The mainstream press is already working on the Rick Perry narrative. It basically goes like this: he’s dumber, less educated, and less sophisticated than George W. Bush. What is this based on? I’m not sure really. “He’s stupid” is just another lazy liberal slant. Liberal journalists disagree with him and it’s just easier to dismiss him as stupid. Howard Fineman has an article in the Cannibal Huffington Post with a unique spin on Karl Rove’s and Team Bush’s attitude toward Perry: they don’t like Perry because they’re embarrassed by him. Perry is just too conservative dumb. Just read this the elite drival…
There is a good measure of defensiveness in the Bush crowd’s dismissal of Perry. It is though they are staring into a cracked mirror and seeing the flaws of their favorite son, George W. Bush.
The first irony is that the man Rove made president — George W. Bush — was accused of a similar reliance on simple sound bite thinking. Though Bush was better read and more thoughtful than outsiders gave him credit for — and his grades at Yale were much better than Perry’s at Texas A&M.
First of all, college GPA isn’t the be all and end all of measuring intelligence. Some of the dumbest people I knew in college had high GPA’s and some of the smartest people I knew were barely getting by, so Bush’s 2.75 GPA at Yale compared to Perry’s 2.22 GPA at Texas A&M is hardly relevant and it’s certainly not “much better” as Fineman insists. This same phenomenon existed during the 2004 election. Everyone just assumed Kerry was smarter even though his GPA was lower than Bush’s. Do we really want to judge how smart people are based on what they were doing when they were 18-22?
In the meantime, what is it that makes Perry stupid? Is President Obama stupid because he campaigned in 57 states and signs his name with the date 2008 in 2011? No, but no one really cares when Obama makes a gaffe because the press hasn’t drilled the “he’s stupid” meme down our throats non-stop. Basically the left’s only reason for calling Perry stupid is because he believes in God and doesn’t believe in theory of man-made global warming. Neither of those positions is stupid.
The whole problem with Obama and with Bush is that they’re part of the establishment. The political establishment is broken. They’ve given us too much government and too many regulations. I don’t buy that Rick Perry is some kind of anti-establishment hero. Perry is dialed into a lot of GOP money and has a lot of connections. The reason Team Bush and Rove don’t like him is personal. Fineman is unable to see this clearly because he’s a liberal.
The rhetoric from the so-called Progressive left has become progressively poisonous. It is difficult to fathom that one would write or say, let alone think, the disgusting, profane things said and written by leftists about conservatives, particularly conservative women and minorities.
Palin and Bachman are evil bitches and C words, held up as effigies of a particularly degrading form of politicized propaganda. Black conservatives are Uncle Toms who have somehow betrayed their race, simply because they think their race is better than the condescending white guilt that treats them as if they were idiotic children.
This dehumanizing objectification has become the defining tactic of the left; there is no logical defense available for leftist ideology, thus it sinks to the lowest depths of depravity to make its point, such as it is.
When fascism comes to America it will be driving a Prius with a COEXIST bumper sticker.
Witness the Tweets Henshaw regurgitates here in all their glory, and then the righteous indignation, accompanied by profanity and insults, when the Tweeter finds their Tweet at The Daily Plunge. Also witness the commentary on leftist sites like Daily Kos and The Huffington Post. Offensive comments are not relegated to the left side of the blogosphere, but the sheer volume of mean-spirited, ugly commentary is somewhat shocking.
Then again, maybe this is not so shocking. Years ago as an idealistic college student I was attracted to liberalism based on its professions of tolerance and open mindedness. Enthusiasm soon dissolved into disillusionment.
Oddly enough, one of my epiphanies came during an MTV News report on a pro-choice concert headlined by the Red Hot Chili Peppers. It was rather jarring to me that a rock band with a fairly large collection of misogynist songs in its repertoire would be “pro woman.” Then it dawned on me that being pro-choice is not pro-woman at all. It’s another way to degrade women and to tell them that they’re too stupid and immoral to make a right choice before conception.
For some reason, the left embraces an ideology that basically says we’re not much better than animals, and thus need to be treated as such. This is one of the founding principles of the Progressive movement, from its early years as it dabbled in eugenics to its modern-day insistence that man is not a special creation, endowed by his creator with certain inalienable rights.
