Do not think Professor Ric Caric that simply because you have not responded to the challenge to debate that I, Mojo JoJo, have issued you in the posts that I posted this morning challenging you to debate on several subjects that you and your minions think you understand better than I, Mojo JoJo, understand which is absurd because my intelligence is much greater than the intelligence with which you misunderestimate the intelligence that I have. This will not be forgotten, nor will I cease to remember that you have not yet answered the gauntlet thrown down before you by me, Mojo JoJo.
And as far as those feminists like Amanda Marcotte who feel that deep down I project hypermasculinity because I am secretly terrified of the vagina that she, Amanda Marcotte, possesses but that I do not, I, Mojo JoJo, do hereby pronounce that I am not in anyway terrified by the vagina that Amanda Marcotte would like to try to weild to defeat me because I have developed in my laboratory by virtue of my incredibly large and powerful brain a cootie deflector of such power that it can turn inside out Amanda Marcotte’s supposedly harrowing vagina like just one more rubber diaphragm purchasable over the counter at the pharmacy though it is better to have one professionally fitted by your gynaecologist for your comfort and safety.
Also although I have infinite rodents’ tookuses not to give about the imputations made by Mahablogger Maha that I am a hater who lumps all people of exotic religions contrary in some respects to the Christian religion developed and promoted by the man known as Jesus in the time of the Roman Emperor Augustus for which he was crucified by masculine men who were projecting their insecurities onto the savior unless one follows instead the Buddha whose mystical path to salvation was practiced at an earlier date among his manifold followers who built magnificent temples such as Ankgor Watt which even though they fell into disrepair show in their sculptures the celebration of a wide variety of sexual positions practiced by their practitioners who seem nevertheless always to include a man and a woman as if that were some kind of normative behavior that we in the West have shackled them with probably by the use of some form of time machine invented by, yes, me, Mojo JoJo. I, Mojo JoJo will now cease to speak having spoken the variety of challenges which I have enunciated against the response of my nemeses from across the blogosphere for which I will now hush as I await your replies.
Alright, that monkey is kind of creepy.
And I like that style of writing, cramming 250+ words between commas or various other types of punctuation. My eyes were beginning to hurt, but I think you made it to the 11th line before one of those dastardly commas reared its ugly head.
And Prof. Ric is a pussy.
And, Kyoto
Ahhhh…nicely done, Dan. Buttercup has a special place in my heart, and you will not prevail, Mojo JoJo!
You have brass balls, Mojo Jojo, the thought of Amanda’s cunt’s shadow alone scares the crap out of me.
Nice of you to stick up for Ric, Pablo.
I have to admit, that is not the second-best Mojo JoJo imitation I have ever read. Very nicely done.
I’m so glad to see that y’all made today “Ric Caric Day” at Protein Wisdom. I didn’t know you guys cared so much. I even showed the top post to Mrs. RSI and she was almost as proud of the honor you extended as I am. Now my whole life has a meaning that it didn’t have before. Thank you from the bottom of my heart.
P.S. It was also good to see JD confirm my arguments in the first reply to the MoJo JoJo post. Saves me a lot of work.
Possessed monkeys, Buttercups … something must be in the water.
Who stole all of Dan’s punctuation marks ?!
Yup, you are. Would you prefer something else? Weenie, perhaps?
Folks, I will quit calling him a pussy, though given my prior scientific construct defining that term, he is objectively a pussy.
Since he appears to be so hung up on that, I shall cease and desist, so he can get on to the more important things, like addressing the posts from Dan and Jeff, substantively.
If he hurries, he might substantively respond before TNR admits they were duped.
The clock is running.
Ya pussy!
Buttercup, the hypermasculine PowerPuff Girl.
Once again, Ric rolls in with nothing of substance.
Dan, as for my previous, you’d have to understand the context which I’m not going to detail here.
She’s not hypermasculine, she’s just a badass.
Excellent. Hope her carpal tunnel is feeling better. :)
Sometimes I feel funny and clever, and then I read something like this. ;-)
This is also not the second best Mojo Jojo imitation that I have ever read.
Mojo Jojo: And each of the girls gave the Professor a swift kick.
[the girls do so]
Mojo Jojo: Why? Because I don’t like him. Not one bit!
Mojo Jojo: Oh that is so LAME. You will PAY for your use of inappropriate dialogue.
“It is I who you will obey! Obeying commands is what you’ll do! I will give you commands, and you will obey them!”
Nice try Dan ,
Still not fluffy enough .
The “challenge” Goldstein and Collins offered was for me to write five or six books. With all due respect, you guys really aren’t that important to me.
I made a two part argument last night. First, I characterized many of the comments I’ve seen on this blog as bigoted. Another example besides JD is Thor who drew up a nicely misogynous comment about Amanda Marcotte’s genitals. If the bloggers here want to see a lot more misogyny, they should revisit the comments on the post linking my “weenie boy” post. There were several “bull dyke” comments that were bigoted in the extreme.
Second, I argued that Goldstein’s (and Collins’) rationalizations for circumscribing muslim immigration, opposition to gay marriage, and opposition to feminism are more evil than the bigotry of people like JD and Thor. What Goldstein does is both provide intellectual cover for bigots and advance a political agenda on behalf of homophobic bigotry and racism.
The posts today engage in various kinds of diversionary tactics (my family, Dumbledore, my paper on Jesus), straw man arguments (gay opponents of gay marriage) and a particularly ridiculous effort on Goldstein’s part to claim himself as an original feminist.
Maybe you guys don’t get it, but I tend to think that you’re engaged in a fundamentally dishonest operation. But let me spell it out. As a right-wing blog, you are allied with other people on the American right. These include the religious right, the white racists, the thoroughgoing homophobes, the woman-haters, the anti-Muslim bigots, and the immigration bigots. You’re part of the same political party as the bigots, you all think of yourselves as part of the conservative movement, and you advance the same political agenda as the bigots. That’s one of the reasons why I’ve yet to see any sign of disgust at these kinds of bigotries at Protein Wisdom. You folks are very clever and you’re smart enough to know who your friends and allies are.
The Mahablog (which I don’t read) was mistaken to throw you in with “the haters.” In fact, you’re worse. You rationalize and justify most of what the haters want. To give an idea of where you folks fit historically, you are the kind of conservatives who would have defended slavery against the abolitionists, defended segregation against the NAACP and Martin Luther King, defended a husband’s claim to be “lord” over his wife against the early feminists, and defended the laws against homosexual sex that were overturned only recently. All these things were enormous evils and it was the work of radicals and liberals that got them overturned over the dead bodies of conservatives.
The same thing applies today. Because of people like you (William Bennett, Christina Hoff-Summers, etc.) the crude haters like JD and Thor are a stronger force in American society than they otherwise would be. In my opinion, bigotry rationalizers like yourself make American society a much worse place than it might be. That’s a significant responsibility on your shoulders.
Sorry Dan ,
Just the right amount of fluffy .
Your brush, it is too broad, Mr. Ric. I know for sure I never called anyone a bulldyke except for maybe Chuck Hagel and I’m pretty sure I pointed out that he was a very handsome bulldyke with steely blue bulldyke eyes.
– Owing, I would suppose, to My hyper-Neandralthalic personality, and secret fear of vagina’s in general, I personally heart the Mayors Secretary. Hot. I think ole MoJo would do her if only the damn pesky pussy trio would just give him a vacation from trying so hard to overcome his vastly superior evilness. In the mean time, taking stock, we’d have to say that Junior prof. Ric, pussy emeritus, has garnered far more attention than even the most precocious 12 year old.
