Archive for Liberal Snots

Hosanna Montana

Remember Todd Akin? Neither do we, but evidently he was a towering figure in the Republican Party. Every Republican in the country, from presidential hopeful to candidate for dog catcher, was obliged to answer for some ignorant comment he made about rape. He must have been really important.

Almost as important as Amanda Curtis:

Meet Democrat Amanda Curtis. She took over as the Democrat Senate candidate in Montana after Democrat John Walsh disgraced himself by cheating on his Army War College thesis (As an actual Army War College graduate, I’d like to say, “Thanks for that, Johnny – those of us who did the hard work to actually earn our masters degrees really appreciate you devaluing it.”) Now Democrat Amanda Curtis is running as a free-spirited progressive, unconstrained by things like class and dignity and the concerns of her constituents.

[U]nlike the goofy womyn’s studies majors we laughed at back in school, we can’t just ignore her. Nor, try as they might, can her fellow Democrat Senate candidates.

Democrat Mark Begich, where do you stand on Democrat Amanda Curtis’s attack on women’s right to be free of sexual assault? Do you consider women’s safety an appropriate topic of humor? Do you stand with the right of Alaskan women to exercise their Second Amendment right to protect themselves from violent crime, or do you support a candidate from your Democrat Party who will vote with the rest of the liberals in your Democrat Party to deprive women of that right?

Democrat Mark Pryor of Arkansas, where have you been as Democrat candidate Amanda Curtis was insulting and rolling her eyes at the mere mention of Christianity?

Democrat Mark Pryor, do you support your Democrat Party’s candidate when she thinks the religion that most of your constituents hold dear is a punchline?

Democrat Allison Lundergan Grimes of Kentucky, where do you stand on Democrat Amanda Curtis’s anti-Christian hate speech? Do you stand with the people Kentucky or with the liberal Democrat establishment in Washington, D.C.? Your silence is your answer.

Democrat Kay Hagan of North Carolina, why do you think it is okay for your fellow Democrat to make fun of Christians, and then to roll her beady eyes at the mere mention of the idea of family? Is that what you believe? Why do you want this woman in the Senate?

Democrat Michelle Nunn of Georgia, why aren’t you raising your voice against this kind of mindless progressive bigotry? You made a big deal of refusing to promise to vote for Democrat Harry Reid as majority leader, but in your first test you’ve chosen to tolerate the anti-Christian, anti-family hate of Democrat Amanda Curtis just because she’s in your Democrat Party.

Democrat Bruce Braley, be like Republican Joni Ernst and emulate the example of courage that this Army lieutenant colonel has displayed by standing up to your Democrat Party for its nomination of an anti-Christian, anti-family, anti-woman extremist.

Democrat Amanda Curtis is truly the Todd Akin of this election cycle, yet in contrast to the Republicans, who immediately repudiated Todd Akin’s bizarre biological misconceptions, the Democrats, by their silence, tacitly admit that they either support their Democrat Party over the people of their states or that they agree with Democrat Amanda Curtis’s radical and extreme agenda.

Why do you choose the Democrat Party over your people? The time is now to repudiate the anti-family, anti-Christian and anti-woman views of Democrat Amanda Curtis.

Todd Akin was just as irrelevant (or relevant) to the Republican Party as Amanda Curtis is (or isn’t) to the Democrats. I just wouldn’t want to be accused of not affording her equal treatment.

PS: The last poll from about two weeks ago had Curtis down by 20 points—too close for my liking.

Comments

Comforting the Comfortable

Many conservatives have come to realize that to win the contest of ideas, you have to compete on the field of culture. It does one no good to be right (as in correct) when Hollywood, academia, the media are all left (as in wrong).

They tell us so themselves:

At last, we know the reason why comedy writers don’t make fun of President Obama much.

It turns out the man is completely unmockable.

We learn this from Jim Downey, the longtime “Saturday Night Live” specialist in political japery. “If I had to describe Obama as a comedy project, I would say, ‘Degree of difficulty, 10 point 10,’” the writer says in the expanded new edition of the “SNL” oral history book, “Live from New York.”