This is an important area of separation between right and left. If rights are endowed by the creator, government has no real right to either grant them or take them away. However, if rights are endowed by your fellow man, they become arbitrary and subject to the whims of those in power. Moreover, if I am endowed by my creator, I have individual worth, regardless of my views. But if I am just another animal, a parasite on Mother Earth, then it’s easier to make me one of “them” and thus expendable.
Ultimately, what I found was that liberalism was neither tolerant nor open-minded. In fact, liberalism, in its post-modern sense, is not liberal at all; it is totalitarian. This becomes increasingly clear as one samples the vast media landscape of leftist voices, from the anonymous comments at The Daily Kos to the rants of Bill Maher, Jon Stewart, Keith Olbermann, Janeane Garofalo, et al.
They do not respectfully disagree; they demonize anyone who disagrees with them. They aim to take away the very humanity of their opponents, an ancient and effective means of politics that has sometimes led to genocide.
This is yet another reason I believe in limited government. I do not want to be subject to the whims of people who hold such contempt for others in their heart, a contempt that borders on inhumanity. The great massacres of the 20th Century were perpetrated largely by dehumanizing and degrading those being murdered so that the majority of people would simply look away as the atrocities were committed.
The defining characteristic of genocidal regimes is that all real power is concentrated in the central State; all else is subordinate. While I’m obviously concerned about the totalitarian leanings of the left, someone on the left may be concerned about a theocracy. Fair enough, but all of us, left and right, should advocate for a limited federal government because when all power resides in the federal government, we’re all screwed.
Freedom of religion is a cornerstone of what makes the United States so great. According to the Constitution the United States cannot establish a state religion. According to our liberal friends there’s a “separation of church and state.” Greeting cards from the White House that say “Merry Christmas” seem to upset many progressives. As does “God Bless America” and “One Nation Under God.” None of those examples create an establishment of a state religion, unless the state forces people to give up their beliefs at gunpoint and become Methodists or whichever sect or religion the state deems best at the time. The idea comes from a misinterpretation of a letter by Thomas Jefferson, but we must forgive liberals because the Constitution is old and confusing, kind of like the English language.
Liberal confusion aside, we’ve got it pretty good here in the United States. In the Middle East being a Christian is a good way to end up dead. In Alexandria, Egypt an apparent suicide bomber killed 21 Christians. This really isn’t a shocking attack. Christians are being persecuted all over the Middle East. Religious intolerance is a horrible problem throughout much of the world, but what hope is there when Muslums like PressTV’s Hassan Hanizadeh cover the news.
Although, at first glance, the finger is pointed at extremist Wahabi or Salafi groups, it goes without saying that no Muslim, whatever their political leanings may be, will ever commit such an inhumane act.
Attacks on churches in Egypt, Lebanon, Iraq and Tunisia can be analyzed in the context of a Zionist scenario aimed at driving a wedge between Muslims and Arab Christians. Since the emergence of Islam, Muslims and Christians in the East have always coexisted peacefully as Islam pays due respect to the freedom of divine faiths — especially Christianity.
Delusion, thy name is Hassan Hanizadeh. Much like how Global Warming alarmists blame every natural weather event on Global Warming, people like Hanizadeh blame the Jews for everything. Before anyone thinks this type of perverse logic cannot happen in the United States, I say think again. It’s already happening. Check out one of the comments from the crazy article.
jeff1/2/2011 11:43:56 PMman really good article it seems like when one looks at the only winner after 9/11 it was israel american and muslims arabs didnt gain a thing, and againwith iraq we know for sure zionists are behind that with scooter libby manipulating intel. to get US to fight iraq thats documented and wolfowitz another jewish traitor to USA. zionist cause all problems and then sit back and watch 2 sides kill each other for their benefit ISRAEL CONTROLS MEDIA in USA zionist are the dirtiest scum in the world.
This guy even brings up Scooter Libby! Ripped from the MSNBC headlines. Highly partisan people are willing to believe anything. One man’s religion is another man’s political viewpoint. There’s a good reason why it’s not a good idea to bring up religion or politics around strangers. It’s because they mean the same thing to certain people. Liberals complain that FOX News controls the media and Muslims blame the Zionists.
I just pulled up a random article from the Cannibal Huffington Post to scour through the comments, always filled with a raft of liberal misinterpretations. This time it’s Justice Scalia’s comments about sex discrimination. Before I hate too much on the people who left comments there was one liberal who actually got it, but he was the exception. There are a lot of vile comments, but here’s one that kind of sums it all up.
