House of Eratosthenes

Oh Gawd, this is just too funny. A week ago, I had put up a post called What Is A Liberal? in which I defined three rough scenarios which have a distinct liberal solution and a distinct non-liberal solution. I then explored the principles that the liberal solutions had in common with each other. One of my scenarios had to do with the owner of a business, with a limited amount of capital for hiring, being able to take on only three entry-level laborers instead of four, with a minimum wage being recently hiked. I said…

Liberals have an answer for that, too. They “do studies,” and then come out and say things like “our study found no measurable negative impact on employment.”…This is not an isolated situation; with issue after issue, liberalism upholds a disturbing pattern of insisting that I stop thinking for myself, even in matters of simple multiplication and subtraction, and outsource my thinking to other people.

People who do studies. People who promote studies. People who are not in the office with me, sweating over the figures with me, helping me to figure out how to pay the bills with the money I have. People who, so far as I know, have never transferred money from a personal savings account to meet a payroll. Those are the people telling me to forget about math, put the calculator down, it will all work out.

then…

Guns: Get rid of them. Think you need them for your personal protection? Don’t think about it. Living out in the sticks? Wife pregnant? “911” has a thirty-minute response time? Hakuna Matada. Our “studies” say you don’t need the piece. Ditch it.

It’s all got to do with things mattering less. Less thinking going on. People shutting up and doing what they’re told. What they’re told by…oh, what does it matter who. Stop asking questions.

So…the conservatives use their noggins as crystal balls. Raise taxes, and people will turn into cheapasses. Take guns away, burglars and rapists will break into whatever house they want to, knowing there’s no guns in there. Make a bunch of rules about not being able to fire teachers, and you’ll be left with a bunch of incompetent teachers. It’s all cause and effect. Liberals get hold of “studies,” and if the study is something they like, they promote it, otherwise they’ll sit on it.

And as if some divine cosmic entity said to itself “Hey, that Morgan guy needs some help proving his point,” look what happens here.

Our friend Misha, the Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler, has been getting into it with some lawyer asshole named Glenn Greenwald. The Rottweiler has been enjoying himself thoroughly, by the way. All this stuff makes for a great read…a little off-topic from where I want to go with it.

Anyway, Greenwald goes off, in his own blog, on the Rottweiler. And his point is…well, it is as follows…

Prominent right-wing blogger today calls for the murder of Supreme Court Justices – the Right fails to condemn it

If your only source for news was reading right-wing blogs, you would have thought that the most significant world event in the last few days was that some crazy woman who nobody ever heard of before (someone by the name of “Deb Frisch”) left some vile comments on Jeff Goldstein’s blog, a venue which itself is devoted to some of the most vile, deranged and psychosexually disturbed commentary that can be found on the Internet. Virtually every right-wing blogger spent the weekend focused on this solemn and grave matter, milking it for all it was worth. Many implied that this unknown commenter was some sort of towering figure of great significance among liberals, and exploited the drama to argue that the “Left” must approve of these comments because they didn’t denounce the comments enough times or with enough vigor.

The blogger Misha of the blog Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler is one of the most linked-to and popular bloggers in the right-wing blogosphere. He’s the 42nd most linked-to blogger on the Internet, and he is in the blogroll of scores of right-wing bloggers, such as Michelle Malkin and Captian’s Quarters Blog. He wrote a post today discussing the Supreme Court’s decision in Hamdan and here is what he said:

Of course, this is the same Supreme Court that earlier decided in Kelo that private property rights only matter as long as a private company doesn�t offer a better deal, above or below the table, to local authorities, so one shouldn�t really be surprised. The unelected, black-robed tyrants have a long history of not giving a fig about the Constitution if they don�t like what it says, not to mention a long tradition of usurping the powers of the legislative and executive branch by ruling by judicial fiat. . . .

Try doing anything to those mutilating darlings of the Supremes in order to extract life-saving intel from them, and then wait for the Supreme Whores to decide that you were �humiliating� them in doing so.

Five ropes, five robes, five trees.

Some assembly required.

He’s advocating that the five Supreme Court Justices in the Hamdan majority be hanged from the neck until they’re dead. His homicidal formulation is a play on the more standard call of the Right for American journalists to be hanged — “Journalists. Rope. Tree. Some assembly required” — another death call which, it just so happens, Misha also issued just a few days ago.