– Since all of us with working brain cells, a prounounced lack of anal-retentive paranoia, and the same for monsters that go bump under the bed at night, have had to put up with the blathering spew of these grey-matter challenged Marxist syncophants, (not so cleverly disguised as real human beings) for years now, it would really be a red letter day, a Kodak moment in the history of Man, if a SecProg ever had a cogent, or at least original, idea. I would immediately demand it be preserved in the National archieves.
– This amusement never ends.
Would it be more fair to say that you’re too afraid to debate Jeff and Dan, Ric, or that you simply feel yourself to be unqualified?
Or is it both? NTTAWWT.
Christina Hoff-Summers? No need to bring the Bangles into this.
Blast, Ric has called me out. Now I must remove the lawn jockey before he catches that too. Boy, these feminist studies professors are just too quick for me.
tw: Turkey itself – I need to stop writing comments since the turing words speak for me!
The irony doesn’t so much “drip” or “ooze” as “gush uncontrollably from all orifices”.
wait, wait, I think someone missed that other comment thread where it was mentioned that George Wallace was a Democrat. oh, the Phelps guy too. WHY DO YOU HATE THE GAY SOLDIERS PERFESSOR!?
I am curious. How does calling somebody a pussy make them a bigot?
“…That’s a significant responsibility on your shoulders…”
– Yes, well, its a tough onerus job, but somebody has to kick some sense into those repacious little SecProg minds Ric-Le-pussy. Otherwise we’d all end up living up to our balls in French students.
– Bon appitite’
See, there are 3 types of people in the world: Dicks, Pussys, and Assholes…
oh and let’s not forget these gems from Sen. Clinton and Sen. Biden.
By his standards, calling people weenie’s is bigoted as well. BIGOT!
Please, correct me if I am wrong, but didn’t he just, in broad strokes, lay out exactly the type of free speech for me, but not for thee kind of thinking that Maha “I am intolerant of intolerance” spews? He pigeon holes an entire group of people, lumps them in with people that we claim no affiliation with, and then condemns our views based on the views of the people we are not affiliated with. Nifty, that.
How are we objectively, or subjectively racist, Professor? How are we objectively, or subjectively sexist, Professor? How are we objectively, or subjectively, homophobic, Professor?
Hey Ric,
I’m neither a bigot nor a misogynist. You write you haven’t read Maha, you must not read Marcotte either because she talks about her genitals far too often for me. I don’t care about what color you are, what’s between (or not) your legs or any of the other labels so many on the left have to attach to people. If you don’t get the irony of “intolerant of intolerance” no one can help you. You’ve been offered a chance to debate your positions and turned it down. Pardon us for pointing out that lessens your credibility. Or, have I, too, misunderestimated.
oooooh, I think I get it now. Someone is just not content to rest on his laurels. Hold out for the Lifetime Acheivement Award!!!! I’m rooting for ya!
I see. I speak for them and they, I. I mean, we’re allied, right?
White racists, Ric? Am I a white racist? Are you addressing me, a white racist? Is Dan a bigot? Does Jeff hate women? Is Pablo a thoroughgoing homophobe?
All of us, Ric? How exactly do I then, being at the least a white racist, advance bigoted politics? And if none of us are as you imply, do we secretly wish to be?
Probably clever enough to be accountable, which means you’re just making this entry-level shit up then, no? Because you sure as hell don’t speak for me, even though you once did, you arrogant jackass, going so far as to imply my motive and my intent before marching off, self-satisfied. If, that is, I may have the courtesy of suggesting what it was you were all about at the time.
Meanwhile you, The Perfesser, evidently oblivious to the utter fallacy that is already your person, just added guilt by implied association with some seedy types who probably would fit your own, unique worldview about things that you probably wouldn’t care for (if they existed as much in meatspace as they do in your mind which also has no sense of the marvelous irony you just as vividly embody) but getting back to it, they and us are indeed conservatives anyway unless they just look like conservatives which, don’t you know, tends to require quite a bit of name-calling but not the kind progressives like The Perfesser — you — do because for some it’s okay but not so much for others.
Although I’m rather devoid of originality, The Perfesser, I didn’t actually write that to resemble Dan although I am of like hive-mind, what with my being a conservative and all. Which, as The Perfesser — you — would well know, being an expert. I write it because how you ever got to the level you pollute simply astounds me, what with that convoluted trainwreck of reason.
Just trying to get the hang of this complete bullshit you expect to stand here on its merits. See, I swear that my dishwasher thinks entire levels of consciousness beyond that.
Which is also to say that I’m not quite sure how to condense that one down so it fits those little Fallacies 101 cheat sheets or pamphlets, but there you have it. If you, The Perfesser, were somehow, on some antimatter planet, in charge of actually teaching folks, now all this sewage could be a real problem.
Maggie – That is perfectly acceptable, so long as they subscribe to The Narrative.
I just want to get this straight, Professor. Opposition to gay marriage is evil? Opposition to affirmative action is evil? Opposition to second wave feminism is evil? That is precisely the tactic used by the Mona’s of the world to simply avoid engaging, by placing their own positions beyond debate, and categorizing any opposition as evil. Well done. Good company you are keeping there.
Not to go and pick at nits, but most, if not all of the Civil Rights legislation was passed due to Republican support, as the Dems filibustered it. Keep on rewriting history to serve your needs though, it must be comforting. As a point of reference, which party does the former Grand Kleage of the KKK belong to? Bull Conner? Democrat. Wallace? Democrat. Your hands are not clean, Professor.
I AM A FORCE IN SOCIETY ! READ THESE WORDS AND WEAP ! Weap, my friends.
All of that bluster to essentially say, and I paraphrase … “No way am I going to outline my beliefs. For reference, see Castro, and move 5 paces to the Left. I will continue to assert that you are bigots, misogynists, homophobes, racists, sexists, etc … as I did within my first 3 comments on this site. Anything, and I mean anything, you say will simply be contorted to fit the conclusions I drew prior to posting here.”
Good day, weenie.
Ric is just acting out cause The Spice Girls are going to come back and upend his whole widdleschlong. An already-unsettled America will blink in incomprehension, then will turn en masse to Women’s Studies to help them understand. Will Ric meet the challenge or will he flail helplessly? Crunch time.
Maggie – Thanks a fucking lot. the beard was not the least bit surprising.
– Ric – Serious question. Was it really easier to trade in your ballsac for a few words of “sensitive”, and “enlighted male” from the FemiNazi’s?
– A bit of advice. Trade in your top siders and slacks for a pair of hard cut jeans, a tan stetson, and a good bottle of Bacardi’s purple lable, and the next time a pussy-whipping Feminist dork gives you a ration, tell her to go fuck herself, and the bulldyke she rode in on.
– Your self image will improve by orders of magnitude, and you might ntice your circle of friends shift to real people for a change. Take back your manhhod dude!
“What Goldstein does is both provide intellectual cover for bigots and advance a political agenda on behalf of homophobic bigotry and racism. ”
Come sit on my veranda and enjoy the cover of my inclusive umbrella all ye who comment here ! Where do you find the time Jeff?
That was beautiful, Dan. I do hope it becomes a regular feature. Please consider it.
like you’d ever ask her about it. ;D
BECAUSE OF THE PATRIARCHY!!!!
Maybe Ric could just join in… Judgey Spice? Zigazig ha!
…BECAUSE OF THE GUILT BY ASSOCIATION!!!
FELLOW TRAVELERS OF THE WORLD, UNITE!!!
Good point. And The Perfesser still comes in a remote second!
You’re a bigot. No I’m not. Yes you are. No I’m not. Yes you are…
Good stuff.
GO GO GO GO SUPER POWER!!!
YEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGHHHHHH!!!
Comment by me on 7/24 @ 9:53 pm #
You’re a bigot. No I’m not. Yes you are. No I’m not. Yes you are…
Good stuff.”
Effin’ racists .
