Like I said. Clap! Clap! Clap! Polly-want-a-cracker?
Polly-want-a-cracker?
"t1gercat" <wexford1778@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:1173817192.906493.311820@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mar 13, 3:52 pm, "Billary/2008" <F#
%K_Liber...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> This article pretty much covers all of the hate filled, wacko, extremist
> talking points of the left. Everything from religion to economics.
> Joseph
> Stalin himself could not have written a better manifesto. I applaud the
> writer! His programmers would be proud of their protégé. He
regurgitated
> this crap flawlessly, on queue and without remorse. Clap! Clap! Clap!
> Clap!
>
> "Trey Harlow" <thar...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
> news:H7DJh.3015$Qw.2904@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
> > From Salon.com:
>
> > The Coulterization of the American right
>
> > The "faggot" episode isn't about Ann Coulter. It's about the deal
> > conservatism made with the devil -- a deal that has cost it its soul.
>
> > By Gary Kamiya
>
> > March 13, 2007 | So Ann Coulter has done it again. She called John
> > Edwards a "faggot" at a major conservative conference and everyone is
> > outraged. But do we have to go through this ridiculous charade again?
> > Nothing's going to happen. This is old and profitable hat for the
> > shameless buffoon who once compared Hillary Clinton to a prostitute
> > (when Clinton was first lady, no less) and displayed her keen grasp of
> > geopolitical strategy after 9/11 by declaiming, "We should invade
their
> > countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity."
> > (Following her sage advice, George W. Bush acted on the first two
> > recommendations, with splendid results, but the third, despite the
best
> > efforts of some of his holy pals, is proving difficult.) We all know
> > that Coulter will emerge from this episode selling even more books,
> > appearing on even more right-wing talk shows and being even more
> > fanatically wor****pped by her legions of fans. A few newspapers have
> > dropped her column, and some GOP presidential candidates condemned her
> > statement -- who cares? As should be amply clear by now, there is
> > virtually nothing that Ann Coulter can do that will cause her to be
cast
> > out of the bosom of the American right. And even if she was to lose
her
> > head and cross a line that even she can't cross -- calling Obama a
> > "nigger" is about the only thing that would do the trick -- a thousand
> > hissing Coulters would spring up to take her place.
>
> > For this isn't really about Coulter at all. This is about a pact the
> > American right made with the devil, a pact the devil is now coming to
> > collect on. American conservatism sold its soul to the Coulters and
> > Limbaughs of the world to gain power, and now that its ideology has
been
> > exposed as empty and its leader****p incompetent and corrupt,
> > free-floating hatred is the only thing it has to offer. The problem,
for
> > the GOP, is that this isn't a winning political strategy anymore --
but
> > they're stuck with it. They're trapped. They need the bigoted and
> > reactionary base they helped create, but the very fanaticism that made
> > the True Believers such potent shock troops will prevent the
Republicans
> > from achieving Karl Rove's dream of long-term GOP domination.
>
> > It is a truism that American politics is won in the middle. For a
magic
> > moment, helped immeasurably by 9/11, the GOP was able to convince just
> > enough centrist Americans that extremists like Coulter and Limbaugh
did
> > in fact share their values. But the spell has worn off, and they have
> > been exposed as the vacuous bottom-feeders that they are.
>
> > It will be objected that Coulter, Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, Michael
> > Savage and their ilk are just the lunatic fringe of a respectable
> > movement. But in what p***** for conservatism today, the lunatic
fringe
> > is respectable. In the surreal parade of Bush administration follies
and
> > sins, one singularly telling one has gone almost entirely unremarked:
> > Vice President Dick Cheney has appeared several times on Rush
Limbaugh's
> > radio show. Think about this: The holder of the second-highest office
in
> > the land has repeatedly chummed it up with a factually challenged
> > right-wing hack, a pathetic figure only marginally less creepy than
> > Coulter. Imagine the reaction if Al Gore, when he was vice president,
> > had routinely appeared on a radio show hosted by, say, Ward Churchill.
> > (The comparison is feeble: There really is no left-wing equivalent of
> > Limbaugh, just as there is no left-wing equivalent of Father Coughlin
or
> > Joe McCarthy.) The entire American political system would melt down.
> > Beltway wise men would trip on their penny loafers in their haste to
> > demand Gore's head. Robert Bork would come out of retirement to call
for
> > a coup to restore the caliphate, I mean the Judeo-Christian moral law
in
> > America. Yet the grotesque Cheney-Limbaugh love-in doesn't raise an
> > eyebrow. We're so inured to the complete convergence of "respectable"
> > conservatism and reactionary talk-radio ravings that we don't even
deem
> > it worthy of comment.
>
> > The right in America has always flirted with various forms of gutter
> > populism, but its latest incarnation may represent its lowest
> > limbo-dance yet. It's worth pausing for a moment to recall how this
> > happened. Newt Gingrich, the adulterous moralist and demagogic hit man
> > who led the vaunted Republican Revolution of 1994, is largely
> > responsible for the GOP's debased state, along with evangelical holy
> > warriors -- let's call them Christo-jihadists -- like Pat Robertson,
> > Ralph Reed and James Dobson. In a reprise of Nixon's "Southern
> > strategy," which used racist appeals to white Southerners to
devastating
> > political effect, Gingrich and the Christo-jihadists fired up the
> > so-called values or social issues conservatives by ranting about guns,
> > God and gays.
