Rant D'Jour
I was watching a riveting elementary girls basketball game this last weekend, and a close friend was telling me about the Al Franken presentation he attended the night before. He did preface this, halfway through, by saying I don't suppose this is something you would appreciate. I mentioned that I may have attended, only to ask him about the Boys and Girls Club money, which of course he know nothing about. I then told him that I would be disinclined to try and heckle a speaker, that was more of a lefty move. Odd how the free speech loving lefty moonbats always want to stop someone from speaking.
The funny thing about living in the metropolitan Pacific Northwest is that anyone that is not dogmatically liberal is seen as a bit of a pariah, if not outright evil. I generally find that my friends with more conservative viewpoints find liberals to be niave, while liberals tend to view conservatives as evil. The whole moniker Beelzebub was chosen as a liberal group of friends I know were implying that I was evil because I didn't share their worldview.
My problem I suppose is an inability to see my own level of depravity. Sure, I can joke around regarding my "evil" ways, but I really don't believe that. I believe I am just as sensitive to issues of "social justice" (I really hate that term), just have a different view as to what is important and how best positively affect our world. Screwtape recently sent me a link to The Copenhagen Consensus List, which outlines areas in which the world can be impacted using some rudimentary cost benefit analysis. This list really cheered me up, as it reinforced many of my own conclusions.
What I wish I could say, but can't without being socially ostricized in my local community, is that most of the current dogmatic liberal solutions are based more on self congratulation and establishing a feeling of superiority than actually solving critical issues in the world today. You can give tax credits to fund abortions for minors without parental notification funded by increased taxes on the rich and multi-national corporations, and that will have a negligible impact on millions dying each year from Malaria because some dogmatic environmentalist thinks that DDT is evil and not acceptable for use under any conditions.
I firmly believe that the Democratic party was so distraught over the 2000 election that they have lost their collective minds. Now they are doomed to another decade wandering in the wilderness howling like Moonbats (see the rant-o-matic to the right). When did the Democrats become the party of isolationism? When Pat Buchanan is agreeing with you, perhaps you need to rethink your position. This is the same type of madness that led some disturbed linguistics prof at MIT to defend Pol Pot in the 1970s.
The nation actually benefits from a strong Democratic Party, one that actually presents serious positions on foreign and domestic policy.
I was watching a riveting elementary girls basketball game this last weekend, and a close friend was telling me about the Al Franken presentation he attended the night before. He did preface this, halfway through, by saying I don't suppose this is something you would appreciate. I mentioned that I may have attended, only to ask him about the Boys and Girls Club money, which of course he know nothing about. I then told him that I would be disinclined to try and heckle a speaker, that was more of a lefty move. Odd how the free speech loving lefty moonbats always want to stop someone from speaking.
The funny thing about living in the metropolitan Pacific Northwest is that anyone that is not dogmatically liberal is seen as a bit of a pariah, if not outright evil. I generally find that my friends with more conservative viewpoints find liberals to be niave, while liberals tend to view conservatives as evil. The whole moniker Beelzebub was chosen as a liberal group of friends I know were implying that I was evil because I didn't share their worldview.
My problem I suppose is an inability to see my own level of depravity. Sure, I can joke around regarding my "evil" ways, but I really don't believe that. I believe I am just as sensitive to issues of "social justice" (I really hate that term), just have a different view as to what is important and how best positively affect our world. Screwtape recently sent me a link to The Copenhagen Consensus List, which outlines areas in which the world can be impacted using some rudimentary cost benefit analysis. This list really cheered me up, as it reinforced many of my own conclusions.
What I wish I could say, but can't without being socially ostricized in my local community, is that most of the current dogmatic liberal solutions are based more on self congratulation and establishing a feeling of superiority than actually solving critical issues in the world today. You can give tax credits to fund abortions for minors without parental notification funded by increased taxes on the rich and multi-national corporations, and that will have a negligible impact on millions dying each year from Malaria because some dogmatic environmentalist thinks that DDT is evil and not acceptable for use under any conditions.
I firmly believe that the Democratic party was so distraught over the 2000 election that they have lost their collective minds. Now they are doomed to another decade wandering in the wilderness howling like Moonbats (see the rant-o-matic to the right). When did the Democrats become the party of isolationism? When Pat Buchanan is agreeing with you, perhaps you need to rethink your position. This is the same type of madness that led some disturbed linguistics prof at MIT to defend Pol Pot in the 1970s.
The nation actually benefits from a strong Democratic Party, one that actually presents serious positions on foreign and domestic policy.
posted by Beelzebub at 2:07 PM
2 Comments:
I think that an editorial in the Oregonian a couple of years ago had it right: the "Latte Liberals" of the Pacific Northwest, much more so in Oregon, are a religion. There are tenets, orthodoxy, us/them mentality, and cognitive dissonance when the theology is challenged in a rational way.
I think that's really the point of this blog, or what it should be - playing devil's advocate to the tissue-thin groupthink in the region. And the beautiful irony is that the far Left is just as unhinged, blindered and adversarial as the far-right Pat Robertson types.
It is funny that you mentioned Pat Robertson. My friend said that Pat was a topic for Al Franken. Al himself is self lampooning, but doesn't realize it. He really can't take shot at Cheney looking for a friendly audience at Fox, when he speaks in Portland.
Post a Comment
<< Home