If'n you don't want to click the link, suffice to say the garbage was a photoshopped image of "Gollum" from LOTR movies with Jack Layton's face attached, accompanied by the words of wisdom:
"Never argue with a progressive. They pull you down to their level then beat you with experience."
Typical. The very definition of an "ad hominem attack." [Once again, for the slow: It's "ad hominem" if all you've got are insults that are beside the point. If you've demonstrated that the person is an idiot, then you're justified in so doing.]
Just for kicks, I typed a sarcastic "whoo-ray" to the mindless piece of drivel:
Wow! Brilliant argumentation! You really know how to find your opponent's weakness and then "go for it"!My sarcasm evidently went right over the blogger's head:
Ummm ... if you haven't figured it out ... I have very little respect for "progressives" ... period ... if for no other reason that only a completely supercilious and arrogant person would wear the title, "progressive". And, last I checked, the post presents no arguement ... just states a fact.
So, I was forced to edumacate the person:
"Ummm ... if you haven't figured it out ... I have very little respect for "progressives" ... period"
Yeah, like anyone gives a sh_t.
"if for no other reason that only a completely supercilious and arrogant person would wear the title, 'progressive'."
Actually, (moron) people who use that term only mean that they're forward thinking. By now, there's enough history to have a sense of what that means. Pro-minority rights, Pro-opening up the political system to everyone, Pro-environment, etc., etc., ... as opposed to "regressive" imbeciles who want to return us to any sort of theocracy, who believe that women, minorities, youth, must "know their place," etc., etc.
"And, last I checked, the post presents no arguement"
Duh, rillee? Actually, that was obvious. I was being sarcastic. Too subtle for you I guess.Yes. No argument. That's par for the course for your sort.
"just states a fact."
In your dreams pal.
And that brought me two replies from some dimwit with the pseudonym "Nomennouvum" the deconstruction of which will be the point of today's post. A "debate" if you will.
"Anonymous" above this post can only be Thwap. [tis true! i hadn't bothered to attach my moniker that time around!] Note the use of profanity, the childish name-calling ("moron" is a personal favorite epithet of Thwap), and the unintentional tautology to counter conservative complaints that leftists consider themselves "progressive" ("Well, we're progressive because we believe progressive things, which 'regressives' don't." As if conservatives don't believe in democracy and freedom for all, but want to establish a mullahcracy in the West, take away rights for minorities and women, and want to destroy the environment.) No. Only Thwap can be that dumb and un-self-aware.
A-A-A-N-N-N-N-D-D-D .....
Thwap,
Who is supporting the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, which have served to establish nascent democracies in those states that have never known it? Who is freeing whole populations of women
from Islamist (i.e, "theocratic," Thwapy) oppression? Who supports the rights of Dutch citizens not to live under the threat of dangerous fatwas issued by bloodthirsty Islamic leaders? What administration in the US appointed the first black man, and then the first black woman, as Secretary of State? Who is fighting to prevent the expansion of influence of theocratic Iran is the Middle East (and maybe beyond, if they acquire WMDs), in the face of constant criticism by their political opponents? Who supports whole-hardily the tiny state of Israel, a country made up largely of Jews, a minority surrounded by those who wish to push her into the sea? Who is constantly on alert for "progressive," multi-cultural, and Islamist-sympathizing assaults on the inalienable right to free speech? Who is consistently criticizing anti-Semitism whenever it rears its ugly head (nowadays, it seems principally to come from the UN)? Who is leading the way in calling attention to the hideous facts of honor killing, forced marriage, and genital mutilation in the West?
I'll give you a hint, Thwap: the answer ain't the self-styled "progressive" community.
Now, who are the regressives?
So, let's go through this ejaculation of gibberish, shall we?
"Note the use of profanity, the childish name-calling"
Oooh! PROFANITY!!! Whatever. "Childish name-calling," ... this from a blog where the guy sticks Layton's face on Gollum, ... I'm supposed to muster up some sort of dignified, eloquent response? Fuck you. Moron.
"("moron" is a personal favorite epithet of Thwap)"
Well gee-willikers! Why the fuck shouldn't it be? You moron! You're all a bunch of fucking morons, ... that's why novenerumerusnrsum, that's why.
"and the unintentional tautology to counter conservative complaints that leftists consider themselves "progressive" ('Well, we're progressive because we believe progressive things, which "regressives" don't.' "
As I said, there's enough history for us to know what progressives stood for in the late-20th century. Peace, women's rights, sexual freedom, civil rights for minorities, environmentalism, economic justice and anti-imperialism, to name a few. This is documented fact fuck-face, so suck it up.