>
> > Just as im****tant as Newt and the holy men was what former right-wing
> > operative David Brock called "the Republican noise machine," the
> > well-funded media apparatus that ceaselessly broadcasts right-wing
> > propaganda. Figures like Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Sean Hannity and, of
> > course, Ann Coulter, using the enormous power of the new Fox News
> > network and of talk radio, whipped their audience into a resentful,
> > self-righteous fury, raging against "godless secularists" and "liberal
> > elites" who they blamed for the moral collapse of America. This
vicious
> > culture war played on the fear and confusion of traditional Americans
> > confronting massive societal and cultural changes -- a process
> > brilliantly described in Thomas Frank's "What's the Matter with
Kansas?"
>
> > In fact, the right's culture war was -- and is -- mostly bogus. Most
of
> > the deep societal changes it decried -- the decline of community, the
> > loss of religious faith, economic insecurity, selfishness, social
> > atomization, anomie -- cannot be blamed on liberalism: They are
products
> > of modernity itself and of the modern world's triumphant economic
> > system, capitalism. (Daniel Bell pointed this out more than 30 years
ago
> > in his 1976 classic "The Cultural Contradictions of Capitalism.") And
> > those changes have been greatly exacerbated by the monopolistic,
> > heck-of-a-job-Brownie, cor****ate-crony version of capitalism -- one
> > loudly championed by, naturally, the GOP. Other aspects of the right's
> > culture war are simply reactionary and/or unconstitutional, like its
> > attack on science and its outrageous attempt to tear down the wall
> > between church and state. There are some culture-war issues, like the
> > fight over abortion, that are genuine moral cruxes and difficult to
> > resolve. But even these have been made far more toxic and destructive
> > than necessary by the right's hysterical use of them as a bludgeon to
> > attack its enemies.
>
> > But if the right's culture war is almost entirely a fraud, and is one
> > of the major factors behind the unraveling of the American polity, it
> > paid big political dividends. The right's embrace of "values" allowed
it
> > to stave off what should have been its inexorable decline. If the
price
> > is obeisance to an increasingly vulgar, bigoted, nativist,
know-nothing
> > and theocratic ideology -- well, apparently it is better to survive as
a
> > slimy Gollum hungering after the Ring of Power than not to survive at
> > all.
>
> > By rights, American conservatism should be dead or on life sup****t by
> > now. The ideology has always been incoherent, deeply divided between
its
> > libertarian, free-market wing and its traditionalist, "values" wing.
As
> > George H. Nash noted in his 1976 book "The Conservative Intellectual
> > Movement in America Since 1945," a shared anti-communism and political
> > convenience tem****arily concealed these profound differences. Ronald
> > Reagan's anti-communism, and his sunny personality, allowed
free-market
> > conservatives to overlook the fact that government actually grew
> > enormously on his watch. With a majority of Americans continuing to
> > believe in Democratic social policies and programs, and demographic
> > trends running in the Democrats' favor, the right was facing disaster
> > after Reagan's exit and the fall of communism. It desperately needed a
> > boogeyman to unify its unruly factions. Fortunately, conjuring up
> > boogeymen has been a right-wing specialty since the days of the
> > Know-Nothing movement.
>
> > First the right launched the culture war, a key part of which was
> > demonizing the Clintons. This and a disgraceful Supreme Court decision
> > sufficed to get a featherweight named George W. Bush named president.
> > But Bush lived down to his résumé, and after his first year his
approval
> > ratings were tanking. The old culture-war tricks weren't working
> > anymore; the magic was wearing off. And then a miracle literally fell
> > from the skies: 9/11.
>
> > The terror attacks were just what the right needed. It allowed it to
> > fold "national security" into its culture war ****tfolio -- a potent
> > mixture, especially with Congress and the mainstream media drugged by
> > patriotic fervor. Islamic terrorism was hastily dressed up as the new
> > Red Menace, liberals were painted as Chamberlain-like appeasers, and
all
> > was well for a while. In 2004, Bush's strategy of appealing to his
base
> > proved successful, despite his
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
We all know you didn't read the article, ****wit, so stop pretending.
The conclusion was prophetic and rang especially true when it comes to
your brand of calcified ignorance.
"...as the feebleness of the right's agenda becomes more and more
apparent, we can expect the noise from figures like Coulter and
Limbaugh to get louder and louder. But the tactic will not work -- in
fact, it is likely to backfire. And if the Republicans go
down big in 2008, conservatives will finally be forced to confront the
Frankenstein monster they created -- and decide whether they dare get
rid of it before it consigns their movement to oblivion. Based on
their recent history, I don't think they have the common sense to take
out the garbage."
Now stick your fingers in your ears and yell "la, la la." The Right is
thoroughly bankrupt. Only the hard core Bu****es remain and those
numbers are shrinking daily.
|
