House of Eratosthenes

Here’s the backstory. Blogger friend Westsoundmodern embedded that video, we’ve been talking about it on & off — not because it’s got good lookin’ women in skimpy clothes in it, but because the conversation that ensues just brings out the worst and most thoughtless in liberals. We like to make a study of both of those, good lookin’ women in skimpy clothes, and the disconnected, incoherent thoughts that swim around in the addled brains of liberal douchebags. So keen-eyed nobodies who visit The Blog That Nobody Reads, will note we have been returning to this.

“Joe America” just uploaded the capstone to the pyramid of dumbshittedness a few hours ago, and it really is something to behold:

Morgan,

I agree, if people are calling tea-baggers racest without cause, they are being racist. My comment was directed more at Westsound’s blatant sexism and belittling of any woman who thinks she can get by on her talent and brains alone. Maybe someone like Helen Thomas doesn’t give a crap whether someone like you find her attractive or not. I guess if you’re paying for fashion advice, you go to the woman at the Macy’s make-up counter; if you’re paying for some sort of specific expertise, one that requires education and knowledge, I personally don’t care what they look like; Results are what matter – Substance.

I think a lot of people look at the photos of the tea-party protests and wonder: where are all the non-white people? Maybe only white people are rational and dislike being taxed in to the ground? I don’t know… But as far as I can tell, they don’t seem to have any real solutions, just complaints about being taxed too much. Well, me too. I just get tired of whiners and complainers that have no viable solutions. They’re just wasting everyone’s time – in my opinion.

Questioning the patriotism of someone that balks at invading another country is a far cry from telling someone to get out of the way if they don’t have any solutions to the mess we’re in. A monopoly on free speech? Oh yeah, those damned minorities keeping the white man down again…..

I don’t know where you live, but around here there are plenty of literal creationists and born again nut-jobs. I’m not calling them crazy, I’m just saying that anyone that believes that god created the world in seven days is a nut-job. I don’t car how long days were back then – It’s flat out crazy-talk, and goes against all scientific thought.

Sarah Palin says she believes in creation. The only difference is that she uses the old “days were way longer back then” explanation. It’s all just degrees of mental illness to me. If I told you I believe that God came down and punished half the people in the world by making them have dark skin, and I’m descended from the white (good) people, so I’m never supposed to breed or worship with all the dark skinned people (like the Mormons believe: http://www.mormoncurtain.com/topic_racism.html) you would call me crazy, intolerant, or racist – maybe even against Mormons? – Unless of course you were a Scientologist, then the Mormons would side with me in calling you crazy. It’s all relative I guess. People can believe anything they want; and I have the right to deem them total nut-jobs. It’s a free country after all.

And no thanks, to what I consider a “crazy person” running the free world. I don’t care if you get your ideas from the Koran, the Bible, the Torah, or a book brought down by an Alien Angel, it’s all the same to me. It’s not what I believe in, and you can keep it to yourself, thank you very much.

Now, if deeply religious people could be elected to public office and be expected to govern with a secular hand, that might be different. But I have yet to see that happen in real life. And it only seems to be getting worse…..

And, you try writing writing more than a few sentences on your Iphone. Fosell, fossell, fawcell. oh well….

Regards,

Joe

Some observations I make about this:

One. Joe, like many millions of others, doesn’t really work with facts. He just goes through the motions of doing this. WSM “belittl[ed] any woman who thinks she can get by on her talent and brains alone”? Really? WSM came in afterward and called him out on it, to which Joe said…well, nothing. Palin believes in Creation, “she uses the old ‘days were way longer back then’ explanation”? What’s that supposed to mean? Palin’s views on Creation have been vastly exaggerated, this isn’t news to anyone who’s been paying attention. But it seems Joe’s willing to buy into every little thing he’s heard about her…and I’m supposed to believe every word too, because some anonymous guy who can’t spell things on his iPhone tells me to believe it.