This man never met a giant corporation whose interests he’d protect to the ends of the earth, but he’d sooner give up pasta and red wine than admit women are the equal of men and deserve equal treatment under the law.
Making derogatory statements about Italians is fine, but don’t you dare interpret the Constitution correctly! Liberals aren’t the only ones who suffer from political delusion, but they act like they’re immune to it. Paul Krugman’s New York Times op-eds drip with condescension. When a person religiously believes the facts are on their side the only reason the only possible way there could be an opposing viewpoint is some kind of sinister plot (Insert: Neocon, Jew, Zionist, Corporation, Scooter Libby).
I love the blogosphere. It’s awesome that everyone who has an opinion can share it. However, if you’re going to share your opinions be prepared to have them spotlighted, especially if it’s on the Cannibal Huffington Post. Today I came across a comment from TN60 that I thought was funny and delusional enough to share on The Daily Plunge.
I always saw the police state of AZ as the worst of the worst for Republicans, and it would stir up the Latino voters to go the voting booth. You are definately going to see it in TX and Colorado and California, as well. That is why you see Bloomberg joining Murdoch on immigration. Murdoch can’t afford to lose his Conservative base who watch Loony clowns.
Then you have the whackos in NV, Ky and Utah, talking about civil rights and cutting Medicare and S/S and there goes the old people. The young people who were behind Obama’s win, wanted change, and so far, due to Republicans Obstruction, they will get behind Democrats, because Republican Rule was what they came out in numbers to defeat. Black voters already know that Republicans are not in their corner and they have voted Democratic in large numbers for years.
If the Democrats can manage to turn the anger at the Republicans as the party of everything BIGs, and not for the “little people”, I see reduction in Repbulican numbers in November.
Where do you begin? This comment plays on every paranoid delusion that exists on the left. It even has the “youth vote” myth. As I’ve stated before, most progressives do not care about illegal immigration. They view illegal immigrants as an untapped voting bloc that the racist Republicans will not allow. That’s why brain-dead outlets like the Huffington Post are comfortable letting convicted felons post as long as it reinforces their worldview.
One piece of conventional wisdom that started a few years ago is the idea that liberals dominate blogs. A few years ago this was true when the United States was living under the cruel dictatorship of President Bush. Progressives needed a place to post their laments about faux voter fraud, global warming, and the plight of the American homeless. Liberal blogs were a dime a dozen. Back in 2006 there were all kinds of theories as to why liberals were blogging.
One suggested reason is that more liberal blogs have comments and promote individual blogs, participation and more which bring more repeat and continuous traffic. Also, it is possible that progressive/liberal and anti-war blogs are read in countries other than the United States; this may not be as likely for the conservative ones. The other theory is that the party in opposition has more to complain about, strategize about and work on than the party in power. In that case, I will revisit this article if things change in November of 2008.
It seems clear which of the theories above is correct. Now that Obama is in the White House the blogosphere looks a lot different. Conservative blogs are now gaining more traffic. The National Review’s blog, The Corner, is now the second most popular political blog right behind the Cannibal Post (AKA Huffington Post). That’s no small feat considering the amount of money the Queen of Cannibalism spends on her site. Then there are progressives who feel that liberal blogs are superior because they’ve learned “to be reverent.” No, seriously.
Now compare that concept to the writing style of your favorite liberal bloggers. Notice the sense of awe and reverence? The respect they have of language and a turn of phrase to convey the inter-connectedness of life?
None of that exists in the rightwing blogosphere. I’ve read the so-called A-List conservative bloggers and their essays are rife with fear, stereotypes, and embittered presumptions.
This was written by em dash who earlier in her reverent post called the Bush Administration the “crooks, thieves, and miscreants inhabiting the White House.” That type of rhetoric is certainly presumptuous, bitter, and shallow, but I’ll leave it up to someone else to convey the inter-connectedness of life. As far as fear is concerned the left is just as guilty of using fear tactics as the right.
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary. – H. L. Mencken
Give us your overpopulation, health care sob stories, homeless rediscovery, DDT, and global warming nonsense. How did the President pass his pork filled stimulus bill? Of course, he used scare tactics. For someone like em dash who is high on intellectually superiority it’s amazing how naive she is when comes to simple politics. I guess that’s just another widely accepted stereotype on the left.