Slam it to the left
If you’re having a good time
Shake it to the right
.. if you’re, um, like a thoroughgoing homophobic white racist, bigot
To put it bluntly, Professor, I think you’re deluding yourself. Neither side has the market cornered on peace, love and compassion; neither side has the market cornered on oppression, bigotry and hate.
Morehead, KY
95.65% of people are white, 1.48% are black, 1.15% are asian, 0.23% are native american, and 1.49% claim ‘Other’.
1.16% of the people in Morehead (40351), KY, claim hispanic ethnicity (meaning 98.84% are non-hispanic).
Quite the diverse little hamlet you have there, Professor. Hell, the commenters on this site alone are more diverse than your town.
Are we to assume that because you choose to cloister yourself in an area that is lilly white, in percentages far greater than the national averages, and has one of the highest workers compensation and disability ratios in the nation, that you choose to intentionally segregate yourself from brown people? Since I know you would say no to that, why is it that you are able to make your observations based on nothing but your opinion, while objective figures are not sufficient to make the same type of observations?
I’ll not be providing any intellectual cover any time soon, but is there something I can do on behalf of homophobic bigotry and racism?
It is just too much fun watching everyone go all native for the tourists.
(I’m getting all freaked out by these spam block words though. Last time was “oppression hurts” and this time it’s “wealthier Tories.”)
I’m so glad to see that y’all made today “Ric Caric Day†at Protein Wisdom. I didn’t know you guys cared so much (yadda-yadda-yadda…..)
Translation: you have no substantive response, just a further round of jejune name-calling. Semantic content: zero.
Why not save yourself the effort? For your next post, you could simply copy and paste the word “bigot” oh, maybe five or six hundred times. Your carpal tunnels will thank you, and the rest of us won’t have to wonder if there’s any actual signal buried in the logorrhetic torrent of meaningless noise.
Dan, that was a first-rate Mojo JoJo channeling.
Perfesser, I apppreciate knowing I can scratch Moorhead State off the list for my three sons.
Ooops…make that Morehead State.
“bigotâ€Â“bigotâ€Â“sexistâ€Â“bigotâ€Â“bigotâ€Â“bigotâ€Â“bigot“big“bigotâ€Âotâ€Ââ€Â“bigotâ€Â“bigotâ€Â“bigotâ€Â“bigotâ€Â“homophobeâ€Â“bigotâ€Â“bigot—really big bigot”“misogynistâ€Â“bigotâ€Â“bigot—racist”“bigotâ€Â“bigotâ€Â“bigotâ€Â“bigotâ€Â“bigotâ€Â“bigotâ€Â“bigotâ€Â“bigotâ€Â
BTW, did anyone else catch the story about Ward Churchill getting canned?
TW: bush resistance…this thing is eerie.
Oh, and not to engage Caric — which would be pointess, given that he has the intellectual depth of a small soap dish — but for anyone with an open mind, I note that of the various views he is smearing people with here, let the record show that — contra Caric — Jeff supported the Supreme Court decision striking down anti-sodomy laws. And it’s the Left that more broadly supports non-remedial racial discrimination and stopped caring about the oppression of women in those parts of the world where women are treated as chattel under sharia law. That’s an over-generalization of course. But I’m admitting it, unlike Caric, who assesses guilt by association in a manner worthy of Tailgunner Joe McCarthy.
Wait. Wait. Wait….
I’m not a professor of semiotics, or even semantics, so lemme get this straight: By discussing and debating issues of strong national security, original meaning and liberty we give cover to the racists homophobes and wife-beaters?
Nut the leftists openly advocating surrender, capitulation and sedition don’t give ‘give cover’ to the Jihadis, anti-americans and Venezuelan National Socialists?
Is that right?–I mean “correct”?
and to set the record straight–I am not a homophobe. I just don’t like poo….
Michael Hardwick was kinda hot before he got the slims and died and all.
Hahaha–I meant “But the leftists….” ‘Nut’ works just as well. Don’t miss the part about the poo.
1914 synonymous More like 1941, you filthy man-perfecting, though police leftists.
“Moorhead State” and “Morehead State” are both bigoted terms which should be avoided. “Moorhead” represents a concealed desire for the brutal decapitation of people of color, while “Morehead”, while sex-positive on the surface, is implicitly framed in a habitus of heteronormativity, and is thus, de facto, homophobic. “Morehead” is also insensitive to differently-abled People with Microcephaly.
So…if I’ve got the gist of this, he won’t engage JG on the whys of bigotry, racial discrimination, and misogyny because we are bigots, racists, and misogynists.
And we are allied with evil or are evil or are at the very least Chaotic Neutral Drow (wait, they were a matriarchy…Salvatore you intolerant bastard!).
Thus, he will engage solely with people who weren’t bigots, racists, and misogynists and who are not “allied” to anything on the Right (since they would be allied with evil) or with Right-wingers, conservatives, “neo-cons”, etc.
Naturally…
In other words, jkrank, he’s omnisciently intolerant.
– In view of this profligate “guilt by association” tendency that SecProgs seem to be unable to control whenever challenged for their screwball ideas, maybe it would be easier to identify them as “Hominemites”. Or would that be too obvious, and not nuanced enough.
“…and to set the record straight–I am not a homophobe. I just don’t like poo…
– So then, stretching the manic approbium metaphor thinner than a pair of Brittany’s panties, that would nake you a what? POOIST!
– And so as the Sun sinks slowly in the West, and Ric’s brave Secularist boat sinks beneath the waves of collectivist bullshit, we hear the cry of the diversified natives…”Hey sport….I love diversity just as much as the next guy….but the next time you touch my ass I’m going to skewer your balls”….
I just increased the good Professor’s traffic by 25%, and noted that he put up a post where he has the audacity to claim that Jeff and Dan offered no substance in their responses. Good gawd. He is worse than a reporter.
jkrank – Yes, that about sums it up, but I would add one little addendum to that. The Professor gets to determine, unilaterally and subjectively, how those terms are defined, and to whom, and when, they apply.
Pussy.
CraigC – be nice ! ;-)
SEXIST!BIGOT!RACIST!
My shoulders hurt. Must rest. Just for a minute.
Since I can turn my dishwasher on and off via my cell phone, I am quite certain that my dishwasher thinks entire levels of consciousness beyond that of the esteemed Professor. Unfortunately, the good Professor’s thinking, or lack thereof, cannot be turned on and off by my cell phone. I am going to have to get my contractor back out here and see if she can fix that.
One of my teammates from my high school basketball went to Morehead on a basketball scholarship. I dropped him an email to see if he was ever fortunate enough to have taken the Professor’s class.
I am quite certain that Prof. Caric would flunk me, on principle, were I to sign up for his class.
TNR still has a chance to admit they published a fraud before Caric-ature substantively addresses the literally hundreds of refutations of his simplistic fallacious thinking (with sincere apologies to actual thinking).
Ha! Funny because I have a pair of Power Puff Girl panties.
No way, MayBee! I, um, have a Buttercup umbrella. Kinda cool cause it has these extra bits for her pointy hair.
Ric, buddy, I’m watching this play out and I gotta tell you.. I’m embarrassed for you. A few words of advice.. just between us guys.. MAN UP BITCH. Reach down between your legs, grab your sack and remind yourself you’re a man. Once you’ve done that then get up off your knees and pick up the gauntlet that Jeff’s thrown down.. like a man. I’d like to read an honest debate of the issues Jeff’s listed… Both sides of the issues intelligently presented.. with a minimum of name calling and hyperbole.. You may get your ass kicked but at least you’ll have the self respect that comes with putting up your best fight and going down swinging… As most guys know from experience, the asskicking hurts less than the shame of backing away from a challenge like a… like a (cant think of a better word..) ..like a PUSSY.
tw: defects youthful
Shorter Ric Caric: “The most bemused person wins the argument, right?”