That's why we call ourselves progressive. It was earlier described as "supercilious and arrogant" to do so, so the point needed to be clarified.
Ah! But what's this??
"As if conservatives don't believe in democracy and freedom for all, but want to establish a mullahcracy in the West, take away rights for minorities and women, and want to destroy the environment.) "
Truth be told, "conservative" is such a debased word that I can't begin to debate with you what "you" (a self-described conservative) believes in. If Stephen Harper, Ezra Levant, Mike Harris, or George W. Bush have anything to say on the matter, it's some sort of stupid thuggery when in government, accompanied by blatant theft and corruption, all defended with the lamest sort of intellecutal flatulence.
To the degree that Harper wants to impose his regressive views about women's role in society, he's a regressive. To the extent that "conservatives" and neo-liberal whatthefucks want to lock people up without charges and torture them indefinitely (which, please note, is the opposite of "freedom for all"), to that extent they're regressive. To the extent that Christian fundamentalists want to impose their idiotic morals and their homophobic garbage on us, and to the extent that these whackjobs call themselves "conservative," to that extent are they regressive, as opposed to pro-fucking-gressive.
But let's see ....
"Who is supporting the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq"
It's amazing, the unintentional hilarity that ensues whenever one of these imbeciles actually tries to defend their beliefs, isn't it? Yeah, those crimes against humanity are really "progressive"!! Un-fucking-believa-bull!!
"which have served to establish nascent democracies in those states that have never known it?"
Sadly, no. We manipulated Afghanistan's loya jirga and imposed Karzai upon them. After that, well, what else is there to say? And don't dislocate your shoulder patting yourself on the back, because it was the USA that helped put Saddam Hussein into power and assisted him in wiping-out his political enemies. Governments installed via electoral fraud tend not to bring genuine democracy to client states. If you had half-a-brain, you'd know that.
"Who is freeing whole populations of women from Islamist (i.e, 'theocratic,' Thwapy) oppression?"
You really don't have a fucking clue, do you?
"Who supports the rights of Dutch citizens not to live under the threat of dangerous fatwas issued by bloodthirsty Islamic leaders? "
Yeah, because progressives hate people intolerant of other people's cultures, .... and the Dutch. What the fuck are you yammering about here you idiot? That "progressives" support dangerous, bloodthirsty fatwas? Fuck-off with your fatwas!
"What administration in the US appointed the first black man, and then the first black woman, as Secretary of State?"
Good God! You're as stupid as Condoleeza Rice! (Who said she joined the Repugs because they were the party of Lincoln, ... years after Nixon and the Repugs adopted the "Southern Strategy" of picking up the white racist Southern vote after Johnson and the Democrats brought in the Civil Rights Act and integration.) The Repugs are the party that systematically tries to deny black voters their democratic rights. The word you're straining for is "tokenism." That's when you provide some noteworthy exceptions that are supposed to stand for wholesale acceptance. It fools gullible people, but not most people.
"Who is fighting to prevent the expansion of influence of theocratic Iran is the Middle East (and maybe beyond, if they acquire WMDs), in the face of constant criticism by their political opponents?"
After destroying Iranian democracy in the coup against Mossadeq, installing the brutal, corrupt Shah, ... the US has no claim to bewail the fundamentalist regime that managed to gain power. The ham-handed bush II administration has given Iran a Shia ally in Iraq, and has strengthened the bonds between Iran and Baathist Syria. You're completely wrong on so many levels that my typing fingers will be worn to bony stumps accounting for all your errors. Spare me your drivel (disproven by the USA's own intelligence agencies) about terrifying weapons. After your explosion of credibility on this subject in Iraq, you presume to be taken seriously about Iranian WMDs? It beggars belief!!
"Who supports whole-hardily the tiny state of Israel, a country made up largely of Jews, a minority surrounded by those who wish to push her into the sea? "
Tiny, nuclear-powered Israel? The racist state that is EXPANDING by building ILLEGAL "settlements" in the occupied territories? The one that invaded Lebanon twice under false pretences both times, killing thousands of innocent civilians? The country that massacres and starves the Palestinians? That nuclear-powered tiny little country? You can forget your stereotypes about the nature of opposition to ISRAEL's policies. They don't fly here.
"Who is constantly on alert for "progressive," multi-cultural, and Islamist-sympathizing assaults on the inalienable right to free speech?"
That'd be me chump. True, there's dissent on the Left. Some people see the Human Rights Commissions as defences against systemic bigotry and hate-speech and what-not. But there's also people who stand on the side of free speech. The debate is a lot more sophisticated than you're capable of grasping, what with your loathsome and groundless self-righteousness.
And, ... I'm tired. Work to do.
Okay; where were we?
