My buddy Zero Boss links to an insane, profane anti-Republican rant written by a delicate flower named Sue in NH. The article isn't featured at an obscure site, but at Daily Kos, perhaps the most popular political blog in the world. Read the fawning attagirls that follow this bizarre descent into mouth-frothing. These are the people who swept Howard Dean into power today.
It puts a lot of the whining about "hateful" Republicans into perspective.
Please don't read this as a blanket indictment that all Democrats are wild-eyed circus freaks. But the Democratic Big Tent Circus does seem to be directed by the Side Show these days.
Posted by Discoshaman at février 13, 2005 12:10 AM | TrackBack
*post deleted for mindless vulgarity*
Posted by: Sniff Sniff at février 13, 2005 12:51 AMPart of me thinks we ought to make sure as many people as possible see this posting. The Democrats are worried that their message isn't getting out, and that they aren't communicating clearly. Sue from NH has a clear message that resonates with at a very vocal part of the Democratic constituency. We ought to help them make sure more Americans understand.
Posted by: Chuck at février 13, 2005 03:27 AMIf I remember correctly, Daily Kos was paid $250,000 to promote Howard Dean's bid for presidency.
Posted by: Robert Mayer at février 13, 2005 03:32 AMI'm your buddy?
*sniff* I'll be okay, really *snort*, it's just something in my eye...
Seriously, thanks for the love. And yeah, that's what got me more than anything - the lack of balance in the comments. If DK is the present and the future of the Democratic Party, then we're either looking at a one-party system or a civil war.
Posted by: The Zero Boss at février 13, 2005 03:42 AMPray every day that these people get more media outlets and opportunities to get their message out. Pray every day that these people get a radio program, a billboard campaign... heck, if I could I'd give them an hour every night in prime-time -- commercial-free -- to get their message out.
Because every time they spew they reveal themselves to be the barking moonbats that they are, and another 5,000 people decide to abandon the Democratic Party.
Please, don't let me stop you... talk as much as you like. Can I get you a microphone?
Posted by: Greg at février 13, 2005 04:43 AMWow. Sue's rant is about the dumbest thing I've read all year. (And the year is pretty young.)
Hey, I'm a Republican...were's all that money I'm supposed to have and all those second, third and fourth homes? The *one* house I have isn't even in a gated community! And apparently I'm supposed to hate everybody who is different from me and doesn't agree with me. (Kind of like the folks at the Daily Kos.)
Right-wing pundit Ann Coulter referred to the 2004 Super Bowl halftime show performance featuring singers Janet Jackson and Justin Timberlake as "simulated interracial sex," claimed that college professors make controversial statements to get "laid by coeds with hairy armpits who probably don't like men," and called the presence of "girls" in the military "appalling" -- all in one night of cable news appearances.
Mindless-
If you were the person I deleted, then your posting hateful things rather proved my point, don't you think? Some people have an irony deficiency.
Anyway, from reading your second post, I think you missed my point in general. If I were saying that only the Left has people making disagreeable statements, then your comment would be a bulls-eye. But I'm not. I critique conservatives here on a regular basis -- everyone from Jerry Falwell to Michael Savage has been in the crosshairs recently.
What I'm posting about here is the bizarre, irrational hatred that pulsates from the Left these days. Coulter is picking on specific things she doesn't like. The Kos post I linked is a hate-filled screed against a good third of the country. And it's representative of a LOT of the dialogue on the Left these days.
There's an old truism that Republicans think Dems are wrong, and Dems think Republicans are evil. That expression is becoming more and more accurate.
Posted by: Discoshaman at février 13, 2005 12:08 PMI'm an ignostic and I'm a Republican.
I support the ACLU and I'm a Republican.
I think the government oughtta back out of marriage and I'm a Republican.
I live in a rowhome in a city neighborhood and I'm a Republican.
I drive a Volkswagen that gets 30+ miles per gallon and I'm a Republican.
I don't even drive THAT to work, 'cause I take the bus, and I'm a Republican.
I'm against the death penalty and I'm a Republican.
Should I continue?
As long as the lefties continue to convince themselves that the 52% figure is nothing but reactionary evangelicals and multi-billionaires, they are destined to lose more and more of the people they are alienating with rhetoric such as this.
Posted by: rox_publius at février 13, 2005 06:31 PMCoulter is picking on specific things she doesn't like.
Oh, well that’s different then isn’t it. She’s also a right wing media star who “picks on specific things she doesn’t like” all over cable television and has done it for years. She’s helped spread “truisms” like this:
There's an old truism that Republicans think Dems are wrong, and Dems think Republicans are evil.
