previous post
next post
This just in! Democratic Party full of anti-feminist misogynist troglodytes!
At least according to the ludicrously simplistic freshman-level analytical rubric Jacob Weisberg applies in an article over at Slate.
Sometimes, you wonder if it isn't just self-parody? Weisberg opines that Racism Is The Only Reason Obama Might Lose:
No, Jacob, you've nailed it. It couldn't possibly be because we just don't like a Red Diaper Liberal as the candidate. No, it must be about the skin color.
Of course, all y'all on your side must be raging anti-feminist misogynists and homophobes - because you didn't nominate Senator Clinton, or even offer her the "three steps behind and one step to the right" consolation prize of the Veep position, and didn't put forth a gay candidate, either.
Good golly gee.
Or, as General Sullivan used to say when listening to arrant nonsense at the USR briefings while he was commanding the 1st Division of Foot at Fort Riley:
Simply amazing.
Which was Sullivan-speak for... bullshite.
Dude, your White Liberal Guilt is showing. Better take your guitar and get off the stairs - Bluto is coming.
My conscience is clean.
Snerk. Sometimes they just make it too easy.
Sometimes, you wonder if it isn't just self-parody? Weisberg opines that Racism Is The Only Reason Obama Might Lose:
Heh. I'm guessing this article wouldn't have been written if it were Alan Keyes, or Ward Connerly, or Clarence Thomas, or Thomas Sowell, or Condoleeza Rice, or J.C. Watts, or Deroy Murdock, or Colin Powell as the candidate. Well, maybe Powell. If he was running as a Democrat. And of course, if it was Murdock, it would have to be homophobia.Many have discoursed on what an Obama victory could mean for America. We would finally be able to see our legacy of slavery, segregation, and racism in the rearview mirror. Our kids would grow up thinking of prejudice as a nonfactor in their lives. The rest of the world would embrace a less fearful and more open post-post-9/11 America. But does it not follow that an Obama defeat would signify the opposite? If Obama loses, our children will grow up thinking of equal opportunity as a myth. His defeat would say that when handed a perfect opportunity to put the worst part of our history behind us, we chose not to. In this event, the world's judgment will be severe and inescapable: The United States had its day but, in the end, couldn't put its own self-interest ahead of its crazy irrationality over race.
No, Jacob, you've nailed it. It couldn't possibly be because we just don't like a Red Diaper Liberal as the candidate. No, it must be about the skin color.
Of course, all y'all on your side must be raging anti-feminist misogynists and homophobes - because you didn't nominate Senator Clinton, or even offer her the "three steps behind and one step to the right" consolation prize of the Veep position, and didn't put forth a gay candidate, either.
Good golly gee.
Or, as General Sullivan used to say when listening to arrant nonsense at the USR briefings while he was commanding the 1st Division of Foot at Fort Riley:
Simply amazing.
Which was Sullivan-speak for... bullshite.
Dude, your White Liberal Guilt is showing. Better take your guitar and get off the stairs - Bluto is coming.
My conscience is clean.
Snerk. Sometimes they just make it too easy.
Weisberg doesn't do any better because no one he listens to has ever told him what drivel it is. I imagine a writer (in general) would present themselves as poorly if they never encountered a good editor.
Maybe the people he listens to don't read his drivel?