Ah yes! Celebrating the "inalienable right to free speech." Which, in "Conservative Land" means championing (not accepting, not resigning oneself to do it) the free speech rights of a bigoted newspaper editor who inflames Muslim sensibilities during a time when they're under widespread military attacks, when their homelands are being invaded in a "Crusade," ... yes, you champion the defense of this guys right to tweak the noses of a targeted people, ... even though this same bigoted doofus had refused to print cartoons that mocked Christianity.
Either that Fleming Rose shit, or you're all heroes for wannabe tough-guy Mark Steyn's eugenic yammerings. But if somebody wants to critique the Afghanistan mission, it's been my experience that your side jump up and down like frightened baboons, shrieking that criticism "hurts the troops" and how can people attack the troops in war-time and blah, blah, blah. If someone wants to put on a play about Rachel Corrie, somehow you "conservatives," you "champions of free speech" can't muster any enthusiasm to defend them when they're pressured to shut down. So, really, spare me your chest-thumping self-congratulations on your devotion to free speech fuckwad. Just spare me.
"Who is consistently criticizing anti-Semitism whenever it rears its ugly head?"
I'm not sure where you're going with this one champ. Is this when you try to shut people up for condemning atrocities committed by the Israeli state? Is that your position? That when Israel bombs an entire country killing thousands, because an anti-Israel militia group in the south of that country captured some Israeli soldiers to force a prisoner exchange, it can't be criticized because Israel is a Jewish state?
Seriously. Go straight to hell.
"(nowadays, it seems principally to come from the UN)"
The UN is an institution that is, by default, comprised of countries that had formerly parts of European empires. It's no surprise then, that the majority of nations at the UN are imposed to an expansionist, European-based civilization in their midst, enforcing racist, inhuman policies on the natives. Anti-Semitism isn't the whole story here, and any honest human being would be able to account for that.
"Who is leading the way in calling attention to the hideous facts of honor killing, forced marriage, and genital mutilation in the West?"
Ah, fuck-off with your bullshit. Why don't you go and check out what all the lefty feminist harpies have been saying about these issues for years? Why don't you open your eyes to what the brave, heroic women of RAWA have been saying for years, with only the lefties giving them a forum?
It's amazing, the gibberish that spins around in your empty craniums. Don't you think it odd that the secular, atheist, faggot-loving left is so allegedly infatuated with Islamic fundamentalism? Does it strike you as inexplicable?
That's because it is you dimwit!!
It's not the case, as you so ignorantly maintain, that leftists are merely blind to the dangers of "Islamo-fascism" because of our naive multi-culturalism and our debilitating cultural relativism. If you'd bother to take your head out of your stinky ass, and actually engage with the left, rather than posting stupid photo-shopped images and genuine ad hominems and then shooting loads of spunk into each others' mouths, you'd clue the fuck in.
The danger isn't this Islamo-fascist conspiracy dreamed up by right-wing hacks. The danger is a terrorist response to Western imperialism. The danger is a backlash against racist arrogance. The depths of insanity of this whole "Islamo-fascist" humbug is unfathomable.
And with that, ... I'm truly done for this post for the day.
6 comments:
Aahh...that felt good. I too am not about to engage civilly with willfully ignorant, lying sacks of shit on the right.
How long ago was it that one of the main architects of the Republican right's attempt to permanently take over American government, whose name I can't recall, admitted that any talk of a Liberal slant in the MSM was ridiculous on the face of it. Megacorporations OWN THE FUCKING MEDIA; They'd be remiss to their shareholders if they went against the most profitable direction, and provided their most vocal critics with so much as an equal level of discourse. In the US, you have to look hard to find any reports on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict showing the devastation being rained down upon the Occupied. Many of my representatives in Congress on the right have enabled this by echoing Israeli rightwing propaganda as fact. I'm not saying that everything is so clear cut, but how can anyone know what the truth is when it goes through the rightwing filter first?
Indeed. That's why I linked to "A Tiny Revolution." One of the few spaces that's gotten beyond demanding better from the capitalist media.
Democratic media is what's needed, so that slow-witted, gullible, assholes like novanemressmussen? can at least get facts from which to base their shallow delusions on.
At least their delusions will be less dangerous for decent people.
Oh yeah? Well, who the hell was talkin' to you, numbnutz?
Man, I'm sorry...it's hard to turn off the smackdown mode! hehehe
I noticed that I did the same bi-polar gag on you the last thread; Merely coincidence...I don't think I'm bi-polar, but I'll ask around to be sure.
Who you going to ask?
Aha! You're right; Trust no one! Gotcha, man! Thanks for the heads up! Waaiitt a minute...y-you might be...I gotta go...
Post a Comment