Thursday, November 02, 2006

Humiliation Incorporated

"Democrats" who make use of the same cutthroat tactics that the right-wing GOPers do--character attacks, scandal mongering, the usual snickering sexual insinuations, etc.--in effect defeat their own cause. Foleygate amply demonstrated that machiavellian aspect of new-school liberals who will do nearly anything to tarnish the other side. Instead of hammering on BushCo for, say, possible lies or misrepresentations about intelligence regarding WMDs or the "safe haven", many liberals now seem preoccupied with getting the dirt on someone from the opposing side. That sort of ID politics is not merely juvenile but an inverted sunday school morality itself--one might call it Norma Raeism. Marxists themselves are often as capable of a sort of do-gooder morality as nauseating as that of dixie biblethumpers.

Foleygate was mostly a non-issue, except for the hysterical sort of soccer mommy common to Kos or DU or TeeVee (or this clown's site ). OK Yeah he's slimy etc. but Foley wasn't even charged with a crime. However unsavory, he could have done what he allegedly did in Toronto legally. Whether Bush and Co. lied about or greatly misrepresented intelligence data regarding Iraqi WMDs or the "safe haven" idea: that's a f-n issue. Whether Lay and Enron or other energy powerbrokers met with Schwarzenegger and somehow arranged the Recall: another case. Some of the more bizarre aspects of 9-11--the crash into the Pentagon especially: that's a case. Possible vote fraud in Florida 2000: a case.

In the Brave New World of Media, Inc. anyone suspected of a crime or moral failing is found guilty as soon as his face appears online or on TeeVee: bada bing, Public Enemy #1. And Mommycrat hypocrites deny the presumption of innocence clause to suspects nearly as often as conservatives do....even fundie morons such as the Colorado preacher Haggard have a right to a fair trial. And Haggardgate has the makings of another pseudo-scandal which will play well with liberal pundits and populist muckrakers who have yet to realize that a Feinstein or Hillary are to the right of most hick conservatives.


Unknown said...

Well put. I do realize that Feinstein and Hill are right of the center. I hope most folks do too. But then, I try to be optimist..and fail miserably.

J said...

DiFi, Hill, Kerry and many other democrats rubber-stamped the War Effort act back in like 2003, and also signed off on the stalinist-like Patriot Act, and approved Bush's tax slashes for the wealthy (I think Kerry voted against it).

I am a political moderate, tho' still favor some traditional democratic ideas (say, in regards to govt. economic policies and enviro. issues) and while believing there may have been grounds for the US and Brits to enter Iraq (and to be concerned about Islamic terrorism as a whole), I object, however, to the manner in which BushCo handled it--or mishandled it.

J said...

But most substantive discussions of the war (or other real issues, like econ. or the petroleum racket) have been replaced with the endless character defamations and insinuations and scandals: and liberals are nearly as guilty as conservatives in that regard.

(Thanx for comments. I have enjoyed reading some of your blog posts on the Californian: taking on the Oil goons--now that is authentic progressive politics, however daunting it may appear.)

Unknown said...

Fiscally I am moderate, social programs I am quite liberal. And I do appreciate some of the libertarian views, but not many. I am registered to vote as "decline to state" I have no allegience to any party..they are both corrupt as hell.

Custom Search

Blog Archive