Of course, if the Post could find a ?typical? red state voter who fit so many stereotypical traits, it ought to have been able to find a ?typical? blue stater who did, as well. So the question is, did it really try?
Maybe they could have spoken to a limousine liberal from the Upper East Side -- someone who wonders ?How could George W. Bush have been elected? Nobody I know voted for him!? Or an anti-war activist who marches for every cause that comes down the pike. There must have been at least one such liberal here in D.C. for the pro-abortion rally that took place the weekend before this story ran.
In the series, Stein and his conservative family come off looking good. He reads Townhall.com every morning -- bonus points for that. And on the issue of homosexual rights, Stein sounds at least as open-minded as the ?blue state? representative.
?My attitude toward them is I really don?t care,? he told the paper. ?Would it change how I feel about someone? I don?t think so.? In other words, live and let live. Hardly the draconian response the conservative stereotype seems to demand.
Compare that with Maryanne Harrison. When asked how she?d react if her son told her he was homosexual, she claimed she?d be supportive. ?Gay people, they don?t pick an easy road,? she said. ?But if it was his calling, I wouldn?t stand in his way.?
Pick a road? Hardly the full-throated positive response one would expect from a typical liberal.
When all?s said and done, this series is just another example of big-media bias. The elites see liberals as normal people, friendly people, people they?d want to have dinner with. Meanwhile, they see conservatives as some strange species from somewhere ?out there.? People they?ve never met.
People they wouldn?t want to meet.
Of course, in the real world, conservatives are no more identical than liberals are. We differ on many issues, and some of us are even so nice, you wouldn?t mind having a conversation with us.
The Post?s bias is wrong. But it is predictable. That?s what?s typical.