Two. Joe can’t conclude anything once he does have the facts. He says “People can believe anything they want; and I have the right to deem them total nut-jobs.” Let’s see what else Joe has the right to deem. When I object to Obama sympathizers trying to gain a “monopoly on free speech” Joe “deems” that to mean “Oh yeah, those damned minorities keeping the white man down again.” Oh yeah, Joe. Sure. Whatever you deem.

Three. When Joe bases his ideas on something, he bases it on — other peoples’ ideas. He doesn’t say the idea of a seven-day Creation “goes against all scientific evidence” — he says it “goes against all scientific thought.” Now, there are lots of different ways to interpret the seven days, but Joe seems to have his mind all made up. He’ll interpret it in whatever way he “deems,” and once he’s done deeming that he’s ready to deem any adherents to be “nut-jobs.”

Four, and I’ve saved the best for last: Joe’s priorities are mistaken. Anyone who wants to be our next President can go to church every week, believe every single word out of the Bible, even view it through a strictly fundamentalist lens. Noah’s Ark, the eclipse of the sun getting stuck — everything, lock stock and barrel. That really isn’t going to affect much of anything.

When the current President is a “nut-job,” He “believes” a massive new entitlement program is going to save us money, and we should all be thankful to Him for cutting our taxes as soon as we’re done bitterly clinging to our guns and Bibles. Because of that, my children and grandchildren probably can’t earn a goddamn thing, and neither can yours, or Joe’s.

I think I got this guy pegged: He’s a secularist. He doesn’t think people can do anything good if they’re religious, and he doesn’t think people can do anything bad if they’re secular. He’s one of these smarmy atheists who have it all figured out, there is nothing up there because he’s figured it out that way.

Joe doesn’t figure things out, though. He’ll never admit this, but he swims with the tide. He’s one of these characters who, with a time machine, I can motivate to take on any opinion I want him to…just by figuring out what period in which that opinion is popular, and transporting him there. You want a Joe who believes in slavery? Coming right up. A Joe of Salem who thinks we need to hunt all the witches down? I can do that too. A Joe who wants to crucify all the Christians and feed them to the lions? No mean feat…how about a Joe who believes the Lancastrians rule by divine right? Or the Yorkists? Or Julius Caesar? Or wants to help participate in Caesar’s assassination? I can do it all, just give me Joe’s warm-putty-like mind, and a time machine with a precise dial on it.

People like this have no balls, no fortitude. That’s why Joe is so incensed about the lack of intellect in an ordinary citizen of Alaska whom he doesn’t personally know. Just think about that, now. You might conclude Sarah Palin’s a big ol’ dummy because so many people are saying so. Tentatively. Must be something to it, mustn’t there? That much is reasonable. But to get emotionally wrapped up in it, is a little nuts. You can only pull that off if you lack courage.

People like this are like jellyfish, just drifting with the current…left…right…whatever. If we all played a “truth or dare” game in which we sat in a room and talked about our experiences going against the consensus, poor Joe wouldn’t have jack squat to say. And I think he’s upset about it, if you want to know the truth. Maybe that’s why he gets so nasty over not-a-whole-lot. And that’s why I think Joe is important; there are a lot of people like him.

They go left when left is popular, they go right when right is popular. They hate themselves for it and are therefore constantly, indescribably, rude. They’re the anti-Charlton-Hestons.

What the hell, the electrons don’t cost anything. Let’s clutter ‘em up.

Well, they’re not free, but they are awfully cheap. For now anyway. Until cap & trade makes them “necessarily skyrocket”, I believe were the President’s words.

So let ‘er rip! While you can.

I only got one more thing to say. But I’ll let Randy Haddock say it.
- philmon | 04/20/2010 @ 20:26
Excellent. Now that you’re done with him, can I still use him as a hand-puppet, Unka Morgan?
- vanderleun | 04/20/2010 @ 22:05
I’ll glove up first. Promise.
- vanderleun | 04/20/2010 @ 22:10
I was gonna say.

But it sounds like you paid attention in preventative health class.

Yeah, Secularists account for some of the worst religious bigots there are.
- philmon | 04/21/2010 @ 06:43
Ooh, good line.

I was noticing that although I didn’t say anything. I don’t see Creationists demanding a monopoly in the school curriculum. I don’t see them banning any books. I don’t see them going to court to remove icons that are associated with other denominations.

I see the people on the secular side doing these things, and am expected to take it in stride.

I assume it’s okay to make reference to “sides,” since I saw Joe doing that in the aftermath somewhere. My girlfriend’s Dad is kind of like this; I asked him once what exactly it is about Hillary Clinton that he likes, and he couldn’t answer. These people don’t have ideas, they just like a good fight.
- mkfreeberg | 04/21/2010 @ 06:48
I’ll tell you what it probably is.

Hillary and her husband are seen as centrists.

The deal is, giirlfriendsdad likes Hillary because he believes saying he does makes him appear to be a reasonable person with an additional percieved noble nod to his inner feminist. It’s “intellectual flair”. Big buttons on his TGIF apron. He probably doesn’t even know that. But that’s it.

At any rate, her idolization of Alinsky is all I need to know about her.
- philmon | 04/21/2010 @ 08:04
I think I got this guy pegged: He’s a secularist. He doesn’t think people can do anything good if they’re religious, and he doesn’t think people can do anything bad if they’re secular.

In regards to a(nti)theists:

A corollary to Mike Godwin’s excellent 1990 theorem that “As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1,” the observation has been made that no discussion, of anything whatsoever, between two atheists can go for longer than 20 minutes without an attack on God or the Church.

“Hey, man, cool shoes.”

“Yeah, Christians would hate ’em.”

“How’s your Mom?”

“She’d be fine if those idiots next door didn’t keep going to church and waking her up on Sunday morning.”

“How ’bout those 9ers?”

“WHY CAN’T THE CATHOLICS ELECT GLORIA STEINEM POPE!!!???”

And so forth.
- rob | 04/21/2010 @ 09:56
Speaking of ‘working with facts’, here’s a current favorite from Morgan K. Freeberg his ownself

“Liberal women are UGLY. ”

Count me among the millions who ignore such ‘facts’.
- Arthurstone | 04/21/2010 @ 13:48
That is actually what is called a generalization, Arthur. Just like many others that doubtless meet with your approval moar-better, like for example conservatives can’t think straight. Or Tea Party people are racists.

Generalizations for thee but not for me, eh?
- mkfreeberg | 04/21/2010 @ 14:01
‘That is actually what is called a generalization, Arthur. Just like many others that doubtless meet with your approval moar-better, like for example conservatives can’t think straight. Or Tea Party people are racists.’

Ouch. There is a little pain inflicted on the English language.

Still I love it when you channel, Morgan.

Now if you can demonstrate where I’ve said any of those things you project upon me then let’s have a little look see.

But wait. Since no such examples exist let me guess how you do it.

You intuit my *approval* because “I think I got this guy pegged” & “I can do it all…”

Right?

Heh. Heh.
- Arthurstone | 04/21/2010 @ 16:06
Context, Arthur. That was about your buddy Joe.

Gerard’s right about you. You need to focus. And you met him face-to-face and didn’t realize it at the time? Egads, you do have a problem.

Suggestion: Go ahead and accept it when the liberal women are ugly. Some of them are working hard to be that way, you know. Maybe this refusal of yours is what’s causing your ADD.
- mkfreeberg | 04/21/2010 @ 16:19
I’ll be the first to admit there are some seriously hot liberal women. I’m thinking of two hard core liberal women right now in particular that I find quite attractive. And I won’t bring up their names because I don’t want to start a whole nother thing (yes, I realize that isn’t proper English but I don’t give a rat’s bippie) And though I can’t think of any off the top of my head, some ugly conservative women. I know there’s gotta be some.