“It’s like being a rock climber looking up at a thousand-foot-high face of solid obsidian, polished and oiled,” Downey says. “There’s not a single thing to grab onto — certainly not a flaw or hook that you can caricature. [Al] Gore had these ‘handles,’ so did Bush, and Sarah Palin, and even Hillary had them. But with Obama, it was the phenomenon — less about him and more about the effect he had on other people and the way he changed their behavior. So that’s the way I wrote him.”

Got that? The charter Choom Ganger, confessed eater of dog and snorter of coke. The doofus who thinks the language spoken by Austrians is “Austrian,” that you pronounce the p in “corpsman” and that ATMs are the reason why job growth is sluggish. The egomaniac who gave the queen of England an iPod loaded with his own speeches and said he was better at everything than the people who work for him. The empty suit with so little real-world knowledge that he referred to his brief stint working for an ordinary profit-seeking company as time “behind enemy lines.” The phony who tells everyone he’s from Chicago, though he didn’t live there until his 20s, and lets you know that he’s talking to people he believes to be stupid by droppin’ his g’s. The world-saving Kal-El from a distant solar system who told us he’d heal the planet and cause the oceans to stop rising. The guy who shared a middle name with one of the most hated dictators on earth.

Nope, nothing there to mock. No way to get a grip on this polished, oiled obsidian. So comedy writers didn’t and mostly still don’t.

In a new book, “Politics Is a Joke!” three academics tabulated 100,000 jokes told by late-night comics over the last 20 years. They found that in 2008 only 6% of the jokes were about Obama (Palin attracted nearly as many jokes in four months as a public figure as he did all year). And those jokes had a tendency to be about as barbed as cotton candy. Example cited by Tevi Troy in The Wall Street Journal: Jon Stewart said Obama visited Bethlehem so he could see “the manger where he was born.”

In every presidential campaign since 1992, the researchers found, comedians aimed more jokes at Republicans than they did at Democrats. Overall, twice as many barbs flew at the GOP.

“Our job is, whoever is in power, we’re opposed,” “SNL” chief Lorne Michaels told The New York Times in 2008.

And 2008 is when that policy ended.

Anyone who cares deeply about a story—say, the way we do about Israel—sees the distortions in the media and the culture at large. We often despair. Obama, global warming, big government, race—we see (and share with you) report after report, story after story highlighting the misconceptions and hypocrisies in the coverage in the media and culture, yet we feel like we get nowhere.

To many young Americans, Jon Stewart is their John Chancellor, and Tina Fey is their Sarah Palin.

Speaking of whom, who says Obama isn’t comedy gold?

Comments

Fetus…Baby…Whatever You Call It…

Don’t call it “difficult”:

Planned Parenthood calls abortion “a difficult decision” in many of its consent forms and fact sheets. When NARAL launched a film on the 40th anniversary of Roe v. Wade in 2013, the president of the pro-choice organization called abortion “a difficult decision” women and couples face.

Lawmakers use the adjective, too. “It was a difficult, difficult decision, but it was the right one,” Nevada Assemblywoman Lucy Flores said last month in defending her choice to have an abortion at age 16. In 2005, then-Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton described the decision to have an abortion as “one of the most fundamental, difficult and soul-searching decisions a woman and a family can make” and “often the most difficult [decision] that a woman will ever make.”

However, when the pro-choice community frames abortion as a difficult decision, it implies that women need help deciding, which opens the door to paternalistic and demeaning “informed consent” laws. It also stigmatizes abortion and the women who need it.

Often, abortion isn’t a difficult decision. In my case, it sure wasn’t.

Good for her. I’m glad it was a piece of cake. Easy-peasy. A snap. (Or was that the baby’s spine?)

Who needs the agro?

Today, when advocates on both sides of the debate talk about the decision to have an abortion, they preface their statements with adjectives such as “difficult,” “hard” or “reluctant.” For anti-abortion conservatives, the reason for using such language is clear: Abortion is murder, they contend, but characterizing a woman who has one as a murderer is a bit, well, harsh. A more charitable view is to assume that she must have struggled with making this immoral choice. Pro-choice advocates use the “difficult decision” formulation for a similar reason, so as not to demonize women. It also permits pro-choice candidates to look less dogmatic.

But there’s a more pernicious result when pro-choice advocates use such language: It is a tacit acknowledgment that terminating a pregnancy is a moral issue requiring an ethical debate. To say that deciding to have an abortion is a “hard choice” implies a debate about whether the fetus should live, thereby endowing it with a status of being. It puts the focus on the fetus rather than the woman.