Come on, you know very well that during the Clinton years shrill, hateful right wing populism brought political discourse to new lows. It took a long time but a lot of people who are politically moderate finally realized the hate machine was directed at them, simply for being Democrats. Now you try to pretend that a few people venting on the internet is equivalent to years of slander on big media outlets. Nice try, but it doesn’t fool anyone who’s paying attention.
Posted by: irony? at février 13, 2005 11:29 PMYes, irony. As in, I do a post about Dems being hate-filled. Then you come on to contradict me by being. . . hateful. Irony was the nice depiction of that approach. There are more direct ways to describe it, but I try to keep things friendly.
Anyway, more tomorrow. It's rack time over here. :-)
Posted by: Discoshaman at février 13, 2005 11:45 PMI do a post about Dems being hate-filled.
You’re a real uniter aren’t you, a real compassionate conservative? Your line is–“look all you liberals we’ve beat you to a pulp for the last ten years and it worked. Now we’re in power so just sit down and shut up. Don’t you dare answer us on the same level we’ve used to bully you out of power. That’s not nice. Be a nice little liberal and we’ll give you a pat on the head (oh my, aren’t we clever tee he)”.
Posted by: irony? at février 14, 2005 12:34 AMThe "united" approach doesn't work. The Democrats call for bipartisan unity, but it won't work because no matter what issue is being addressed, they simp[y won't agree with pragmatic solutions if the Republicans offer it. For them, it is all or nothing. Break rather than bend.
It is not the Republican duty to unite with the opposition. They don't have to. It is the Democrats' responsibility to themselves to pick their battles and unite when the uniting will help them. Social Security is a big one. I think the Republicans will eventually win that battle, and if they do, then all the credit will go to them. If the Dems, however, start working out the solution immediately then not only will the crisis be solved, but the Republicans will not be able to take the lasting credit.
Pick you battles. You're picking all the wrong ones and looking stupid over it.
Posted by: Robert Mayer at février 14, 2005 12:47 AMPick you battles. You're picking all the wrong ones and looking stupid over it.
You might want to take a look at recent polls. People don’t trust the administration, why should they? This administration has made a mockery of core conservative values and the result is clear. Republicans have promised too many things to too many constituencies and it’s clear they never intended to deliver on those promises. Your party is in the hands of people with the ethical values of Ken Lay. From a political perspective all Democrats have to do is stand aside and watch you collapse. Unfortunately, irreparable damage is being done to this country in the process. Republican voters need to become acquainted with the real issues and start holding their representatives accountable. The skills that put those people in office can’t help them solve problems, they’re specialists in public relations. That’s all they know how to do, spin, distract, repeat.
Posted by: irony? at février 14, 2005 01:11 AMThe people who swept Howard Dean into power today were Democratic state party chairs and senior local and national officials. While a few of those people probably write for DK, I seriously doubt that Sue in NH is one of them. Furthermore, the structure of DK permits stupid stuff like this to be published because it hosts a bunch of different people, like a political livejournal. This post was not on the main page of the site, and as far as I can tell wasn't in the recommended diaries section, and I wouldn't have even noticed it had it not been for your blog via Zero Boss.
As I have said before: CRAZIES ON BOTH SIDES. Your only purpose in highlighting this madness seems to be to align Howard Dean, for whom the case has been made already, with a bunch of people who aren't Howard Dean...for what? Because you want him to fail as a leader? Is a one party state a good thing? Ann Coulter, who called fat women "pie wagons," and Kid Rock, who has a song called "Balls in Your Mouth," both voted for Bush. Was GWB swept into office by a horde of skinny women and oral sex fanatics? I guarantee you that more people are exposed to Kid Rock lyrics than read DK diaries. For instance, me: I read DK probably daily, but rarely read a diary because they're often useless, but I have heard probably three hours of KR from just listeneing to the radio when my CD player broke back in 99. So.
Posted by: leftthecapitol at février 14, 2005 07:46 AMJust the day before yesterday, my husband imparted this profound bit of wisdom to one of our children, in response to her reaction to a bit of lighthearted teasing from one of her siblings:
"If someone calls you ugly, making a face doesn't prove them wrong."
Perhaps the Ironic One needs some basic parenting wisdom.
Posted by: pentamom at février 14, 2005 03:46 PMDisco,
Thank you for linking to this very revealing specimen of the left-wing mind. Such as it is.
