If 'mainstream conservatism' means 'popular with enough conservatives that you can't call him a member of a 'fringe' with a straight face', then he, Ann Coulter, and Rush Limbaugh are mainstream conservatives.
Just remember, though: it's liberals who have problems with anger these days.
Yes, that's it, point your fingers and shout "They're doing it too!" I'll see your Savage, Coulter and Limbaugh, with Michael Moore, Kos, and Air America, and I'll raise you one party Chairman, Howard Dean. (And since he's the party chair, I can assume that rabid hatred of all things Republican and especially actual Republicans is the official stance of the Democratic Party.) Gee, this is fun! It's good to read these nice moderate websites once in a while for some good, solidly reasoned discourse.
And as for highlighting extreme points of view, Hilzoy's post might be just a little more effective if five comments in one of his fanboys hadn't called for killing every Republican he could think of by name. AND NO ONE CALLED HIM ONE IT!
So tell me, why is Obsidian Wings and its legion of Republican haters better than The Savage Nation?
I'm not saying, "hey look at them, they're worse! Gotcha!" because that's a stupid game and we can both come up with thousands of examples with about 13 seconds on google, but rather:
A) the Angry Left thing is a smear just to prevent any consideration of anything said. Yes Howie Dean screamed! Therefore he's an looney, not to be listened to, save for ridicule. To me, it's not that Savage is angry, it's that his suggestions are batshit insane. That might be anger-driven, but it's not the anger itself...
B) And even that said, fine, I'm angry, I'm fucking furious. Now that that's established, why are my criticisms invalid? If I'm angry, I should be easier to rebut since my judgment is cloudy, etc...
"Demurrer" is legalese for 'yeah, so?' if that makes sense.
And simply as a matter of context, Hilzoy's post is more continuing a response to last weekend's "Angry Left Blogger" article.
[T]he Angry Left thing is a smear just to prevent any consideration of anything said.
Yes, and saying that while smearing the Right is a sign of Hilzoy talking out of both sides of his face. Don't bitch about the heat while pouring gasoline on the fire.
Yes Howie Dean screamed! Therefore he's an looney, not to be listened to, save for ridicule.
Great, but I'm not talking about the scream. I'm talking about this:
"I hate the Republicans and everything they stand for...."
And this:
"Well, Republicans, I guess, can do that because a lot of them have never made an honest living in their lives." [Later he lamely tried to ammend this to say he only meant Republican Party leaders. Given the whole context of his remark, his attempt to back out of the comment was ludicrous. So besides calling me a crook, he also thinks I'm too stupid to know when I've been insulted.]
And this:
"This is a struggle of good and evil. And we're the good." [The evil was not any terrorist group, but the Republican Party, of course.]
And then there was Dean on the Kelo decision:
"The president and his right-wing Supreme Court think it is 'okay' to have the government take your house if they feel like putting a hotel where your house is."
Given how the various members of the Supreme Court voted, this is pretty much a blad-faced lie. And oh yeah, W hadn't appointed any Justices at that time. Again he thought we were too stupid to notice. What an imperious asshole.
So spare me the bit about the scream being used to discredit him. I have every reason to despise someone who has called me a crook and assumes I'm too stupid to realize it. I don't need any dumb-assed bad audio moment to discredit anything Dean says. So fuck him, and fuck the Democratic Party that supports him.
And even that said, fine, I'm angry, I'm fucking furious. Now that that's established, why are my criticisms invalid?
I'm not even going to listen to the criticisms of someone who starts off by calling me a stupid crook who never worked an honest day in my life. If the people on the left want me to listen to them, they're going to have to spend several YEARS to convince me that they actually give a goddamn about me, or my opinion, or my vote. Because in the meantime I have no reason to think they're doing anything other than trying to grab power to fuck me over. Because that's basically what the Deomcratic Party leadership has been telling me for years now.
And I could say why would I listen to someone who questions my patriotism, and so on and so forth. My this is fun...
But I won't. Look, Hilzoy is attacking the Angry Left meme, not demonizing the right (seriously, if you read the body of her work, she is often critical of the right, yes, but seldom arbitrarily and almost with factual support.)
But if you want to assume I hate you because we disagree, have at it. (And of course, I don't. And I think you know that.)
5 comments:
Hilzoy sums up:
If 'mainstream conservatism' means 'popular with enough conservatives that you can't call him a member of a 'fringe' with a straight face', then he, Ann Coulter, and Rush Limbaugh are mainstream conservatives.