And we can’t have that! The “status of a being”? Piffle!

If the fetus is not a being (as if!), she doesn’t tell us what it is instead. I’d kind of like to know.

Not only is abortion not a difficult choice, it’s not even a choice:

Abortion rights groups are struggling to expand their message from “pro-choice” — which they say no longer resonates with voters as it once did — to more broadly encompass women’s health and economic concerns. The movement needs such recalibration precisely because it was drawn into a moral debate about the fetus’s hypothetical future rather than the woman’s immediate and tangible future. Once these groups locked themselves into a discussion of “choice,” terminating a pregnancy became an option rather than a necessity. Pro-choice groups would be a lot stronger, more effective and more in sync with the women they represent if they backed away from the defensive “difficult decision” posture.

Option, shmoption—get busy abortin’ or get busy buyin’…diapers.

There’s not all that much room between me and the pro-choice crowd. I want abortion to be safe, legal, and rare, just as they do. The only difference is I mean it. The “pro-neccessity” crowd does not.

Comments

[Bleep] Liberals Say

Aggie wrote this comment to a post below:

Yesterday, one of the low information crowd told me, quite seriously, that the Tea Party was an outgrowth of Occupy Wall Street. Can you believe that?

I can, Aggie, because I hear [bleep] like that all the time. It’s time to start a column of it.

Yesterday:

I was killing time in Cambridge and overheard two students at a language school waiting for their class to start. One was local, and worked in web design for politics. The other was from out of town, but noted that Massachusetts was a pretty blue state, that the politics must be left wing. The local one assured him that was so, and added “I hate Republicans.” The second one responded “I can’t imagine a Republican learning Portuguese.” They continued in like-minded palaver until their class started.

Why would a Republican not take Portuguese? Why would a Democrat? Is there a hidden logic to that statement? People learn Portuguese only to hit on hot Brazilian chicks. Can’t Republicans fantasize about Shakira?

But it was the “I hate Republicans” line that I really should address.

Now, we all use “love” and “hate” liberally (pardon the pun): We “love” pickles, but “hate” relish; love Sandra Bullock, hate Maggie Gyll…Gylen…you know the one I mean. The one everyone hates.

But “hate” Republicans? How many does this person know? There aren’t that many of us around here—which is why she felt so free to speak of us that way. What are the odds, as the other person observed, that one would be loitering outside a Portuguese language class? Or loitering anywhere other than near a Catholic girls’ school or a highway rest stop? It’s a safe hatred, a comfortable hatred, a without-fear-of-contradiction hatred. Aren’t those the most dangerous kind?

The Governor is a Democrat. The Mayor (of Boston) is a Democrat. Both Senators are Democrats, as are all nine Congressmen (it used to be ten until we mercifully lost one to redistricting). There are only four Republicans in the 40-member State Senate, and 30 out of 160 members of the State House. Shouldn’t Republicans in Massachusetts be pitied rather than hated?

Except for the threat (and reality) of violence, Republicans in liberal strongholds are like blacks in the Jim Crow South. Despised, resented, under-(or un-)represented, misrepresented—if our politics were as readily apparent as the dark skin of African Americans, we would only have more such stories to tell, not fewer. But probably not the threat (or reality) of violence.

Move over, “It’s Unexpected!”™ and Dispatches From the Front Lines of Socialized Medicine, we have a new standing headline, [Bleep] Liberals Say.

Comments

Hey UN! What About This War Crime?

In the Democratic War on Women, that is:

A Democratic operative deleted her Twitter account Monday following a series of what some called racist remarks about Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s wife, Elaine Chao.

Chao, former U.S. Labor Secretary under President George W. Bush, is Asian.

Kathy Groob, who describes herself as an “advocate for women in politics,” sent a series of tweets related to Chao at a political event Saturday.

According to WKMS, Groob sent the tweets in response to comments McConnell made at the event, in which he referred to his wife as “the only Kentucky woman who served in a president’s cabinet.”

In one tweet Groob wrote, “Hey Mitch, nothing against you wife and spouses should be off limits; since you mentioned, she isn’t from KY, she is Asian.”

