How stupid are conservatives?

Really, really, really stupid

Conservative acquaintances sometimes accuse me of not listening to both sides of the political arguments of the day. I've heard this from my parents and from the token Republicans who are permitted to sit in on my Friday lunch group (which is mostly a bastion of hardcore moderates and liberals). The reality is rather different. I actually listen to much more right-wing talk radio than is good for my digestion. It's like a bad habit, but one likes to know what the opposition is up to (or down to).

Rabbi Daniel Lapin is the Sunday afternoon talk-show host on KSFO who puts the Jew in Judeo-Christian. Given KSFO's target demographic, most of Lapin's listeners are probably right-wing Christians who know he is doomed to burn in hell for failing to embrace humanity's Lord and Savior, but he's conservative enough to be tolerated in this life. Of course, Lapin isn't the only Jew who has turned to the dark side of America's political force. One of his fellow travelers called in during last Sunday's gabfest.

Lapin greeted Hannah cheerfully and she wished him a happy Passover. Then she added her two cents' worth to the theme of the day: differences between liberals and conservatives.

Hannah: As far as your topic, well, it might sound simplistic to you, and you're probably going to say that I have a one-track mind, but I blame everything on the liberals. I really do. I think if Sigmund Freud lived today, he would be a liberal.

Lapin: You're right about that. No question. He was and is and always will be a liberal.

Hannah: Yeah. And the problem is that this whole science of—if you can call it a science—of psychiatry, I think is lot to blame for this because instead of just punishing somebody who goes and killing people, they look for reasons. I mean, I'm not interested in the reason. I mean, maybe the guy is miserable, but that's no reason to kill somebody.

Lapin: That's right. And that's how I started this segment, this discussion. Stop inquiring as to why the Binghamton murderer did it. It's irrelevant.

---

Wow. Just wow.

Who cares what the reasons are for mass murder? It's possible that such knowledge might enable us to reduce the number of occurrences of these violent crimes, but seeking answers is so ..., well, gay, right? Only sissies and liberals (but I repeat myself, of course) want to understand things. Conservatives are willing to wallow in ignorance as long as they get a chance to serve on the firing squad, pull the lanyard on the guillotine, take a swing with the axe, release the trap door on the gallows, or flip the switch on the electric chair. Somewhere along the line they heard that ignorance is bliss and decided to maximize their happiness.

Say, who owns the rights to the name of the Know Nothing Party? I know some people who could make good use of it.

Read more...

Carnival time!

Starting the new year right left!

The liberals are taking over the United States government this month and wouldn't you know it? We're just giddy about it! And we're celebrating, too. A new installment of the Carnival of the Liberals (#82) has just been unveiled at Accidental Blogger. Go check it out! And while you're there, don't forget to notice that yours truly has a recent post in the list of delightfully left-of-center articles. Of course, I'm sure you've already read it.

Maybe I should send the link to my right-wing father. I'm sure he'd get quite a thrill from the new Carnival of the Liberals. It would shake his world (view).

Read more...

I am Barack's bitch

Can't help loving that man of mine

Obama owns me. Perhaps he suspects and is taking advantage of it. In recent days he's pissed me off a few times, but signed, sealed, delivered—I'm his!

This FISA crap? Maybe the statute needs revision and updating, but any version that pleases George W. Bush is guaranteed to be bad. We should have let it wait until we have someone in the White House who regards the U.S. Constitution as more than a scrap of disposable tissue. I'm sure, however, that Sen. Obama wants it off the table so that Republicans can't point at him and scream that he doesn't want to protect our nation. (He should protect it from George!) Obama's cover story is that he promised to oppose an earlier version of the FISA bill, not this new improved “compromise” version that's on its way to the president for his signature. Sorry, senator. That fig leaf is way too small. You are showing, bro!

Faith-based initiatives? It all deserves to be swept away with a broad broom. In case no one has noticed, nearly eight years of church-state entanglement has done nothing to bring God's blessings showering down upon our nation. Quite the opposite, in fact. If God exists (perhaps with the sort of twisted sense of humor that would explain George Bush), then he must support separation of church and state. Otherwise why would he smite us with fires in California, floods in the Midwest, home foreclosures across the nation, sky-high gas prices, and surging unemployment?

But Barack says he plans to mend it rather than end it. Oh, sorry! That's Bill Clinton's line about affirmative action. When Bill used it, it made sense. When Obama applies it to Bush's faith-based initiatives program, it doesn't.

It's absolutely inevitable that the mass media will fall in love with whatever narrative they enjoy the most. In 2000 it was mocking Al Gore as a liar and serial exaggerator just because they didn't like him. (Thanks a lot, guys! You stuck us with Bush!) In 2004 it was reporting the allegations of the Swift Boat liars without noting that none of them had actually served with John Kerry or had any first-hand information about Kerry's service in Vietnam.

Precisely what the agreed-upon narrative for 2008 will be we don't know yet. Presumably the press will shy away from anything too overtly racist. Those subterranean rumbles must be discreetly coded rather than broadcast in the clear. We can be sure, however, that the old reliable flip-flopping charge will get another lap around the track. It certainly applies to McCain, though he's been getting off pretty easy so far. Obama has made it easier for the media to latch onto the flip-flop meme because in his case he's actually changed his positions in some bad directions, as noted above. Now he'll be pilloried for changing his position even when he doesn't, as with Iraq. (He's being accused of backing off his 16-month timeline for withdrawal even though he's long been on record as saying it would be done carefully and in consultation with military commanders. How dare he! Obama should commit to a plan that he will follow no matter what!)

In brief, Obama has disappointed me in a few ways, some significant, others not. But he hasn't come anywhere close to turning me away from him. I supported Hillary throughout the primary season and I followed her into her rival's camp last month. Virtually all of Sen. Clinton's supporters did the same thing and are now lined up behind Obama. (The noisiest Hillary holdouts are, in fact, most likely frauds. You can tell from their websites, which exhort dispirited Clinton supporters to vote for McCain, but also sport links to www.gop.com. Ha! You GOP shills aren't Democrats at all!)

Hillary Clinton made the point that it's time to end divisions in the Democratic ranks and devote ourselves to electing Sen. Obama in November. She's absolutely right. Our second choice is now the only choice. There is no alternative.

What? Did you say Nader? (Are you an idiot?) McKinney? (Yeah, you are stone-cold crazy—unless you mean Mark, but he's Canadian.) Barr? (I just want him to do well enough in Georgia to deny McCain the state.) Grownups understand that either Barack Obama or John McCain will be the next president of the United States. The fringe candidates are protest votes, and I have no interest in being a smug loser whose political purity is greater than that of the major parties. (Yeah, being purer than the major political parties is such a challenge.)

People have a right to cast a protest vote in some grand political gesture, but that's what helped George Bush claim the presidency despite losing the popular vote to Al Gore by half a million ballots. The whole nation has been a loser ever since. I want to win!

And it's not just winning for the sake of winning. There are big issues at stake. For me, one of the biggest is the Supreme Court. I don't want a court that will accept Bush administration policies on executive privilege, warrantless wiretapping, Guantánamo, executive signing statements, intelligent design creationism, gay rights, reproductive freedom, and habeas corpus. If Sen. Obama wants to lose my vote, all he has to say is, “You know, I think we need more Supreme Court justices like Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.” That's what it would take to drive me screaming away and gibbering in my safe place until the election season is over. No more Republican appointments to the Supreme Court! If Obama can save us from that, a lot of the rest is mere detail.

It's that important. I'm voting for Obama. (I hope he doesn't kick me too often.)

Read more...