Just remember, though: it's liberals who have problems with anger these days.
Yes, that's it, point your fingers and shout "They're doing it too!" I'll see your Savage, Coulter and Limbaugh, with Michael Moore, Kos, and Air America, and I'll raise you one party Chairman, Howard Dean. (And since he's the party chair, I can assume that rabid hatred of all things Republican and especially actual Republicans is the official stance of the Democratic Party.) Gee, this is fun! It's good to read these nice moderate websites once in a while for some good, solidly reasoned discourse.
And as for highlighting extreme points of view, Hilzoy's post might be just a little more effective if five comments in one of his fanboys hadn't called for killing every Republican he could think of by name. AND NO ONE CALLED HIM ONE IT!
So tell me, why is Obsidian Wings and its legion of Republican haters better than The Savage Nation?
Pick, huh?
I'm not saying, "hey look at them, they're worse! Gotcha!" because that's a stupid game and we can both come up with thousands of examples with about 13 seconds on google, but rather:
A) the Angry Left thing is a smear just to prevent any consideration of anything said. Yes Howie Dean screamed! Therefore he's an looney, not to be listened to, save for ridicule. To me, it's not that Savage is angry, it's that his suggestions are batshit insane. That might be anger-driven, but it's not the anger itself...
B) And even that said, fine, I'm angry, I'm fucking furious. Now that that's established, why are my criticisms invalid? If I'm angry, I should be easier to rebut since my judgment is cloudy, etc...
"Demurrer" is legalese for 'yeah, so?' if that makes sense.
And simply as a matter of context, Hilzoy's post is more continuing a response to last weekend's "Angry Left Blogger" article.
[T]he Angry Left thing is a smear just to prevent any consideration of anything said.
Yes, and saying that while smearing the Right is a sign of Hilzoy talking out of both sides of his face. Don't bitch about the heat while pouring gasoline on the fire.
Yes Howie Dean screamed! Therefore he's an looney, not to be listened to, save for ridicule.
Great, but I'm not talking about the scream. I'm talking about this:
"I hate the Republicans and everything they stand for...."
And this:
"Well, Republicans, I guess, can do that because a lot of them have never made an honest living in their lives." [Later he lamely tried to ammend this to say he only meant Republican Party leaders. Given the whole context of his remark, his attempt to back out of the comment was ludicrous. So besides calling me a crook, he also thinks I'm too stupid to know when I've been insulted.]
And this:
"This is a struggle of good and evil. And we're the good." [The evil was not any terrorist group, but the Republican Party, of course.]
And then there was Dean on the Kelo decision:
"The president and his right-wing Supreme Court think it is 'okay' to have the government take your house if they feel like putting a hotel where your house is."
Given how the various members of the Supreme Court voted, this is pretty much a blad-faced lie. And oh yeah, W hadn't appointed any Justices at that time. Again he thought we were too stupid to notice. What an imperious asshole.
So spare me the bit about the scream being used to discredit him. I have every reason to despise someone who has called me a crook and assumes I'm too stupid to realize it. I don't need any dumb-assed bad audio moment to discredit anything Dean says.
So fuck him, and fuck the Democratic Party that supports him.
And even that said, fine, I'm angry, I'm fucking furious. Now that that's established, why are my criticisms invalid?
I'm not even going to listen to the criticisms of someone who starts off by calling me a stupid crook who never worked an honest day in my life. If the people on the left want me to listen to them, they're going to have to spend several YEARS to convince me that they actually give a goddamn about me, or my opinion, or my vote. Because in the meantime I have no reason to think they're doing anything other than trying to grab power to fuck me over. Because that's basically what the Deomcratic Party leadership has been telling me for years now.
Now, why is THAT so hard to understand?
And I could say why would I listen to someone who questions my patriotism, and so on and so forth. My this is fun...
But I won't. Look, Hilzoy is attacking the Angry Left meme, not demonizing the right (seriously, if you read the body of her work, she is often critical of the right, yes, but seldom arbitrarily and almost with factual support.)
But if you want to assume I hate you because we disagree, have at it. (And of course, I don't. And I think you know that.)
But if you want to assume I hate you because we disagree, have at it. (And of course, I don't. And I think you know that.)
Of course I know that. But arguing with such tones doesn't really help, and I think that Hilzoy's post proved the meme more than disproved it.
Post a Comment