Groob followed that tweet with another: “Google Elaine Chao, #MitchMcConnell’s wife. No mention of Kentucky, she is Asian” Groop wrote.

Her racially-charged comments drew a firestorm on Twitter from people who questioned why Groob was pushing a narrative that someone who is Asian could not also be from Kentucky.

In Chao’s case, she and her family came to the U.S. from Taiwan when she was a child. She has been married to McConnell for more than two decades.

So that’s what passes for an “advocate for women in politics” among Democrats. I’d hate to see a critic. I also love that her comment came right after she wrote that spouses should be “off limits”.

PS: You might want to station peacekeeping groups inside the Democrat Party. They are repeat offenders:

A Democratic activist has claimed responsibility for controversial radio ads that attempted to tie Mississippi Senate candidate Chris McDaniel to the Ku Klux Klan.

Ruth Harris, 65, of Jackson, Miss., said she and five other like-minded Democratic women pooled their resources to fund three radio spots urging voters to support Sen. Thad Cochran over McDaniel, a state senator, in Mississippi’s contentious June 24 GOP primary runoff.

“This is an Election Day alert. Polls are open from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. When Congressman Thompson says a group of Tea Party radicals scares him, we should listen. Last week the Clarion Ledger was able to tie McDaniel’s campaign to an ally of the Ku Klux Klan. And, this supporter of McDaniel’s campaign was a Klan lawyer,” Harris says as the ad opens. “If we stand by and don’t go to the polls today, do you understand what we could lose? We could lose food stamps, housing assistance, student loans, early breakfast and lunch programs — and disaster assistance, as well as cuts to Social Security and Medicaid.

“The right-wing Tea Party people are saying we are too lazy to care or too afraid to go vote. They say we only want a hand out or something for free,” Harris says as the ad closes. “We are not going to turn back the hands of time.”

PPS: They really don’t like themselves some Elaine Chao:

You’ll recall last year when Progress Kentucky sent out a series of tweets vilifying Chao and McConnell’s “very close ties to China.”

Progress Kentucky, a Democratic super PAC with its sights on toppling Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), has drawn backlash for a persistent effort to suggest that the senator’s wife’s Chinese roots have led him to embrace anti-American policies.

In a Feb. 14 tweet, the group made a particularly blunt jab suggesting that Elaine Chao, former labor secretary under President George W. Bush and McConnell’s second wife, was encouraging him to support outsourcing jobs to China.

“This woman has the ear of @mcconnellpress — she’s his #wife.May explain why your job moved to #China!” the tweet read.

I don’t really get racism. I guess it’s a liberal thing.

Comments

Left Wing Civility Watch

A few headlines from The Daily Caller:

RNC Spokesman Stands Up To CNN Anchor’s Blatant Bias On Republican ‘Racism’

‘Over The Line’: Even The DNC Blasts Liberal Website’s Attempt To Cast RNC Spokesman As Skinhead

UConn Prof. James Boster Harangues People Preaching Christianity: ‘Bull$#|+! Praise Darwin!

At Dartmouth, The Word ‘Fiesta’ Is Now Racist And White People Can’t Use It

How about some from Newsbusters?

UCLA Professor: GOPers Are ‘Sick and Twisted’ Disseminators of ‘Pure Lunacy’

On MSNBC, WashPost’s Capehart Claims Some GOP Officeholders Have Praised ‘Virtues and Beauty of Slavery’

Barely News: Illinois Gov. Quinn Pulls Tweets Comparing Black Republicans to Jewish Nazi Collaborators

Wait, what?

Quinn’s campaign enthusiastically retweeted its support for an outrageous April 17 column by Neil Steinberg at the Chicago Sun-Times. For all practical purposes, Steinberg equated African-Americans who might support Republican Bruce Rauner in November’s gubernatorial election against Quinn to “Jews (who) collaborated with the Nazis during World War II, helping them to round up their own people in the hopes they’d be the last to go.” Quinn’s people quietly deleted the tweets, according to the Washington Free Beacon’s Adam Kredo, “after local Jewish community officials quietly communicated their outrage to the governor.” Given that the time between the tweets and the deletes was apparently a few days, and that the sort-of apologies came almost a week after Steinberg’s column, I’m not detecting a lot of sincerity here.

Yech!