Nice to see that he continues to mistake the Republicans for the party of racism though. No grasp of ANYTHING, that man.
Oh, maggie! How cute would we be together?
MayBee, we would be a force of cute such that the world has never seen and all would melt into puddles before us. or not, I’m getting kinda old for cute. :(
Please don’t tell me we’ve aged past cute and are heading toward eccentric. I really wanted a puddle-melt.
And Dan Collins, you are hilarious.
Word is Michael Vick had two dogs he named after Professor Caric. One of the two was mauled in the heat of debate concerning queer theory explication within Victorian constructs. The other graduated with honors from boarding school before being put down by the Humane Society. Neither doggie shared the moral rectitude of their owner, nor lived up to the origin of their names, but both earned B’s in Composition at Morehead State as undergraduates.
Fight, Fight, Fight for Morehead.
Fight on, varsity.
Ever onward marching
To our victory.
We’re gonna Fight, Fight, Fight for Morehead.
Colors gold and blue.
Our hopes on you we’re pinning,
whether losing or winning.
Go, you Eagles and fight, fight, fight
“Maybe you guys don’t get it, but I tend to think that you’re engaged in a fundamentally dishonest operation. But let me spell it out. As a right-wing blog, you are allied with other people on the American right. These include the religious right, the white racists, the thoroughgoing homophobes, the woman-haters, the anti-Muslim bigots, and the immigration bigots. You’re part of the same political party as the bigots, you all think of yourselves as part of the conservative movement, and you advance the same political agenda as the bigots. That’s one of the reasons why I’ve yet to see any sign of disgust at these kinds of bigotries at Protein Wisdom. You folks are very clever and you’re smart enough to know who your friends and allies are.”
Yor’re right, Jeff, the clown doesn’t have a fucking Clueâ„¢.
thup….thup….thup….thup….thup…
there seems to be a huge backup in front of the Carpal Tunnel this morning, you may want to take an alternate route…
thup….thup….thup…. thup……….
The “challenge†Goldstein and Collins offered was for me to write five or six books.
Yeah, like anyone would read that without a gun to their head. But in reality, no one asked you to write a book, let alone five. You were asked to outline and defend your positions, and again you’ve completely dodged the challenge in favor of ad hominem. Which is exactly what I said you’d do.
So, either I’m psychic or you’re lame, predicable and tiresome.
tw: same stipulated
Might as well be, eh?
Just a rhetorical observation: I find it–asymmetrical that Ric thinks I am importing extraneous subjects by referencing his scholarship, whereas I am providing intellectual cover for bigots and other horrible people of all stripes, even if they do not share my views. It’s amazing how that works. As far as the idea of having to write 5 or 6 books goes, it is generally possible to enunciate the important points of an argument in conspectus fashion within a couple of paragraphs. If the argument cannot be concentrated that way, one is probably presenting something that’s half-baked and needs further ripening, or fundamentally incoherent, or that should require more than one tome for its expression.
The internet does lend itself to something a bit more socratic and less magisterial. Otherwise, I have no idea what it is Ric thinks he’s doing on the nets, besides venting.
Fiddle-dee-dee.
Apparently, the Perfessor missed this. I am truly disgusted by the bigotry detailed there.
Comment by MayBee on 7/24 @ 11:43 pm #
Ha! Funny because I have a pair of Power Puff Girl panties.
I find that…distracting. :)
Whined Mr. Caric,
Oh horsehocky. Do you normally have this much trouble with the English language or are you just afraid to meet even the smallest part of the challenge.
Here. Let me put it in a couple small and simple sentence for you: Pick an issue. Debate Jeff or Dan on that issue. Use facts. Keep the ad hominem attacks to one every half-hour.
Does that make it easier for you to understand?
“Comment by jamrat on 7/24 @ 10:11 pm #
I’ll not be providing any intellectual cover any time soon, but is there something I can do on behalf of homophobic bigotry and racism?”
Yeah, become a Democrat.
TW: hotel pungent, probably because of all the conservatives staying there, right, Perfessor?
If guilt by association makes all republicans/conservatives bigots, does association with the democratic/liberal party make all liberals islamofacists.
After all, if we’re choosing sides, I have little doubt that the democratic agenda is a far better fit for the islamofacists (until they take over of course) then that of the satan Bush and his minions. So does that make all democrats the enemy of america?
See what I did there ?
One of the things I’ve been struck by recently is how, well, bigoted many on the left really are. Now, they’ll never cop to that, or they’ll couch it in terms of “intolerant of intolerance”, but their unwillingness to address competing viewpoints in any way but declaring them “evil”, “ignorant”, etc. leads me to think they’re not positions they’ve arrived at intellectually, but rather emotionally.
Back in college I took part in on-line arguments much like what happens in comments. They were often rancorous and fiery. HOWEVER, there were quite a few people who I disagreed with that well, we were able to “agree to disagree” because we argued back to our base principles and realized how our different starting points — which weren’t that far off from one another — led us to different conclusions.
I believe in the primacy of the individual over the group, balanced against the need for the continuance of a society that, while imperfect, has done a damned good job at providing liberty, fulfillment, and comfort for its members. I believe in the primacy of reason, but understand that the power of emotion must be taken into account, both in my own and the behavior of others.
To me, the worst crime imaginable is taking from someone control over their own life — whether that’s a matter of slavery, rape, murder, or, to a much, much lesser degree, confiscating the results of their labor with excessive taxes.
I’m not religious, but have no problem with those who are, so long as they do not expect me to live by the tenets of their faith. That counts as much for the “moral majority” types as for the jihadis; the difference is the moral majority types didn’t murder 3,000 of my countrymen. That tends to make me take the jihadis as a more serious, and pressing, threat.
There. A statement of basic principles. It’s not complete, but it’s a good start. Now, Caric, what are your basic principles?
To borrow from a leftist tactic… Shorter Caric:
“I throw all you icky people who disagree with me in with all these people I also don’t like and declare you to be JUST LIKE THEM!!!”
“Now, Caric, what are your basic principles?”
“My imagination is much more vivid than reality”
-Herr Doktor Professor
To give an idea of where you folks fit historically, you are the kind of conservatives who would have defended slavery against the abolitionists, defended segregation against the NAACP and Martin Luther King, defended a husband’s claim to be “lord†over his wife against the early feminists, and defended the laws against homosexual sex that were overturned only recently.
The sad thing is that I bet this works with many of his students.
Major John: I find that…distracting. :)
Yeah, me too.
Like her or not, I’ve always wondered what the Ann Coulter haters looked like. You know, the professors that openly slam her in class, yet cower in the shadows, when she speaks at their University.
Actually, I think the perfesser has done a signal service.
He has embodied a tendency I’ve noticed among the Left, but done so in as clear a manner as possible.
Whenever one criticizes the Right, it is permissible, not to mention useful, to lump them together. Thus, Pat Buchanan, David Duke, Duncan Hunter, Zell Miller, Ronald Reagan, Barry Goldwater, are all of a piece. Eventually, you wind up being identified w/ Hitler and Mussolini.
However the same does not apply to the Left. There is no reason to relate Farrakhan, Al Sharpton, the Rosenbergs, and Ward Churchill to any person on the Left. Hence, the sins of the Left, say, of certain unhinged academics, is no reason to question the intentions and motives, never mind purity and virtue, of any other part of the Left. International ANSWER’s sponsorship of a march is no reason to question the motives nor consequences of said march.
Or, to phrase it slightly differently, the Left is comprised of individuals, none of whom speaks or represents any other, but the Right is a monolith, even if only by association. Group-think for thee, but it does not apply to me.
Couple that with a dollop of self-righteousness and serve to the public.
I’m going back to my original theory as to why such vitriol exists toward Jeff on the Academic Left: Jeff can sling the cant far better than they can, and he holds positions that are contrary to their tangled mass of narrative. The Academic Left cannot have that. It will not do.
