« Sprawl vs Affordability | Main | You Are What You Bleat »


Dean aka LD


Reading "this" just makes me sad...

capt joe

I didn't read and I won't. I know what it will say, and have read it before.

I used read that sort of crap but I got cured really fast after watching a discussion on Atrios site discussing how to rape and murder Michelle Malkin. So why did Michelle get this treatment? Because she is an asian conservative, and they figure that is definitely not on. So I figured Atrios like a normal human being would shut down the conversation and excoriate a new a#$hole on the participants. But no, he didn't. He left them to add more and more.

Nice. the compassionate, caring left. Nope, they used to be but not anymore.


"3) But then I thought, if these things don't have at least an element of truth to them, why do I and so many [Germans] think they are right-on? Is it really right to blame the [Nazis], or should the [Jews] be shouldering the blame? I.e., if you really don't stand for these things, show us and make us believe it. We (the [Germans]) are not making these things up -- they are coming from somewhere."

I know, I know, when you start comparing someone to Nazis, you've lost the argument. However, that's not quite what I'm doing here. I'm just using the analogy to point out how fatuous the "reasoning" of the little genius is.


I dont know, I kind of like reading this stuff. It's like watching a professional athlete take a swing at someone in front of the referee / umpire. He knows he's about to do something that'll get him bounced from the game and possibly lead to his team's defeat, but he just doesnt care, he's going to do it anyway. My father used to call this sort of thing wilful stupidity and its what's going to move the Democratic Party back into the minority status it didnt enjoy in the post Civil War years. So I'm all for letting the left fume and fizzle like this, and then showing the broad mass of the American people just what the people who are allegedly their champions think of them.

Peg K

JT - I thought the same thing that you did when I read this. OF COURSE there are a few diseased minds who think like this ... but, just as there are a few awful people of whom stereotypes are true of any race, religion, or national background... it does not for a moment mean that it is true of the group as a whole.

I agree with the rest of you, also, that as long as THIS is the face of the Democratic party - it will be a face that many do not wish to view at all.


Ged of Earthsea

Perhaps he's not lost, but is seeking a better explanation for such people (the gated-community, hummer-drivers; they do exist) than the left is offering him. Do you have one?

The left: People are naturally good, so if some people are acting badly, there must be an explanation. The ones whose badness is most obvious to us tend to be Republicans, so being Republican is an evil influence.

There are two flaws in this logic. Anyone who has tried to raise children knows that people are not naturally good = ). Secondly, bad people also tend to breath, this does not, however, imply that breathing is an evil influence. Correlation does not imply causation.

And alternative: People are naturally flawed, so no explanation necessary for bad behavior - comes with the territory. The question is, what makes people who act in a way considered "good" do so? The critique of current instituitons by the Republican party, both at home and abroad, flows out of this question.


I think the post from dailykos that you're talking about is a symptom of the very core differences in the methods of thought that leftists and rightists employ.

Consciously or unconsciously, leftists think in relatvistic terms.. this gives them vast reserves of tolerance (for everything except intolerance) but it also makes them unable to call a spade a spade.

And consciously or unconsciously, rightists think in terms of right and wrong. In this mode of thinking it is justified to say "fuck you" to someone who has been given the choice between right and wrong, and chooses the wrong anyway. It doesn't do wonders for one's tolerance.

Obviously, most people are somewhere in between a leftist and a rightist as Ive described them.

So while being a tolerant leftist is nice because it avoids conflicts by axiomizing that they don't exist, it is not clear how a true relativist could ever make the important decisions required to lead a country: relativism/postmodernism do not prescribe any method for determining what is right or wrong, correct or incorrect, because they reject that such things exist. The result is John Kerry-esque convictions.

Intolerant rightists, then, are better leaders because they have a way to justify their decisions, and so can carry them through with complete conviction (ie Bush in Iraq).

The problem with intolerance is not that it closes one's mind to other ideas, it's that it closes one's mind to ideas that are judged to be wrong but may actually be right. This cavaet about intolerance makes extreme rightists more dangerous and damaging then extreme leftists.

If you think of the great leaders on the left in recent times, Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy they were great because they thought in terms of right and wrong and were therefore able to lead. Recently the Left has been overtaken my leftists, and it's no wonder that they can't win elections.


Seems like you are all focusing so much on the tone of the original post -- obviously a frustrated rant by an angry lefty -- that you are ignoring the underlying themes. It's a nice way of sidestepping the issues.

There are plenty of examples of actions and policies by the Bush administration and other conservatives in power to lend some credence to the points the author of the post made in an overly-aggressive way. That is where the attention should be.

But I realize this isn't the place to have that discussion -- a blog by a righty for righties. Much like the reason the author posted on daily Kos -- he/she wasn't looking for a real discussion, just a place to yell and be comforted by those of a like mind.

Truth be told, I thought it was kind of funny.


One of the things that is very interesting in psychology is the phenomenon of projecting. In this defense mechanism, a person accuses others of behavior or beliefs that they actually hold unconsciously, but do not want to admit consciously. For some reason, reading this rant made me think of that.

David Tomlin

'We've all read columns in the months following the election pondering why the Democrats seem to be on the downswing today.'

Rush Limbaugh and FreeRepublic don't seem to have hurt the Republicans.

'I used read that sort of crap but I got cured really fast after watching a discussion on Atrios site discussing how to rape and murder Michelle Malkin.'

Quite an accusation. Would you like to back it up with a link?

David Tomlin


David: link is as follows

Frank Borger

"I'm a republican. I have a condo in Vail, a summer home in Maine, and a beach house in Florida. ..."

And then the Democrats run Presidential candidate who owns a Ski Chalet in Colorado, an Estate in Pennsylvania, a beach house on Cape Cod, a large house in Boston and another house in Washington, a yacht he calls Scaramouch and a private jet to visit all these places. Oh wait, he DID sell his mansion in Italy, (to pay for his last Senate run.)


The day after the election my father-in-law, a blue state guy in a red state emailed us the infamous Jane Smiley rip on Republicans, in which she proceeds to insult all her relatives who happen to be republicans as ignorant rednecks. He prefaced the email with "This is how I feel." It was hard to know what to say and I didn't reply at the time. Sometimes this feels like a civil war.

The comments to this entry are closed.