Most of the conservatives that post here quote Rush/Sean/Bill note for note
and you're making this joke?
Are you f*cking stupid?
"Billary/2008" <F#%K_Liberals@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
message
news:DLDJh.2010$Bi2.591@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Like I said. Clap! Clap! Clap! Polly-want-a-cracker?
> Polly-want-a-cracker?
>
>
>
> "t1gercat" <wexford1778@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:1173817192.906493.311820@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Mar 13, 3:52 pm, "Billary/2008" <F#
> %K_Liber...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > This article pretty much covers all of the hate filled, wacko,
extremist
> > talking points of the left. Everything from religion to economics.
> > Joseph
> > Stalin himself could not have written a better manifesto. I applaud
the
> > writer! His programmers would be proud of their protégé. He
regurgitated
> > this crap flawlessly, on queue and without remorse. Clap! Clap! Clap!
> > Clap!
> >
> > "Trey Harlow" <thar...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> >
> > news:H7DJh.3015$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.
>
>
|