Totalitarian authoritarianism has been around for a very long time, and it won't go away anytime soon.
You are right -- the leftwing supporters of the Democrat party are not all circus freaks.
Most Democrat voters are just deluded.
But some of them are thinly-disguised would-be apparatchiks and some of them are up-front wannabe mass-murderers.
And some of them are just corrupt municipal-union hacks.
But it's over.
The FDR power machine was a group-marriage of convenience among parties who couldn't stand each other. The Southern segregationists, the Northeastern "liberals," the Unions, and the Western liberals managed to hold their party together because by doing so, they held on to power. FDR's grand coalition was nothing more than a cynical power-holding mechanism.
Now they've lost power and they've fallen apart.
The municipal employees' unions, the institutional racial panderers, and the remnants of the labor movement are no longer in any position to restrain the radical left.
And the radical left has never been able to restrain itself.
"Free Mumia" will soon be a non-negotiable plank of the Democratic Party platform.
All the best,
Alvar
Posted by: Alvar NC de Vaca at février 15, 2005 01:23 AMAlvar, can you name a prominent Democrat who is a wannabe mass murderer?
Aren't you just engaging in the same kind of hateful stereotyping as the diarist at DailyKos?
Posted by: leftthecapitol at février 15, 2005 05:25 AMAlvar NC de Vaca you sound like just the type this post at Daily Kos was intended to parody. Irony, some people just can't see it.
Posted by: irony? at février 15, 2005 06:28 AMleftthecapitol.
I'm not talking about prominent Democrats, but about prominent leftists. Ward Churchill for example is a passionate admirer of mass murderers. He has deliberately posed with a black beret and a kalashnikov. Of course he is nothing more than a ridiculous phony. But he admires the mass murderers of the totalitarian left and aspires to emulate them.
Now consider the rest of my comments: does the Democratic party have any core about which to organize itself, or is it not the remnant of a cynical power-grabbing strategy?
(Fun fact: Remember that in 1965 more Republicans in the Senate voted for the Civil Rights bill than Democrats, and a far higher proportion of Republicans than Democrats.)
Alvar
Posted by: Alvar NC de Vaca at février 15, 2005 10:22 AMRemember that in 1965 more Republicans in the Senate voted for the Civil Rights bill than Democrats...
Yes, and then Nixon adopted the Southern Strategy in 1968. That changed everything.
Posted by: irony? at février 15, 2005 11:33 AMIs Ward Churchill a prominent leftist? He is now, I guess, because some students at some school opposed his lecture there and it got blown up into a media frenzy. If you're eliding "prominent" with "controversial," sure, every "prominent" leftist is probably slightly mad. Plus, you said "Most Democrat voters are just deluded.
But some of them are thinly-disguised would-be apparatchiks and some of them are up-front wannabe mass-murderers."
If you're saying that Ward Connerly is a wannabe mass murderer, and a prominent leftist, how is he not a prominent Democrat? How do you know his party affiliation?
The rest of your post is nonsense. The Democratic party has certain core ideas, such as making healthcare more available, improving education, and promoting a sane approach to the national budget; these issues are why I would consider myself a Democrat if pressed.
But the Democratic Party of today is much different than the Republican Party of 60, and even forty, years ago. And the Republicans are different, too. In the 30s, Republicans gathered much of the black vote because of lingering resentment for the Civil War and Jim Crow. Today, largely because a Democrat was in the white house in the 1960s, these people vote for Democrats (if Nixon had won as he shouldn've in 1960 you would probably be a Democrat and I would be a Republican). The Republicans were budget hawks when they were out of power; today, they spend like there's no tomorrow. The Democrats are trying to take back the mantle of fiscal sanity (they've got some rights to it, as Clinton was faithful in his promise to pay down the debt). The Republicans would like to hold onto this title, which is why they've submitted a ridiculous budget that goes down for the next four years and then explodes in 2010. But I think the Democrats are being pretty successful in this aspect of their rebranding.
The party names are just labels that shift with the times.
Posted by: leftthecapitol at février 15, 2005 12:32 PMHere's a prominent Democrat:
At the DNC's Eastern Regional meeting in New York on Jan. 29, Dean appeared with other candidates for the DNC chair. There were more bromides, but also this: ``I hate the Republicans,'' Dean said, ``and everything they stand for.''
