just look at SAMMY ARIZONA's comments. What are we supposed to take away from that? Sammy, grow up.

Comment #10 by Chris O. on 2012 08 06

*Yawn*... seriously this is what passes for conservative commentary?

Comment #11 by Russ C on 2012 08 06

And yet, Russ C, you keep coming back to read more and more of Travis' stuff.


PS. Another solid argument against Travis' position. Good one, Russ. Keep 'em coming, libs! You almost have me convinced!

Comment #12 by Chris O. on 2012 08 07

Sorry, was there something I missed that merited response? The folks on AR know I'm not shy about responding.

I keep coming back hoping for something different. Mostly I'm disappointed. It's like a cartoon version of the right, week after week.

Comment #13 by Russ C on 2012 08 07

@Russ C ----- For starters, I would try to disprove Rowley's assertion concerning "progressive barbarism" and that "Everything that conservatives have long said about modern liberals is true, that there is no political sect more thuggish and closed-minded; that the anti-intellectualism of the American Left has resulted in a decrepit subculture of political correctness that only serves to evade honest discussion and shield people – including liberals themselves – from dissenting viewpoints."

Right now you're basically proving Rowley's point. All you've shown is ridicule and flippancy - hallmarks of "anti-intellectualism"

Comment #14 by Jeremy Soninjer on 2012 08 07

And said with no sense of irony. Yes, what better sign of openess to dissenting viewpoints than name calling.

Comment #15 by Russ C on 2012 08 07

Right on, Jeremy. Sadly, Russ C's "anti-intellectualism" is not uncommon down here. Although, he insists that he engages in actual discussions on "AR" ... We'll just have to take his word for it.

Comment #16 by Chris O. on 2012 08 07

AR is a conservative blog in RI. Shouldn't be too hard to find.

Comment #17 by Russ C on 2012 08 07

Got it, Russ. Still haven't seen anything here, though.

Comment #18 by Chris O. on 2012 08 07

"Still haven't seen anything here, though."

Just waiting for Travis to say something serious enough to discuss. You know, we liberals can't go a week without discussing what Perez Hilton has to say about leftist political thought! Glad the intellectuals over here picked up on that.

Comment #19 by Russ C on 2012 08 09

Some rants:

I remember one day a while ago walking on Thayer Street when I happened upon some young socialists distributing literature. As I engaged these young Brown/RISD elitists, as an avid reader of all things Marxist and always up for an intellectual discussion, I noticed a Volvo with numerous liberal and/or progressive bumper stickers. I queried the young lad and low and behold, it was his Volvo given by his parents. Then the topic shifted to the masses, the workers, the proletariat. The irony was staggering. I was at a party with a progressive discussing the biological argument for being gay (I personally believe its mostly a choice issue and who cares who you fuck) but I was explaining that there’s not a whole lot of research to support a “gay gene.” The discussion continued and I remarked hoe I had read an article in the Nation by some leading “gay” intellectuals who were arguing against the “gay gene” stating that parents would flip the switch if they knew and the real issue was choice (such as the abortion argument). So I asked, if you were pregnant with a male fetus and the Dr. told you that your fetus had the “gay gene” and the Dr. told you he could switch the gene (pardon me for my ignorance scientifically if I have the details wrong please look beyond it to the argument), would you. No answer. Why? She wants grandchildren, biological grandchildren. Progressives are intellectually lazy, like Tea Party and Republicans. They don’t think for themselves they digest what their fed and never really question the epistemology behind the argument.

Comment #20 by bill bentley on 2012 08 14

Write your comment...

You must be logged in to post comments.