Sorry, I can’t leave it this way on a Saturday evening. Howsabout a little left-on-left crime?

Randi Rhodes Quitting Radio, Slams Ex-Colleagues Maddow, Franken on Way Out

Rhodes spent considerable time on her show this week saying goodbye to listeners and outlining the rationale for her decision. She also couldn’t resist taking swipes at Al Franken and Rachel Maddow, her former colleagues at now-defunct Air America Radio, especially Maddow (audio) –

So when Air America came I said, oh my God, and the opportunity is amazing…

[P]eople were using it for their own reasons. People were using it not to advocate for others but people were using it for their own advancement, to get someplace else.

Some people saw, you know, a chance to be in a Cabinet and other people saw it as a chance to go to the Senate and other people saw it as a chance to national television.

They continued to take a salary from it, they drained it of its resources, it failed, and then some of them went on to do, you know, the self-aggrandizement thing that they wanted to do. Some of the salaries of the people that, that, that actually sucked the life, the resources out of that platform, Air America, some of them are making $7 million a year now!

This is America, baby! Love it or leave it. We all know what Maddow is; you’re just haggling over price.

Comments

Thank a Vet

Just make sure they keep their distance:

An unsigned Wednesday article in the Military Times spotlighted how veteran groups have rebuked the New York Times for an opinion piece that played up the recent shootings at two Jewish community centers as apparent proof that white veterans are susceptible to joining hate groups. Paul Rieckhoff of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America hammered the liberal newspaper for its “sensational, slanderous and incredibly offensive” attack on his peers.

In the Wednesday op-ed, author Kathleen Belew cited a controversial 2009 Department of Homeland Security report that hyped the potential for “right-wing extremists…to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to boost their violent capabilities,” and targeted conservatives for their criticism of its findings. Belew even threw the race card into the mix:

…This short document outlined no specific threats, but rather a set of historical factors that had predicted white-supremacist activity in the past — like economic pressure, opposition to immigration and gun-control legislation — and a new factor, the election of a black president….The agency was “concerned that right-wing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to boost their violent capabilities.”

Makes sense to me. Everyone knows vets are crazed killers—pro-gun, anti-immigrant, economically-pressed, racist, crazed killers. So what’s the problem?

“Both the title — ‘Veterans and White Supremacy’ — and an accompanying graphic joining service members with KKK members are shameful,” Rieckhoff said in a statement to Military Times on Wednesday. “And the piece relies on weak research and sweeping generalizations about veterans. Especially coming right after so much irresponsible journalism that surrounded the [April 2] Fort Hood shooting, this is stunning and sad to see.”

“How could the New York Times publish such a hurtful piece?” Rieckhoff said. “Veterans deserve answers from the Times — and an apology. After more than a decade of sacrifice, no veteran should have to open the newspaper and read an op-ed linking them to hate groups. In contrast to this op-ed, we should focus on telling the story of veterans doing amazing, inspiring work across the country and addressing the real challenges veterans face, including high rates of suicide and unemployment.”

You want to be treated with respect for volunteering to serve and defend your country, including these liberal pukes who repay you by calling you a psychopath? Get your own newspaper. Call it the Military Times.

PS The US military is in good company. Israelis and conservatives are similarly routinely slimed in the pages of the Times.

Comments (1)

Sarah Palin Called The Fact That Putin Would Invade Ukraine And Obama Would Be Too Lame To Stop Him

I wonder what Katie Couric is thinking?

Sarah Palin may be having a bragging rights moment.

In 2008, when she was the GOP vice presidential nominee, Palin questioned in a speech whether then-Sen. Barack Obama would have the foreign policy credentials to handle a scenario in which Russian President Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine.

“After the Russian army invaded the nation of Georgia, Senator Obama’s reaction was one of indecision and moral equivalence – the kind of response that would only encourage Russia’s Putin to invade Ukraine next,” she said in Reno, Nevada on October 21, 2008.

The former Alaska governor was happy to highlight her prediction on Friday and scold those who criticized her 2008 comments.

“Yes, I could see this one from Alaska,” she said on Facebook. That remark was a reference to a 2008 interview in which Palin argued that Alaska’s proximity to Russia helped boost her foreign policy experience.

Saturday Night Live parodied her remarks in a now-famous sketch with Tina Fey, who played Palin on the show, saying “I can see Russia from my house.”