Okay. Before we go further, I’d just like to point out another thing about liberals. Greenwald is making a point, here, that is made by conservatives all the time. “Hey, this guy on our side got treated such-and-such a way, that guy over there got treated so-and-so a way, it’s not fair.” Both sides do this a lot. But the style is substantially different. Greenwald, if you go over to his column, does not leave this as an open-ended question, the way conservatives do when they use the same technique. He doesn’t say, “Can anyone give me a rational reason why the example I’m playing up, should be played down, and the example I’m playing down, should be played up?” Actually, there are only two questions in this whole post: “What happened?” and “Why not?” His premise, that Misha is as threatening or is more threatening than that psycho twit-burger Dr. Frisch, is something he will not open to question and cannot open to question. You aren’t supposed to be noodlin’ that one out. Should you choose to do so, and should you come to a conclusion different than his, you are simply outside of Greenwald’s intended audience. It’s a subtle distinction, but an important one.

Anyway, maybe I shouldn’t have done that. Continuity of thought is important here. Think about the studies. Liberals and studies. So anyhoo, five days after my comments about liberals and their stupid studies, this comment section is open under Greenwald’s post, and all these Greenwald friendly left-wing half-wits start posting. In total, 253 last I checked. ++guffaw snort++ check out #10.

This is bad enough, but couple your report with this headline from Raw Story:

50 year study says conservatives ‘followers’

In an interview with MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann, former Nixon counsel John Dean explained a largely unknown 50 year academic study. The data shows that conservatives are much more likely to follow authoritarian leaders.

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Video_50_year_study_says_conservatives_0711.html

BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

This is so rich. Liberals are independent thinkers and conservatives are followers. And yet, the liberals are the ones who can’t form an opinion about how to burp, fart, sneeze, take a crap, or hang the new roll of toilet paper afterward, without a “study” telling them what’s what and how high to jump and when to come back down again.

ZERO THOUGHT. I would say it’s so bad, that all they’re doing is getting together and saying “hey, here’s some fresh meat you can use in case a conservative corners you…” without chewing on any of the fresh meat. But it isn’t even meat! You can’t crack this study open, you can’t find out why it took place over fifty years, you can’t find out how it was affected during those fifty years, you can’t even find out who did it. Oh sure you can, maybe, with difficulty. But rest assured of this: The liberal who wants you to “read” the study — in other words, simply adopt the conclusion of the study, as interpreted by the liberal, as your own opinion — won’t be standing shoulder-to-shoulder with you if you choose to do this. And he damn sure won’t volunteer anything making it easier for ya.

Liberal ideas simply aren’t built to be challenged. It’s a twentieth-century, techno-industrial ideology built for a world in which mass-production and mass-communication were the leading edge, brand-new novelties. As such, the points within that ideology are built to be fanned out, broadcast, disseminated, in a single direction: Outward. It’s not a dialog. You’re just supposed to take this huge picnic basket full of poo sandwiches, grab an armload, and start distributing them without peeking between the bread slices to see what’s in there.

Update 7/15/06: This is Installment 3 of 3. The first installment is here and the second installment is here.

Stephen Den Beste wrote an article about liberals and conservatives here:

http://denbeste.nu/cd_log_entries/2003/02/LiberalConservatism.shtml

well worth reading.
- Duffy | 07/13/2006 @ 11:04
[…] Which was not yet the case when I wrote What Is A Liberal? Part V or IV, or the first three chapters either. Now, the air is thick with liberal blatherings. I haven’t exactly been trying to escape them, but assuming that avenue was open to me, it doesn’t seem to me to be a wise plan. Being a liberal is all about coming up with ideas to solve problems, that aren’t necessarily so likely to solve the problem, as they are to change the lives of everyone in a way we can’t ignore once the ideas are put into effect. So this is the interesting thing about our liberals — you can ignore them today, you can ignore them tomorrow. Can’t do both. There’s a certain “pay the piper” overtone when it comes to paying attention to, or ignoring, liberals. […]
- House of Eratosthenes | 12/01/2007 @ 11:50

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent

Items of Interest

Monthly Archives

What They Say

Links

What Is A Liberal? IIIThursday, July 13th, 2006

What Is A Liberal? III
Thursday, July 13th, 2006