Democrat presidential contender Marianne Williamson won’t get the nomination, but she is getting an education — in the facts of life. “Mugged” by fellow liberals this campaign season, she now laments, “I didn’t think the left was so mean” and “lied like this” — “I thought we were better.”

Williamson expressed her epiphany to the New Yorker’s David Remnick in an interview in which she “accused the left of lying about her use of crystals and ‘crystal gazing,’ telling Remnick that there has ‘never been a crystal on stage’ at any of her events and ‘there is no crystal’ in her home,” reports Breitbart.

“She accused those on the left of also falsely accusing her of having told AIDS patients not to take their medicines or implying that ‘lovelessness’ causes diseases and ‘love’ is ‘enough to cure their diseases,’” the site continues.

“‘I’m Jewish, I go to the doctor,’ Williamson said, ripping those on the left for labeling her as an anti-science candidate who does not believe in modern medicine.”

While Williamson certainly is odd, the irony here is that leftists are projecting when leveling an anti-science accusation; they are, after all, our “Lysenkoists,” insisting boys can become girls just by saying so and man-caused climate change is real just because they say so.

Another irony — one that would diminish many people’s sympathy for Williamson — is that she only noticed and took exception to the Left’s pathological lying when it affected her. It apparently escaped her notice that liberals are people of the lie, prevaricating about most everything, including the Trump/Russia/collusion story; misnamed “assault weapons”; the causes of most terrorism; and, most significantly, our Founders’ character (which they impugn) and America’s history (which they twist) and greatness (which they deny).

These lies are truly destructive, too, because as with a computer, it’s garbage in, garbage out. How can people make the correct decisions on what politicians and policies to support if they’re fed the wrong “data” (misinformation) about them?

Williamson is unhappy that the Democrat establishment’s rules are keeping her out of their third debate next week in Houston; she has the 130,000-plus unique donors to qualify, but needs to reach two percent in three more “Democrat Party approved” polls to pass muster. Williamson said that she’s not dropping out of the race, however, as she still may leap that hurdle before October’s debate.

The Democrat establishment certainly doesn’t want Williamson around, making them look weirder than they already are and upsetting the apple cart. She could, after all, pull a Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii), say something “unapproved” and take down one of the Democrat’s anointed, as Gabbard did with Senator Kamala Harris (D-Calif.). For Williamson’s part, she has said that pitting a Democrat establishment candidate against President Trump would be folly.

Folly, though, could also describe electing someone who couldn’t even begin to grasp the Left’s true nature until she was pushing 70. As to her light-bulb-in-head moment, Williamson told interviewer Remnick, “I know this sounds naïve. I didn’t think the left was so mean. I didn’t think the left lied like this. I thought the right did that; I thought we were better.”

Williamson has plenty of company, though. Just consider the late comedian George Carlin. Naïve himself — that’s actually part and parcel of what he was, a cynic (I explain why here) — Carlin said in an interview towards the end of his life that he expected censorship from the Right, but that it was coming from the Left “caught me by surprise” (video below).

If these people had studied history, though, with an eye toward Truth, they’d have known that the Left has been violent, dangerous, and oppressive ever since its French Revolution birth. From the Russian Revolution with Lenin and Stalin to Mao to the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia and beyond, the Left ever promises Heaven on Earth, delivers Hell, and stains the ground red with the blood of innocents — killing approximately 100 million during the 20th century alone.

This nature was recognized early on, too. Just consider that German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche, the atheist’s atheist and hardly a traditionalist, wrote in 1889, “Liberal institutions cease to be liberal as soon as they are attained: later on, there are no worse and no more thorough injurers of freedom than liberal institutions.”

As for Williamson’s (erstwhile?) notion that leftists are “better,” she ought to read the interesting 2008 article “Don't listen to the liberals — Right-wingers really are nicer people, latest research shows” (which, interestingly, appears to have been scrubbed from the Daily Mail’s website; I had to use an Internet archiving service to find it. Hmm…)

Of course, some leftists do sense this moral difference, in a way. For example, Democrat operative Scott Foval, caught in a 2016 sting operation stealing votes and inciting violence at Trump rallies, essentially admitted on hidden camera that Republicans are more honest. “There is a level of adherence to rules on the other side that only when you’re at the very highest level, do you get over,” he said. Some leftists know they’re scum — and they’re content being scum.

If the more credulous leftists would truly open their minds and perceive this, they might get over leftism and not be “useful” in the worst possible way.

Image: Becker1999 on Wikimedia