On Facebook, Palin continued to explain how she anticipated a growing crisis between Russia and Ukraine, where there has now been an uncontested arrival of Russian military forces by air at a Russian base in Ukraine’s Crimea region. They are believed to be Russian land forces, according to a U.S. assessment.

Political tension grows in Ukraine’s Crimea region

“I’m usually not one to Told-Ya-So, but I did, despite my accurate prediction being derided as ‘an extremely far-fetched scenario’ by the ‘high-brow’ Foreign Policy magazine.”

Democrats are so dumb.

- Aggie

Comments

How It’s Done

Liberal Hegemony 101: In this course, the student will learn how to take a minor issue and blow it out of all proportion for the purpose of government takeover as the only solution. Health care, income distribution, and the weather will be prime examples. No previous experience necessary; anyone can do this.

Climate change may be the world’s “most fearsome” weapon of mass destruction and urgent action is needed to combat it, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said on Sunday, comparing those who deny its existence or question its causes to people who insist the Earth is flat.

“We simply don’t have time to let a few loud interest groups hijack the climate conversation,” he said, referring to what he called “big companies” that “don’t want to change and spend a lot of money” to act to reduce the risks.

“We should not allow a tiny minority of shoddy scientists and science and extreme ideologues to compete with scientific facts,” Kerry told the audience gathered at a U.S. Embassy-run American Center in a Jakarta shopping mall. “Nor should we allow any room for those who think that the costs associated with doing the right thing outweigh the benefits.”

“The science is unequivocal, and those who refuse to believe it are simply burying their heads in the sand,” Kerry said. “We don’t have time for a meeting anywhere of the Flat Earth Society.”

Flat earth, poofy hair, who gives a [bleep]?

Isn’t it interesting how desperate zealots get when cornered in a lie? The science is “unequivocal” (a nice change from “settled”); the skeptics are “shoddy” and their motives are corrupt. And there’s no time for anything like debate or review. You can hear the shriekiness of his voice in his words.

This is how it’s done, boys and girls. When you have the facts, pound the facts; when you don’t, pound the table. This is the same approach to Israeli/Arab peace negotiations. There is no more time; Israel faces boycotts and illegitimacy; they must act (i.e. do what he says) now, now, now. There is no other way.

Liberals believe in government, but not democracy.

PS: How did you get to Indonesia, Mr. Secretary, yacht? We know you didn’t take a plane: the hypocrisy of preaching about carbon footprints in such a scenario would be too rich.

Oh no!

Comments

Conservatives Are Bad, But Did You Know We Were This Bad?

A little background, helpfully provided by James Taranto:

One explanation for this phenomenon comes from social psychologist Jonathan Haidt, author of “The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion.” Todd Zywicki, coincidentally on the same day Cuomo made his remark, summed up the relevant finding in a Volokh Conspiracy post:

Haidt reports on the following experiment: after determining whether someone is liberal or conservative, he then has each person answer the standard battery of questions as if he were the opposite ideology. So, he would ask a liberal to answer the questions as if he were a “typical conservative” and vice-versa. What he finds is quite striking: “The results were clear and consistent. Moderates and conservatives were most accurate in their predictions, whether they were pretending to be liberals or conservatives. Liberals were the least accurate, especially those who describe themselves as ‘very liberal.’ The biggest errors in the whole study came when liberals answered the Care and Fairness questions while pretending to be conservatives.” In other words, moderates and conservatives can understand the liberal worldview and liberals are unable to relate to the conservative worldview, especially when it comes to questions of care and fairness.

In short, Haidt’s research suggests that many liberals really do believe that conservatives are heartless bastards–or as a friend of mine once remarked, “Conservatives think that liberals are good people with bad ideas, whereas liberals think conservatives are bad people”–and very liberal people think that especially strongly. Haidt suggests that there is some truth to this.

How often have we said this ourselves? (Other than all the time?) It helps me, anyway, to have been a liberal for many years myself. I know the thought processes (to be generous), the denial, the sacrifice of reality for dogma. I consider my liberal self to be an unfinished version of my better self. I’m still not finished, mind you, nothing so smug and self-satisfied as that, but I could never go back—and it would be back—to modern American/Western liberalism.