“necessary analyzes” – you got that right. Sadly, “analysis” is now passe.
I find Dan’s comment on 84 to be the height of hubris and irony. A PW Poster lecturing another person on the gift of writing succinctly? Dear Lord, maybe Paris Hilton can now denounce Lindsay Lohan for poor driving choices.
timb:
Thanks for taking time off from sticking your nose up Caric’s butt and stopping by here to say … well … absolutely nothing of importance or anything to do with the issues being debated at length.
I think that perfesser nellie-waffle is rubbing off on you…
What’s this “Mojo Jojo” shit?
– No more attention for the invagling clamour of the Left, until they agree to jetison childish name calling, and return to honest debate. Think about the poor use of time, and its cost to the advancement of sociatal issues, every time some mentally stressed out SecProg manages to hijack a perfectly good thread. Time structured waste folks. The whole point is to scrammble the narrative eggs, so all debate is avoided.
– In the words of Patrick Henry – “Screw the French”….
Don’t worry, he’ll be back telling his students this fall (God help them) about his vast exploits speaking truth to power on the Intarwebs. Anyone who dares to disagree with him is in danger of a lower grade. Isn’t Academia great?
That’s because you completely misunderstand it, Timmah! Or, perhaps you’re intentionally misrepresenting dan’s position, which would be a total shocker.
Saying that something can be done is not that same as saying that it must always be done.
“I find Dan’s comment on 84 to be the height of hubris and irony.”
That must be your problem timmy, you need to write 5 or 6 books to properly express yourself. Your massive intellect just can’t be contained in simple little blog posts. We will likely fall on our knees and bow to your wisdom once we read them, you should begin work on that at once. Anything less than an encyclopedia will break all our hearts.
If I hadn’t seen a video of the Professor I’d think he was an Alinskybot, or some sort of artificial-abstrusion engine. Now I know he’s human — a human with a punchline for a career.
Funny how the nuance crowd still manages to deploy the odd sweeping generalization now and again, isn’t it? Ever done a PW site search on “Byrd”?
It’s almost interesting that the timmahweasel would pass right by, say, comment 75 without so much as a whisper. I’ve been asking for that for as long as I can remember.
You know that part where Rush (yes, Rush) says the Left can’t win the war of ideas? Ever? Not even once? Well, sure, the left is by nature a parasite. But the part I like is the tongue in cheek “with half my brain tied behind my back.”
Not as a challenge to raw intelligence, timmahweasel, but for the sheer anti-Perfesser irony. Shove that up your hubris.
To wit, Tim, you probably should have stopped after the question mark.
TW: necessary gasoline. Then again, Turing disagrees with me.
You will love Glenn Greenwald.
There are matters that can be succinctly expressed, and there are those that deserve more elucidation. Expressing disagreement without name-calling doesn’t require massive tomes; it requires a desire to be intellectually honest and to communicate.
That Jeff and the contributors sometimes write long articles doesn’t make it hypocritical to state that “it is generally possible to enunciate the important points of an argument in conspectus fashion within a couple of paragraphs.”
tw: chin dharmo.
If Caric wants to know why this is ‘Ric Caric’ day – it’s called public humiliation. Caric is a fool, and as many as can read will know.
I have sympathy, but I sense desert.
I can be quite succinct when I wish to be. Check out some of my nano fictions.
Hell, why not do one now? I’ll turn it into a post just for fun:
“The Day that Timmy Realized He’d Been Backing the Wrong Horse”: a protein wisdom nanofiction
“Re-education camp? B-but — I’m on your side!”
Yea, Rob. God forbid that we should desire a few rhetorical flourishes and strange but compelling metaphors in a serious tome about racial issues.
This coming from an academic who wrote an entire sneer at conservatives as “weenie boys” and then attempted to redefine it as puffery by saying that he was joking. quite the talent he has; the ability to joke without a shred of humor.
Still, timb has nothing to say about perfessor nellie-waffle’s incoherant and intolerant rant above.
– Watching the mental masterbation of the Left Jeff, De-education might be more apropos.
In my family law post I told folks I wished to avoid the usual labels, like Socialism, to describe its practice. The Perfesser corrected me and told us all I was really rallying The Perfesser’s Monolithic Right with buzz words. Like Socialism.
Then I said — in this thread, no less — I wished there was a shorter label for The Perfesser’s massive fallacy. There isn’t, but maybe an anacronym like FDFGHIZUYBJRBFGDKLGOICMVIWEHFEJKRNPDINQJHQMKQMDXPPGPRTBUIDSBHCF.
Now timmahweasel takes issue with verbosity.
Thanks for playing, timmahweasel. I figure you’ll never win a debate you can’t man-up for. But I know you’ll never win one you can’t even find the light switch for.
Sheesh. Anyone want to tell him it wasn’t “Ric Caric Day,” it was “Silly Buffoon Day” and he was merely the guest star for this episode?
ddDan,
How does one get in on the weilding?
JD, this point, as I have demonstrated time and time again, is bull and shows some sort of reliance on talk radio and lack of reading.
“Comment by JD on 7/24 @ 9:38 pm #
Not to go and pick at nits, but most, if not all of the Civil Rights legislation was passed due to Republican support, as the Dems filibustered it. Keep on rewriting history to serve your needs though, it must be comforting. As a point of reference, which party does the former Grand Kleage of the KKK belong to? Bull Conner? Democrat. Wallace? Democrat. Your hands are not clean, Professor.”
Now, I’m going to demolish this one more time, but it will involve clicking on links (which you have admitted you will not do). So, I hope you’re up for the education.
Unlike the good professor, I know and respect many intelligent conservatives and Republicans. What you did JD in your diatribe is conflate the Professor’s attack. The Professor was railing against conservatives, not Republicans. There was a time in this country (pre-1980’s) when conservatives could be Democrats and Republicans could be liberal. The name for the group of very powerful, very Southern, very conservative Democrats who opposed Civil Rights, Gay Rights, Women’s Rights and a host of other progressive policies was the Boll Weevils (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boll_weevil_%28politics%29). They were an essential and powerful part of (get this name) the Conservative Coalition (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_coalition). Members of the Coalition were Dems or Rep’s until the 80’s and 90’s when the Democrats became “too leftist” and brilliant legislators like Jesse Helms, Strom Thurmond, and Richard Shelby switched parties to become Conservative Republicans.
There are fascinating studies on the “Solid South” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid_South), which detail the defection of conservative voters who called themselves Democrats to the Republican Party, because of the so-called Southern strategy. Here’s a link from Ken Mehlman, where he apologizes for using the Southern strategy (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/13/AR2005071302342.html).
So, conservatives back in the day could be either Democrats or Republicans. That has largely changed. Liberals go to one party and conservatives seek the other. It is a strange (and rare) happening in American politics, where the parties are actually ideological, instead of pragmatic.
Nonetheless, in the professor’s unfortunate labeling of Dan and Jeff as closet racists, he is correct that the conservative movement of yesteryear did oppose Civil Rights and Gay Rights. Certainly, conservatives of today are interested in opposing gay rights. Certainly, the broader movement has a noted disinterest (to be charitable) toward racial issues (witness the emasculation of the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division.).
With that said, I would not accuse all conservatives of the sins of many conservatives, much like I would not want to be branded as agreeing with all liberals (many of whom are way too shrill and unrealistic with regard to foreign policy and ecological regulations). The Professor’s broad brush is too much for me (though I will concede there are bigots on this comment forum, especially with regard to Hispanic immigration and Muslim culture; but that is a small minority of posters.).