For some reason, people keep coming back to the argument that there are "crazies" on both sides. That's never been denied. What you don't see are prominent Republicans ranting and frothing like Dean, MoveOn, Michael Moore and the rest. The cult of Moore says a lot more about the Democratic base than it does about Moore himself. And don't even try bringing up Coulter again. When Bill Frist gives her a hug, THEN come talk to me. Moore was literally embraced by the Democratic leadership.
Posted by: Discoshaman at février 15, 2005 10:58 PMleftthecapitol and irony-
Once again it's the late and I've only now finished my blog posts. If you get a chance to check in tomorrow night, I'll really try to have some more response posted here. Sorry about that. Thanks for your patience.
Your pal,
Disco
Discoshaman, I was challenging Alvar to find a prominent Democrat who advocated mass murder, not one whose current job is to be Hack-in-Chief of the Democratic Party. Is it surprising that Dean is currently hyperpartisan? He's not in a legislative position, or aspiring to ever be--he's in a partisan position.
That said, I think the comments were ill-advised. But as you said earlier in reference to the bloodthirsty Marine, isn't that what partisans are there for--to be partisan?
Posted by: leftthecapitol at février 16, 2005 07:07 AMDisco,
Thanks for reminding me that Dhimmi Carter invited Michael Moore to share his VIP box at the Democratic Convention. Side by side, two cheerleaders for every anti-American thug they can find. Dhimmi Carter, who wrote speeches for a terrorist who ordered the murder of an American Ambassador, and Michael Moore, who openly admires the Iraqi terrorists who commit mass murder with car bombs.
And don't tell me that Dhimmi Carter is not a prominent Democrat.
All the best,
Alvar
Posted by: Alvar NC de Vaca at février 16, 2005 11:26 AMAlvar, how is writing speeches for someone the same thing as being a wannabe mass murderer?
If cosying up to bad men is bad, then Bush is at least as bad as Carter--he spends weekends with Prince Bandar and Vladimir Putin, who are qually as bad (if not worse) than Yassir Arafat. Who knows what Putin was responsible for in his KGB days?
And just how is Michael Moore a wannabe mass murderer for describing the situation on the ground in Iraq in April of last year? In context, he was describing the radicalization of otherwise peaceful Iraqis due to heavy-handed CPA actions, like shutting down non-party line newspapers.
Even if he believes that the Iraqis should have had the opportunity to create their own democracy without US involvement, HOW DOES THAT MAKE HIM A WANNABE MASS MURDERER?
Again, find me a prominent Democrat who wants to kill a lot of people.
Posted by: leftthecapitol at février 16, 2005 01:27 PMHey discoshaman, I won't bring up Coulter, but I will bring up Pat Robertson, with whom George W. Bush met just prior to the invasion of Iraq in 2003. Why is George Bush having meetings with a man who said that 9/11 was America's fault and who indirectly helped fund terrorism through business deals with the former president of Liberia? Or his meeting with the Alabama legislator who wants to bury any book with a gay character in a big hole? Why did he decide to speak at Bob Jones University, which is not only anti-miscegenation but also anti-Catholic? Or why did former President Bush praise the crazy Reverend Moon as "the man with the vision"? Why did Senator John Warner sponsor a huge Moonie coronation service in the Dirksen Senate Building on 23/3/05?
And no, today you don't see too many Republicans frothing. That's because they control everything. How about ten years ago, when they were accusing the Clintons of murdering one of their best friends, staging murder re-enactments in their back yards and so on? I'm talking about elected members of Congress, not controversial filmmakers. The man, Dan Burton, is still in Congress and is a committee chair.
Posted by: leftthecapitol at février 16, 2005 01:52 PMAll-
Someone emailed me about this thread, requesting something. It was deleted and now I have no idea what it was. . . Could you email me again, please? Thanks!
Posted by: Discoshaman at février 16, 2005 06:36 PMleftthecapitol,
I never claimed that "prominent Democrats" were wannabe mass-murderers. My admittedly injudicious but I think defensible assertion was that "Most Democrat voters are just deluded. But some of them are thinly-disguised would-be apparatchiks and some of them are up-front wannabe mass-murderers. And some of them are just corrupt municipal-union hacks."
The point is, though, that the Democratic Coalition of FDR was a disparate and motley coalition of widely diverging groups who banded together in order to take and hold power. That particular coalition has collapsed.
What's left in the Democratic Coalition of the 21st Century is an increasingly dysfunctional collection of shrill and extremist special-interest groups, each one of which is propelled by a misguided drive for ideological purity that is driving it farther and farther away from the American mainstream.
Alvar
Posted by: Alvar NC de Vaca at février 17, 2005 10:44 AM