But let’s look at a few less evolved people, shall we? Taranto names two:

[Mayor Bill] de Blasio launched an attack, or rather reinforced one, on a minority he can afford to alienate. Breitbart.com’s Kerry Picket reports the mayor “emphatically backed New [York] Governor Andrew Cuomo’s controversial remarks that ‘extreme’ conservatives . . . ‘have no place in the state of New York.’ ”

“I stand by that 100%,” said the mayor.

[Cuomo said:] “Right to life, pro-assault weapons, anti-gay–if that’s who they are, they have no place in the state of New York because that’s not who New Yorkers are.”

Cuomo’s statement was a gaffe, though one suspects it was a Kinsley gaffe, an inadvertent disclosure of his true feelings. De Blasio’s endorsement of it, by contrast, was unquestionably purposeful. “I agree with Gov. Cuomo’s remarks,” he said. “I interpret his remarks to say that an extremist attitude that continues the reality of violence in our communities or an extremist attitude that denies the rights of women does not represent the views of New York state.”

These were no pissant pipsqueaks, but the Mayor and Governor of New York City and State. Conservatives are not only demonized (anti-gay, pro assault weapons, holders of “extremist attitudes” that perpetuate violence and subjugate women), but as such, they cannot live among decent people. Would you want to live next to Charles Manson?

But Cuomo and de Blasio are pissant pipsqueaks next to the President of the United States:

“There’s no doubt that there’s some folks who just really dislike me because they don’t like the idea of a black president.”

Says the recently reelected Barack Obama. America as a whole seems to like the idea of a black president. Or, to give America more credit than it deserves, it likes the idea of Barack Obama as president. (He wasn’t the first black candidate, just the first successful black candidate.) Still, there’s no denying that his race (the black half) was more responsible than anything else in putting him on the political map. Just about every white supporter I know has said it.

Even Obama acknowledges it:

“Now, the flip side of it is there are some black folks and maybe some white folks who really like me and give me the benefit of the doubt precisely because I’m a black president,”

Maybe? Did you think it was your effervescent personality? Your sharp wit? Your uncanny ability at bird calls? “Maybe some white folks…” No [bleep], Sherlock.

And you know who it is poisoning the minds of those “folks” who don’t like him. Why, none other than:

“Another way of putting it, I guess, is that the issue has been the inability of my message to penetrate the Republican base so that they feel persuaded that I’m not the caricature that you see on Fox News or Rush Limbaugh, but I’m somebody who is interested in solving problems and is pretty practical, and that, actually, a lot of the things that we’ve put in place worked better than people might think. And as long as there’s that gap between perceptions of me within the average Republican primary voter and the reality, it’s hard for folks like John Boehner to move too far in my direction.”

Got that, “average Republican primary voter”? (Is that a synonym for “typical white person”? A cousin of a “bitter clinger” to guns and religion?) You don’t see “reality”, but a shucking and jiving “caricature” depicted by Rush Limbaugh (pbuh) and Roger Ailes. Maybe you’re not so bad, after all. Just incredibly stupid. So there’s hope.

Oh wait. Maybe not:

RUSH: … So yesterday the New Yorker releases more pages from their interview with Obama in which Obama blames me and Fox News for the fact that he is not as popular as he used to be.

And then later that same day, Chuck-U Schumer heads out to the Center for American Progress to make a speech, and he mentioned me and Fox News five times. Here’s the first…

SCHUMER: What gives this group such undue power? The power of the message machine led by Fox News, the Drudge Report, and the Rush Limbaughs that can broadcast the same exaggerated and even false messages instantaneously are all means that the Tea Party has used to gain ascendancy.

The underlying unrest that allowed the movement to ascend can be found in economic as well as cultural and social forces that in combination have greatly unsettled the American psyche. The first and most important phenomena is a phenomena that Democrats have recently begun to address, the decline in middle class incomes. When the Tea Party elite came in and said, “Government is your problem,” we didn’t say, no, it’s part of the solution. The American people became frustrated, sour, and angry, and the Tea Party elites, unchallenged, tapped into that anger with their pied piper solutions.

Tea Party “elites”? Tea Party “ascendancy”? Who? Since when? Barack Obama is still president, Harry Reid still runs the Senate, and John Boehner, Republican, hates the Tea Party more than both of them put together!