What entertains me is that I criticized both the professor’s post and JD’s post, but I can expect a litany of parsing to come, focusing on “hey, I support blah, blah.” My post is not about individual conservatives of today; it’s about the broad sweep of a movement that is rooted in the American South and Midwest. More learned conservatism came into fashion with the rise of Buckley and Goldwater, and this is a well-meaning, intellectually defensible (in my opinion, still wrong) conservatism based on limited government at home and anti-communism abroad. The fact that it made peace with the conservative South does not essentially make these more serious folks a bunch of racist thugs. With that said, the history of movements such as these should be known and not obscured. Ask Trent Lott how important and relevant that history is the next time he comes to your birthday party and congratulates someone for being a Dixiecrat.
I hope you clicked on any one the links, JD. Maybe someday I can explain how the Republican Party in your home state was once synonymous with the actual KKK (the 1920’s). Doesn’t mean Mitch Daniels is a racist, but it sure should give one pause before he/she shouts “my man Mitch” as he/she drives through Hamilton County toward downtown.
timmah,
The penultimate psalm inspects yonder boiling student and my trapazoid sanctified the visibly ephemeral personage. The exactly disdainful vision ingenuously drained the symbolically external doctor.
Yes or no, timmah? Yes or No?
Timmah,
As you enjoy the succinct, I’d point out that you just called Goldwater well-meaning and intellectually defensible, when he opposed the 1964 Act and is thus the epitome of what the prof. despises. Good luck with that re-education camp.
Slavery was a specifically an institution of the Democratic Party.
Eugene “Bull” O’Connor (the poster boy of American racism) was a Democrat.
The poll tax was a Democratic institution.
Jim Crow laws were instituted by Democrats
Democrat Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black was a KKK member.
It was Democrats like Lester Maddox, Orval Faubus and George Wallace — governors of Georgia, Arkansas and Alabama — “who blocked the schoolhouse doors,
While Governor of South Carolina, Democrat Sen. Ernest Hollings oversaw the raising of the Confederate flag over the Statehouse on April 11, 1961, the anniversary of the firing on Fort Sumter.
The Democrats also filibustered 83 days against the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Albert Gore Sr and former Robert Byrd were two of the Democrats who opposed the bill.
Ex-Klansman Sen. Byrd filibustered for more than 14 hours and 13 minutes straight.
William Fulbright voted against both the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1965 Voting Rights Act. He did so because he believed in separating the races  in schools and other public places. He was a segregationist, heart and soul.
In 1985, as governor, Bill Clinton, the First Black President, signed a law making the birthdates of Martin Luther King Jr. and Robert E. Lee state holidays on the same day.
Which is the party of racists?
“it wasn’t the GOP that opposed the Emancipation Proclamation. Nor was it the GOP that opposed the Thirteenth Amendment prohibiting slavery, the Fourteenth Amendment guaranteeing equal protection, or the Fifteenth Amendment guaranteeing voting rights. (In fact, Republicans voted for the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1965 Voting Rights Act in greater percentages than did Democrats.)
Moreover, it wasn’t the Republican party that opposed Teddy Roosevelt’s anti-lynching legislation or that filibustered or otherwise opposed more than a dozen other anti-lynching provisions during the 20th century.
Republicans didn’t institutionalize Jim Crow, implement school segregation, or establish poll taxes and literacy tests to keep non-whites from voting. Bull Connor, George Wallace, Lester Maddox, and Orval Faubus weren’t Republicans.
It wasn’t a Republican who ordered the internment of Japanese-American citizens (or Italians or Germans) during World War II. Nor were Republicans behind the Chinese exclusion acts or licensing requirements that discriminated against non-white businesses and tradesmen.”
-Peter Kirsanow
Which is the party of racists, again?
How come I believe our definitions of bigotry are a tad different. Show us ONE instance, from here, of bigotry towards the Muslim culture. Just one will do. Thanks. Here’s a hint: Detesting assholes who want to kill or subjugate for their god is NOT bigotry.
tw: Spectral Companion
Would that be our own commenter, “the Ghost of Abu Zarquari”
The Klan, in general, was the militant wing of the Democrat Party. It was used to suppress the black vote and to overturn election results the Democrats didn’t like.
I have to ask, timmah, if you’re going to claim that modern conservatives are to be tarred by association with a 1920’s-era group that declared itself the “Conservative Coalition”, if the same can be done with modern “progressives” and the positions of early 20th-century “progressives”?
And just to pile on:
The abolitionist movement was made up of what passed for “radicals” and “leftists” in those days.
However…
The primary force for the abolition of slavery within that movement were white fundamentalist evangelical Christians, especially clergy.
I just wanted to point out that Theocratic Christofascists occasionally do some good.
Wow. This site has devolved into a pathetic cry for attention. Well done. Too bad nobody is watching but the regulars. And me, I guess.
I guess.
Yea, you would, wouldn’t you?
There! Fixed that for you and thanks for responding!
Aren’t you scared of the needy pangs arising at an inappropriate time when you have to drop a duece? Like a really huge one, I mean.
Heet, the human enema, has now stopped by to grace us with his wit. All of it.
– Caric pens a vessal of idiotarian garbage. Reacts to reasoned challenges with hyperbole, and rancor toward his protangonists, drops a few dimes of hominem, declares himself superior, and exits stage left.
– Marxism in action.
– When the hell will the Left ever understand that sedition, and narative backflips never works in an open society. Apparently, not in our lifetimes.
– Equally apparent, is when you’re in the minority, losing hand or not, you press on, because it’s the only game in town thata “different”.
– “Losers”, on a fools errand.
I have been following the prof’s antics for a short while. I was wondering if he would ever attempt to directly address any of the assertions he has made about the posters and commenters here. I think, with the screed he blessed us with above, we can be safe in the assumption that he will not.
I am neither surprised nor disappointed. The only surprise would have occurred had he actually risen to the challenge, rather than dismissing this site as a cover for bigotry. He has apparently not read much here, or has read his own interpretation of everything, thus circumventing one of the core points discussed here, intentionalism. More likely, he had already made his mind up before even visiting this site for the first time, and runs everything said here through his internal template, which gives him the results he expects.
Well, sure heet, it looks like crap — it always does.
But did you have a point or shall your lifeless intellectual carcass just as surely be tossed onto the same heap as The Perfesser and timmah?
As to timmahweasel, speaking of pointlessness, I’m going to need a bit more clarification on your rules of engagement: The Perfesser’s brush is too broad but your broad brush is just right. How’s that work?
Cause all I see is more of the fallacy of guilt by historical political context depending on which ox needs goring but just enough would be just enough except if it were to go overboard by just your perspective it’d be too much which tends to make The Perfesser’s overboard not your’s overboard in terms of historical context of which neither really are comprehensive enough to begin to make the point you’re trying to make which is that all Republicans aren’t bigoted racist vagina-fearing misogynist homophobes from Red States like The Perfesser seems to be insisting they are in order not to engage them except if you say they’re bigoted vagina-fearing racist misogynist homophobes from Red States which isn’t overboard at all even though it’s an arguably too-narrow a view to make your point which you can’t make anyway because they’re all still potentially (and depending on the speaker and the day of the week) bigoted vagina-fearing racist misogynist homophobes from Red States about your variable standards of debate none of which deal with the principle of the thing because that’s not the point, the narrative is.
Actually, cranky-d, it wouldn’t matter how much perfesser nellie-waffle reads this site.
What’s clear from that slavering screed above is that his particular mindset is set in the concrete of groupthink narrative. Individuals are of no concern for not only are we conservatives, a group utterly invested in racism, sexism, homophobia, blah, blah, but also we are worse than than the average redneck bigot by the very nature of our intellectualizing said intolerant hivespeak.
You and I are part of the collective thus any attempt at nuance or critical thinking or reasoned discussion is trumped by our cancer like existance.
Bah! If I were some kind of virus (instead of a cancer) I would infect the thought cop that is the nellie-waffle. Yes I would.something really incon venient, like a rash in a certain spot…
“Touchy-feely, Truthiness to power” – the opium of the Neo-Left” – Karl Marx – 1917
TW: “unbiased rath” (Or equal opportunity self-serving crap – whichever you prefer.)
There were too many comments for me to read them all. My response to Goldstein is at https://proteinwisdom.com/?p=9499#comment-217725 toward the bottom of the “Will the Real Liberal Stand Up?
I forgot. I don’t read PW on a daily basis. If Goldstein or Collins posts a reply, let me know at my own blog and that will be sent to my e-mail.
I’ve been struggling through another of Hollywood’s politically expedient propaganda devices these last few evenings. This sad half-dead haunch of revisionist fantasy is called Sweet Land and tidily bundles up all that’s wrong with Caucasian European Christian patriarchal immigrant working America, in this case (and presumably as a notice to all to beware who may have whelped you) of post-WWI vintage.
Set mostly in early 20th century Minnesotan farm country or something, it’s got the racist white preacher to whom dancing is anti-biblical, the devilish, grinning capitalist businessman (who apparently sees everything as the opportunity to basically destroy his own markets) the oppressed German live-in girlfriend/mail-order bride and her wannabe voyeur, halting, emotionally-impacted Norwegian boyfriend and presumed future father to her children, the unfair mortgages and inevitable farm auctions and their breeding-like-rabbits dimwitted victims — let her keep the crib, says the businessman, she drops another one every year — the veritable evil of a burgeoning capitalist industrialization of farm life, the stereotypical and perpetually set-upon Socialist activist whose brilliant speeches are accompanied by various haulings-off by businessman’s bought-off police force, and — only halfway through this turgid and self-righteous mess — surely more phantoms of all that was wrong with America and our grandparents a hundred years ago; the heroinne’s ever-present Victrola standing as the sole shining metaphor for all that’s progressive in this hell of inescapable white male design.
Rent it just to howl at the transparency of it all. Because this superficial Left of ours is so set on it’s own entirely fantastical vision of reality that it even writes, screenplays, and shoots its cartoon worlds just to visualize, justify, and share them.
I know a little about white fundamentalist evangelical Christians and their clergy, at least from the 60’s through the 80’s when all the enlightened leftist theory was encircling them with the grossest of intolerance. They had no resemblance to Hollywood’s or the far Left’s imaginative contemporary interpretations and revisions, the actual ills and foibles that exist within the broader group over time notwithstanding. In my experience they had way too much reality facing them to ever behave as has been projected upon them of late.
But it’s not about that fact, is it? It’s about how shit looks, even if you have to invent it.
Comment by Ric Caric on 7/25 @ 10:37 am #
That’s it?
You, projecting your own sick hatreds and phobias onto conservatives?
What a twatwaffle.
JHoward:
Yeesh! Do you mind if I skip that one. I just finished howling at “Inherit the Wind” and the broad brush has left visible bruising.
One thing you should know; we Fundamentalist Evangelical Jesus Freak Fascists© actually hide in plain sight. We may be found drinking a beer in a bar or yelling at the ump at a baseball game or even *gasp* screaming at a rock concert or, *God forbid*, weilding a margaretta and a parrot head.
TO BETTER ASSESS YOUR SINS! BWAAAAA HAHAHAHAHA!
Except for today, and yesterday, and the three consecutive days before that…
They’re veritable cartoons, BJT. As bad as they are, I have to wonder if the Birchers are back and secretly living in Quonset huts packed with cameras and editing rooms someplace in south-central Utah.
One step from parody these boilermakers are. You can usually identify them by how many Sundance wreaths they sport. I highly suspect The Perfesser makes them required viewing, thereby reinforcing the notion of parody — one can almost hear the kids in the hall after class over at Morehead, completely wise to just how to get an A while repressing enormous urges to break out in peals of laughter.
Might even explain that Caricature Award, come to think of it.
Ric Said: As a right-wing blog, you are allied with other people on the American right. These include the religious right, the white racists, the thoroughgoing homophobes, the woman-haters, the anti-Muslim bigots, and the immigration bigots.
And thus the primary fallacy – identity politics. (As BJTexas identified, and probably others in this giant thread. Interesting, in fact, that the very problem is one Goldstein reasonably never shuts up about… and that Ric never understands.)
News Update, Ric: Nobody’s allied unless they make themselves allied. And simply “being ‘right wing'” by your analysis does not make them allies. It means you group them together and assert they must be allied because you so grouped them.
The idea that Goldstein is “allied with” woman-haters because he’s “right wing” is as stupid as the idea that Oliver Kamm is “allied with” anti-Americans because he’s a man of the left (no quotes, because he describes himself that way, openly).
If you need to be told that agreement on one or more points with another person or group doesn’t make you “allied” with them (especially when you have vehement disagreement with them on other points), I don’t know that anyone can help you.
JHoward;
A great if more subtle example of cartoon filmaking was “The Good Shepherd.”
There was a really good reason that it was billed as “fictionalized” account of the origins of the CIA. It was unrelentingly dark and drab. Everyone seemed to be speaking in urgent whispers, furtively glancing over their shoulders for eavesdroppers. Practically every charcter is tragically flawed, hunched over and weighed down by the enormous moral quandries of their work. I managed to make it through the whole thing on Pay per View and lamented wasting two hours of my life on what ended being a film noir cartoon.
But Hollywood is great at making cartoons of historical events, especially when they can pimp a point of view with “artistic license” that supports their preconceived notions of politics and government.
The CIA? Home to emotionally stunted, morally ambiguous elitists from Yale, which explains the Bay of Pigs.
It made my teeth hurt.
Ha. What a dirge that was, every scene conjured from DiNiro’s massive and nuanced intellect (ever seen him in an interview? Nearly monosyllabic. But terribly self-impressed.)
I really liked the hazing scenes. Whereas the Left births its progeny, blissfully smiling, in tiny third-world huts from pain-free mothers while soft rain falls and suns set majestically into the ocean from Contact, the Right hatches its, pasty and shriveled, in Matrix-like constructs and sends them to the brick enclaves in Brazil to learn how not to be human while being fitted with Coke-bottle spectacles. Then a short step to Yale, no doubt.
APPEARANCES, BABY! AND NUANCE!
Oh, and the final scene — where Damon, his life in tatters, gay son alienated, trophy marriage a sham, former token-black daughter-in-law thrown out of a plane over Africa, and deaf girlfriend forever gone, shuffles down the hallway to his eternal damnation — was priceless! I don’t believe I ever had my worldview shaken like that, BJT! GENIUS!
Where else but the hyper-real world of Hollywood are we treated to these blinding insights, where entire decades of life neatly stack up to confirm entire centuries of evil?! I ask you!
Bwaaa haha, how true! Very important that the long suffering pseudotart Jolie character become the moral center, the mirror that projects her derision and horror at the shallow, sallow blue blood Bond boys, lost in their silly college rituals and stealthy conferences whilst screwing up the world with their arrogant moral vacuum.
It was the heads of a coin for which the tails was “V for Vengeance.” At least that was billed as a cartoon.
(Second try: not sure where that URL came from. Something in the page is adding them and deleted my last post. Had to clear cache…)
– Its kind of amazing to watch the manner that the Left manufactures thier puesudo-world views, almost like a strawman planet, uninhabited, but in the likeness of their personal mental issues.
– If there is one humgry child, or one homeless orphan, or one abused puppy, anywhere on the face of the planet, its obviously the evil work of the Americon Right, with their dreams of world domination through economic imperialistic hedgemony.