I still haven’t figured out what it is about Sarah Palin that drives people on the left bonkers. My only guess is that they must feel that she is some kind of political threat. Let’s face it, when a mainstream figure (and Palin is mainstream despite the left’s derangement) like Palin is subject to constant partisan attacks it means the person as viewed as a threat. Ronald Reagan, easily the best President since Eisenhower, was hated on the left. In fact, most people on the left still struggle to say anything nice about Reagan. At the time Reagan was dismissed as an old forgetful idiot by liberals. Check out this description of Palin in a recent entry on the Huffington Post.
After a year and a half of exposure to this virulently toxic presence, the question on the table is: In our lifetime, has there ever been a worse human being in American politics than Sarah Palin? For all the morons and criminals and bigots we’ve been subjected to, has there been anyone else who has combined all of the fetid qualities — the proud ignorance, the sadistic viciousness, the shameless hypocrisy, the arrogant laziness, the congenital dishonesty, the unctuous sanctimony, the bilious resentment, and whichever others I’m forgetting for the moment — that this morals-free harridan so relentlessly displays? (Not to mention that atonal bray with which she communicates it all.)
Has there ever been a worse human being in American politics? Where is this coming from? I’m not sure how anyone on the left can complain about “terrible human beings” as long as disgraced Democrat John Edwards walks the Earth. John Edwards is a living, breathing example of everything wrong with politicians/lawyers and Paul Slansky is concerned about a former governor from Alaska?
Club Soda did a great job summing up the political ramifications of an actual Green Police. Last night’s Audi ad was great because it appealed to both groups. Please read David Roberts’ article today in the Huffington Post. The same site that brought the world Katrina Cannibalism has this take on the Green Police ad:
The ad only makes sense if it’s aimed at people who acknowledge the moral authority of the green police — people who may find those obligations tiresome and constraining on occasion, who only fitfully meet them, who may be annoyed by sticklers and naggers, but who recognize that living more sustainably is in fact the moral thing to do. This basically describes every guy I know.
In other words David Roberts is okay with a police state as long as it suits his political beliefs. This is the great thing about totalitarianism. Someone ultimately gets to be in control. Everything is cool until someone has a gun in your face telling you to stop emitting C02.
Anyway, the point of my post today is to discuss what I thought was the best advertisement last night during the Super Bowl.
Google’s Parisian Love ad is simple. Google’s service is simple. The ad told a story and the sole focus was the brand. From a marketing perspective it was perfect. Evidently Microsoft’s search decision engine Bing is slowly gaining traction. Google has never advertised like this before. Plus, the fact there was a Google ad and nothing for Apple must make someone unhappy.
The last time I checked in with Harvey Wasserman it was August, 2007. Back then he was worried about President Bush canceling the 2008 election.
We must also assume that if it appears to Team Bush/Cheney/Rove that the GOP will lose the 2008 election anyway (as it lost in Ohio 2006) we cannot ignore the possibility that they would simply cancel the election. Those who think this crew will quietly walk away from power are simply not paying attention. The real question is not how or when they might do it. It’s how, realistically, we can stop them.
I guess Wasserman’s defense is that he stopped Bush from stealing the election? Of course no one tried to cancel the election; it’s just insane talk. Wasserman could be simply ignored but his idiotic rants are posted on various sites including the Huffington Post. Plus, he’s had articles published in the New York Times, Los Angeles Times, and Boston Globe. The man is a textbook example BDS. For example, just take a look at his June 24 article titled OOPS! We rigged the Iran/Florida-Ohio vote count AGAIN!!
Blackwell and Bush then used a lethal mix of black box machines, faulty scantrons and hijacked ballots to finish the job. Blackwell worked with Diebold, ES&S, Triad, and other electronic magicians that let him disappear or switch all the votes he needed with a few keystrokes at around 2am election night. His high-tech IT henchman, Michael Connell, has since died in a mysterious plane crash.
This is an article that’s supposedly about the Iranian election, but it just serves as an outlet for another crazy rant by Wasserman. It’s unbelievable that five years later people are so insane that they believe the 2004 election was stolen. If Wasserman was really concerned about voter fraud shouldn’t he have been in Minnesota? Where is his outrage about ACORN? It doesn’t exist because Wasserman is in a closet wearing a tin foil hat waiting for nuclear winter.
Recent Comments