Schumer is just making [bleep] up! And he wasn’t done:

SCHUMER: These people are wealthy, hard right, narrow, people who don’t want to pay taxes, people who say, “I created my business all by my myself. How dare your government tell me what to do with it?” Government paved the roads and built the airports so they can ship their products. Government educated the workers that make their companies run and purchase their products. They conveniently ignore these facts. Over the years, they built a powerful and successful message machine that amplified and sold this anti-government theory to their followers. The Rush Limbaughs, the Fox Newses agree with the plutocrats and spread their propaganda to the masses.

I’ve been wanting to make this point to the “you didn’t build that” crowd for a long time: Romania has paved roads and airpots; so does Zimbabwe. Where are their thriving economies? If that’s all it took, poor countries would become instantly rich with the application of tarmac and blacktop. Stop it.

You really have to hear the contempt, the loathing, dripping from Schumer’s voice. He echoes Obama, but without his “cleanliness” or his “optional Negro dialect” (™ Joe Biden and Harry Reid respectively). I can’t be certain that he and Obama and Cuomo and de Blasio (and Reid and Pelosi, et al) actually feel this much hatred for their conservative fellow citizens—I truly hope note—but their base does. We all know people who hate us this much; we’re related by blood to some. This is their red meat.

We just ticked over into an election year, so we should expect only more. What else do the Democrats have? Obamacare? Loser issue. Immigration? Loser issue. Economy? Loser issue. Peace and respect around the world. Major loser issue.

In politics as in law: “If you have the facts on your side, pound the facts. If you have the law on your side, pound the law. If you have neither on your side, pound the table.”

That thumping you hear is the entire Democrat-Media Complex pounding the table. Get used to it.

Comments

The Second Time as Tragedy

Remember idiot Joe Biden’s exhortation for the disabled state senator to stand up and take a bow?

That was a farce (though to be fair, Biden handled his humiliation well).

This is a tragedy:

While investigating Obamacare Navigators, Battleground Texas, and their connection to Obama’s Organizing for America, we caught some deeply offensive comments on tape.

It seems Battleground Texas and Wendy Davis’ strategy to win the Governor’s seat is to mock Attorney General Abbott’s disability. We caught Davis supporters and Battleground Texas staff on tape making crude statement such as “isn’t that amazing to think of? He’s in a wheelchair and we want to stand with Wendy?”

Even more disturbing was an election official who when asked about forging signatures covered her ears and then went on to admit, “People do that all the time.” A Battleground Texas volunteer then added, “I don’t think it’s legal but I didn’t hear you say that.”

There’s another statement along the lines of mental disability: Abbott’s in a wheelchair, yet lacks empathy with others.

Look folks, we’ll just keep lobbing these stories at you until the truth that liberalism is a mental disorder is universally accepted.

Comments

The Three Funniest Words in English

Melissa Harris Perry:

MSNBC panelists on Monday faced criticism after poking fun at a photo of Mitt Romney, his wife and their nearly two dozen grandchildren, zeroing in on the Romneys’ recently adopted African-American grandchild, Kieran.

During the segment, which appeared on the show “Melissa Harris-Perry,” the panelists made jokes about the infant standing out.

Asked Sunday to come up with captions for the photo as part of a game they were playing, one of panelists, actress Pia Glenn, started singing lines from the song popularized by Sesame Street: “One of These Things Is Not Like the Others.”

Another panelist, comedian Dean Obeidallah, said the picture “really sums up the diversity of the Republican Party.” (Obeidallah appears frequently on CNN and writes a regular opinion column for CNN.com.)

Harris-Perry described the baby as “gorgeous,” before predicting Kieran would one day marry North West, the daughter of Kanye West and Kim Kardashian.

“Can you imagine Mitt Romney and Kanye West as in-laws?” Harris-Perry said, drawing laughs.

Ha-ha-ha! Ho-ho-ho! Journalism’s loss would be stand-up comedy’s gain.

Typically humorless, this is how that mother of all white men announced the addition to the family:

@MittRomney
Follow
Our 22nd grandchild was officially adopted today: Kieran James Romney. cc: @AnnDRomney
4:33 PM – 20 Sep 2013

I don’t get it. Where’s the joke?

Comments

« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »