House of Eratosthenes

Blogger friend Duffy brings to our attention the lamentations of a principled progressive, wondering where all those high-minded progressive principles went, and whether they were ever really there. He says you have to read this if you don’t read another thing. I’m a-gonna go ahead and agree with that…

The battle cry of liberals used to be “tolerance, diversity, and freedom of speech for all, and if anyone says anything to the contrary we will crush them.”

In the third quarter of ’08 it’s more like “nobody gets to pick on women except us.”

The Huffington Post, already in full blown Palin Derangement Syndrome, ran every possible rumor, variation and invented more lies to compliment the original. And the main stream media, who for a solid month refused (absolutely refused) to reprint or broadcast a single word of the John Edward’s affair, ran with the verifiably fake Palin story within hours of it’s publication.

All of a sudden, “Did you hear what they wrote in The Kos” became an acceptable substitute for fact checking. Of course, since one single phone call could disprove the story, nobody in the mainstream media could be bothered to pick up a phone.

Finally, Governor Palin was forced to issue a statement. She had no choice. She advised the salivating media of her teen daughter’s pregnancy. And that’s when we finally surrendered our all of our most cherished principles.

Armed with an official statement, nothing could possibly hold the main stream media back and the liberal blogosphere went berserk. The full fledged gang rape of Bristol Palin was underway. Any shred of decency that remained in the liberal blogosphere was gone.

Author the WIZARD, fkap further adds, in comment #3,

I don’t think Sarah Palin is the loser here. It’s the liberals and progressives who have lost. We have lost our integrity.

We are not honorable opponents…. not today at least.

Which earns this retort in comment #4 from dicentra63,

Hate to break it to ya, wiz, but y’all haven’t been honorable since the Florida recount.

Zing. That-un’s gonna leave a mark.

The situation makes me think of a comment RobCase left here over the weekend, because I’m thinking this is the genesis of the conflict heartfelt by today’s liberals —

The idea of angels taking care of everything for those of the superior heart is a recurrent theme in the novels of one of the most popular liberals of all time – Charles Dickens. It always amused me reading his heroes, how often characters like Oliver Twist, Pip and Esther – those who had the correct conscience – invariably relied on the easy money flowing from wealthy benefactors and inheritances. Somehow he had trouble connecting purity of thought with the practical business of housing and feeding oneself.

That’s the paradox that ultimately defeats that ideological camp. It’s about coming together and building a utopian society which functions day to day for the benefit of “everyone.” But within this utopia, conflict is supposed to have become a thing of the past. Many pieces of the dream depend, completely and utterly, on banishing conflict to history’s ash bin. How do you banish conflict? You banish conflict, not by “talking things out” as liberals like to tell us we need to do, but acting like someone to the political right of Genghis Kahn; by waiting for someone to say something out of line, and giving ’em a good rap across the knuckles.

And making sure all the other subjects see you doing it. That’s what you have to do. Get the message out that this egalitarian society we’re building that works every day for the needs, requirements and demands of “everyone,” is not ever going to be friendly with this jackhole over here. Or anyone like him.

In flinging about their superlatives that concern universality, liberals are particularly exuberant in discussing universality of ideas, especially ideas expressed. Freedom of speech for the least among us; don’t you dare question my patriotism; chill wind; dictatorship; blah, blah, blah. dicentra63 is correct — this kind of hypocrisy precedes Sarah Palin by a good stretch. Throughout my lifetime, liberals have told us “anybody ought to be able to say anything they want to, and if anyone dares to suggest otherwise we’ll make ’em sorry.” What is new with Gov. Palin, is that the story is told. Broadcast far and wide, within a narrow scope of time, in such a way that you can’t escape the message unless you put a lot of effort into your attempts to remain ignorant.

And even that doesn’t work. They’re telling us to lash back at sexist white males who spread lies about women who don’t deserve such treatment, to keep their white male power — and to get the message across, they send out a bunch of powerful liberal white males to do exactly the same thing to Bristol Palin.

Update: dicentra63 is a chick. A chick with a blog. And what a worthy blog it is. Don’t be fooled by all the flower artwork and girly crap, there is some hard-headed reality-type stuff and good meaty substance at this corner. I like.

Heh. I like girls who like girly crap. It’s part of being a girl. Much as I’d like a big house with rough oak beams and knotty pine paneling with animal heads hanging over stone firelplaces — I like having the touch of a woman in my house.

A bright, thoughtful one is doubly nice. If they like the outdoors, I like ’em even better. The grail of womanhood. The ability to field dress a moose is just icing after that. Kind of like a bright, thoughtful man being the grail of manhood.

Well, maybe that should be a bright, thoughtful man who can kick ass if he needs to 😉

I will go check her blog out.
- philmon | 09/08/2008 @ 10:41
In my small minded, petty way I must poke at the phrase “someone to the political right of Genghis Kahn”. What you are describing is a left wing troupe. The Ring wing allows freedom of speech, it’s the freedom of action without consequences that gets you in trouble there. Authoritarian vs. Totalitarian and all that…….
- Robert Mitchell Jr. | 09/08/2008 @ 10:47
…wondering where all those high-minded progressive principles went, and whether they were ever really there.

I can state with some authority… being a semi-recovered Moonbat for some 30 years now, date of conversion sometime around 1978… that those principles never really did exist. In theory, yes. But in practice? Not frickin’ hardly. And that’s the principal reason I left The Left. Coz it’s all about The Hypocrisy!
- Buck | 09/08/2008 @ 17:08
Shoulda siad “one of the reasons…” rather than “the principal reason.” Coz there are many more than a few. But that’s all hindsight, innit?
- Buck | 09/08/2008 @ 17:13
I can state with some authority…that those principles never really did exist.

I think that’s the saddest thing I’ve read in at least a week or two.

Like Clint Eastwood said, a man’s got to know his limitations — and before Carter, I really didn’t have the foggiest idea what was going on. I just sort of assumed that prior to this watershed event in ’68 that our liberals really were moral puritans, in intent if not in effect. I thought they all marched together with Charlton Heston and Martin Luther King; that the destruction of federalism that occurred with FDR’s election in ’32, didn’t become the primary issue until much later — that before I reached an age of awareness, this really was the home of those who were dedicated to equal opportunity for all. That all the control-freakishness came much later.

I’m not being sarcastic, by the way. I really did want to extent that benefit-of-doubt to modern liberals, in spite of all the nasty things I’ve had to say about ’em. And so, since I respect your superior magnitude of experience, this snarky comment of yours is shaking my foundation just a little.
- mkfreeberg | 09/08/2008 @ 19:17
I wouldn’t go that far. I think the Democrats had some good principles when they started, they lost them when Andrew Jackson got elected, and the Populists knew they had found a home. I think that helps explain why the Anti-slavery movement that created the Republicans had very little of the populist sins we expect from a mass movement. As to Civil rights marching, that was done by the Republicans. The Democrats(such as Bull Conner, member of the DNC) were the ones putting the dogs on them. The Democrats big claims to fame were: stopped fighting the Republicans when it became clear they would lose, and once that happened, poisoning the well by going way pass what the Republicans had fought for(equal rights under law) to punishing thought crime(landlords, employers and others subject to the EEOC if they were not “colorblind”). Just my two cents.
- Robert Mitchell Jr. | 09/08/2008 @ 20:08
This is why I get my opinions from Feministing, news from John Stewart, and research my facts at Wikipedia.
It makes the thinking process soooooooo much easier.
- CaptDMO | 09/09/2008 @ 08:35

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent

Items of Interest

Monthly Archives

What They Say

Links

We’ve LostMonday, September 8th, 2008

We’ve Lost
Monday, September 8th, 2008