– It must be a living bitch to maintain that level of hateful angst against your imagined enemies for an extended period of time. I would imagine by now, a lot of the fruitcake SecProgs are about worn out after going something like 0 and 58 against BushCo, for all these 8 long years in the AnyGate camnpaign. I personally can’t wait to watch the wheels come off the Plamehead scam. The Wilsons are watching the clock tick down to judgement day. Sudenly all you hear is *crickets*.
[…] domestic reads, Bush continues to confuse people about who we’re fighting in Iraq, On the Other Hand explores feminist blogging and Amanda Marcotte’s vagina (weird), the Takoma Park city council has unanimously approved a […]
Ultimate cartoon movie praised by critics?
American Beauty.
Damn near every line of that movie, let alone the “plot points” was predictable. It conformed so perfectly to what the self-declared intelligentsia believes it’s like a minor little gospel.
Ya, Rob, I’d agree with that.
It’s reached a point with me that I’m reluctant to go see historical or politically charged movies. JHoward’s concept of Sundance laurels works for me; if it’s featured by Sundance, I’m running away.
Two years ago was the motherlode of cartoon political/social movies. Brokeback, Syrianna (groan), Munich (dbl. groan), Good Night and Good Luck, and one of the “great” cartoon dramas of all time, Crash.
Great historical movies that tell the compelling story as opposed to preaching political “truths” are becoming extinct. The public agrees as none of the movies I listed above grossed as much domestic cash as … The Pacifier!
Preachy is not often entertaining.
Since the only substantive comment is from the N O’Brain, let me SUCCINCTLY sum up the post for him since he did not it and preferred to cut and paste a bunch of bullshit in attempt to obscure the facts: Democrats were not always liberals. Republicans were not always conservatives. The Professor was attacking CONSERVATIVES, not Democrats.
Conveniently, N, had you read any of the links I posted, you would note that Masters Helms and Thurmond referred to themselves as conservatives (as did LBJ in the ’50’s). Conservatives, those guilty of the sins you are so concerned with when you do your stupid posts regarding Democratic party history WERE Democrats. They have always been conservative. They are not Democrats now (ask David Duke).
Jesus, it’s a simple, documented point, yet you repeat the same bullshit about Bull Connor being a Dem. Yes, a CONSERVATIVE Democrat. http://www.lafayettepublicpolicy.com/2index.html
As for the comment regarding Senator Goldwater: “Goldwater supported the Arizona NAACP and was involved in desegregating the Arizona National Guard. Nationally, he supported the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1960 and the constitutional amendment banning the poll tax. However, he opposed the much more comprehensive Civil Rights Act of 1964; he argued that, among other things, it unconstitutionally extended the federal government’s commerce power to private citizens in its drive to “legislate morality” and restrict the rights of employers. Since conservative Southern Democrats were the main opponents to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and previous civil rights legislation, Goldwater’s opposition to the 1964 Act, in which he was joined by only four other non-Southern Republican senators, strongly boosted Goldwater’s standing among white Southerners who opposed such federal legislation.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldwater
Now, you kids run off and play at being offended by the outsider.
As for you N. O’Brain, does it ever hurt being this wrong ALL the time? All you had to do was look at the post, as it’s in simple prose: “What you did JD in your diatribe is conflate the Professor’s attack. The Professor was railing against conservatives, not Republicans.”
As for the Indiana KKK, unlike Southern states, Indiana has been Republican since the Civil War, thus our version was Republican. Most other state versions were Democratic. Point being, AGAIN, the folks opposed to change with regard to race called themselves conservatives. Go ask Strom Thurmond.
Robert Byrd is still quite the Democrat, timmah. Fred Phelps too.
Shorter timmahweasel: Why debate points and principles when there’s entire identities to impute?
Actually, timmah, naturally I understand that definitions are important and that they can indeed arise from profiles and personalities. Problem is that those personalities are still and always at least a generation away from the values, ways, and means they imposed and were subjected to.
I mean, when in doubt, loudly call ’em CONSERVATIVE Democrats with which to beat their memories about the head and shoulders. Or LIBERAL Republicans with which to demonstrate what great guys they were, with these, the insights on principle gained by historical context.
Which naturally takes us back to the definition of conservative, which as you perpetually use it to leverage your non-points, is only ever defined by the players, and that after the fact. As with The Perfesser, why deal with the substance when you have these handy diversions lying around.
This latest professorial wreckage on The Shoals of Protein Wisdom has me no longer considering the mental disorder of Leftism. Now I’m trying to catch a glimpse of just what kind of perspective can be so perpetually and so irretrievably lost. What’s it like in there, where absolutely everything is meandering around like so much filthy, conditional, opportunistic flotsam in search of a hole in the bilge to finally fall through?
Seriously, isn’t that uncomfortable? And entire universe made of nothing more than effluvium onto which to crawl in order not to drown in it.
American Beauty was funny as hell, if you think of it more as a live-action Simpsons than a workable metaphor for suburbia.
By the way, Timmah, there’s at least two obvious points in my comment that actually make yours. I Just wonder if you care to complete the thought…
I sort’a liked that movie. The daughter had some big, perky boomers, huh.
Mighty thor:
No one can say that you’re a complicated guy, can they? :-)
You know what they say, BJ: if all you have is a spear and magic helmet…I mean, a large magical warhammer, all the world looks like little pointy heads to be squished.
timb:
Can you state with absolute certainty that those CONSERVATIVE democrats believed in lower taxes, limited government, business friendly policies, strong defense and individual liberties? It’s awfully convenient for you to support Caric’s broad brush by broad brushing all conservatives on the basis that all Southern Democrats were also CONSERVATIVES!
Methinks that you’ve applied some very iffy scholarship and if you were to dig a little deeper, what you may find is that some or most of those individuals held populist, progressive ideals, supported welfare and social security and tax hikes on the rich and capital gains, etc.
The premise you are trying to trot out that racism is primarily a “conservative” affectation is a long way from the proof you claim and, in fact, is deeply flawed.
Not as flawed as professor nellie-waffle’s collectivization of all PW commentators under the banner of identity politics, which, I guess, is something in your favor.
Not much, though.
Comment by BJTexs on 7/25 @ 2:32 pm #
Mighty thor:
No one can say that you’re a complicated guy, can they? :-)
I’m not complicated, not a big movie buff, but I like tits.
There were too many comments for me to read them all.
Oh, please. This comment thread is only about 13,000 words.
How the hell do you grade papers if you read that slow? Maybe you simply skim them and keep a tally of the number of PC buzzwords?
‘fess up: you didn’t actually read all that pap from Foucault and Derrida back in grad school, did you? You just bullshitted your way through the seminars.
Fortunately for you, so did everyone else.
SBP: He probably uses the academic staircase: The papers that fall the farthest get ‘A’s.
Yes, and people in favor of eugenics referred to themselves as “progressive”. Shall both sides play that game?
Rob: Owwwwwww!
I read it. And understood it. Much to the chagrin of my professors, I should add.
“We’ll just have to agree to disagree” was how many theory seminar discussions ended.
Hmm. Might want to tell him that. Because he says things like “You’re part of the same political party as the bigots” — which tends to confuse the knuckledraggers into believing it is HE who is equating ideology with party.
Too much nuance, and we begin to slobber like stupid chows.
Holy Hell! I can’t believe that I ate the whole thing! I read every word, followed every link, read every word in those posts and most of the comments. No shit, it took me about 4 hours. After having done that, I would imagine the good professor will spend the next several weeks trying to get that rather unsightly mushroom shaped rhetorical tattoo off his forehead before the College Republicans see it. However, he should not neglect to wipe that bit of rhetorical man-chowder still dripping off his chin either.
Well done Jeff, for a HATER!
SweepTheLeg – It is referred to as a mushroom bruise, being the inevitable result of a cock-slap. :-)
Really cute. And the monkey is so well drawn!
http://red-state.blogspot.com/2007/07/reply-to-that-really-cool-guy-jeff.html