I do agree with Morgan that part of the problem is that trying to appear feminine often disqualifies you from speaking out in liberal circles as any sort of intellectual, and that many avoid trying. In my book, even less attractive women get points for trying. If you’re not going to even try … well … I certainly won’t dismiss you as a human being, but don’t expect points in the “who’s good-lookin'” department.
- philmon | 04/21/2010 @ 18:11
Phil, word to the wise. I hope you’re not trying to actually reason with this intellectual gelding called Arthurstone. As I said over here,

The lesson to take away from this, is that when we talk to our lefty friends we’re dealing a lot less with an ideological position than with a sort of a science & art to avoiding the main subject…Being a liberal means it’s always about the other guy.

Where “Joe America” drifts with the current, Arthur is completely directionless. Note this obsession he has with this quote of mine, that liberal women are UGLY in capital letters. Obviously, he disapproves of it but one thing’s missing: He doesn’t come out and disapprove. The harshest thing he’s said against it is that I “in a world where this qualifies as serious thought.” It’s obviously a pejorative statement, but you’re always left to conclude that. You always have to do some speculation to figure out what he really means.

If that happened with just ninety percent of the things he said, or eighty, or seventy, it might mean he’s being clever. When it’s all the time it just means he doesn’t have any balls. He lives in a world in which “liberal women are ugly” does not qualify as a serious thought; that means the hairy gross women with man-hands won’t let him call it out, and he complies like an obedient puppy. It also means they don’t have serious conversations in this world. Nothing is stated letter-for-letter, plainly, the way real men state things. It’s all just kind of implied in a snotty sort of way.

Arthurstone can keep his “world.”
- mkfreeberg | 04/21/2010 @ 19:53
Count me among the millions who ignore such ‘facts’.
– Arthurstone | 04/21/2010 @ 13:48

Count me among the millions who ignore YOU, douchebag. Not content with cluttering up the blogs of Morgan’s friends, you have to come over here and still up trouble too, eh?
- cylarz | 04/21/2010 @ 23:04
Charity to my resident troll, cylarz. It’s all he’s got after the Legos are put away.
- vanderleun | 04/21/2010 @ 23:19
Oh heck no. I just sometimes feel the need to spout off what I think. Go figure 😉

It was just a general observ….

Oh, I see!

Incidentally, I missed rob’s comment somehow. I actually know people like that. Christians are somehow the bane of their existence. It would almost be funny if it weren’t so pathetic.
- philmon | 04/22/2010 @ 05:43
The comments are just exploding, everyplace this subject matter is replicated. That is here, at Gerard’s place, and at the post at West’s place which is above seventy comments. There is obviously a lot of interest. I don’t think it is about the subject at hand, I think it is about the way we do our arguing nowadays. And I think the interest is real, genuine concern.

With the liberals like Joe America and ArthurStone, the concern is limited to concern over having the last word.

With more broad-minded people, the concern is about: Who are these lightweights? Could it be they have real responsibilities? Do they make my food, clean my shirts, refine the gasoline that goes in my car, teach my kids?
- mkfreeberg | 04/22/2010 @ 07:22
[…] Obama Approval Slips Yet Again The Violence Card Obama Must Present Papers in Arizona Pedantic II Joe America’s Rant McCain Says Yes to the Arizona Immigration Bill Humor vs. Contempt Nuts Caught in Flying Fox Drunk […]
- House of Eratosthenes | 04/23/2010 @ 07:11
[…] because silence equals consent don’cha know), in his exuberance and incompetence revealed a little bit too much about the […]
- House of Eratosthenes | 05/22/2010 @ 06:57

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent

Items of Interest

Monthly Archives

What They Say

Links

Joe America’s RantTuesday, April 20th, 2010

Joe America’s Rant
Tuesday, April 20th, 2010