This Is Probably Worth Repeating…

10 comments December 2nd, 2006at 01:37pm Posted by Eli

I posted this about 5 months ago, but it now seems timely enough that an exhumation may be in order:

It is not a coincidence that the women and minorities who are prominent conservatives are unusually vile and unqualified – it is by design.

I believe that the conservatives actively seek out, recruit, and cultivate these people, not just to apply a thin layer of I-Can’t-Believe-It’s-Not-Diversity on top of their Wonderbread movement, but to provide endless opportunities to accuse their opposition of the very hatefulness that is their stock in trade.

Some examples:

Democrats opposing Clarence Thomas for being a sleazy sexual harasser? A lynch mob.

Liberals/Democrats pointing out, repeatedly, that Condi Rice is criminally incompetent? Racist, sexist, and possibly homophobic.

Liberals jumping all over Michelle Maglalang (or something) for her hypocrisy about Teresa Heinz Kerry’s “professional name” when she uses one herself? Racist and sexist.

Liberal outrage at Ann Coulter over… jeez, who can keep track? Yeah, definitely sexist, yeah.

Liberals making a fuss about a gay prostitute in the White House press corps (possibly sleeping over as well)? Homophobic.

Liberals bashing Israel’s increasingly sadistic Palestinian policy, neocons, or Joe Lieberman (and don’t try to tell me he hasn’t been cultivated by the Republicans)? Anti-semitic (I’m Jewish, by the way – but perhaps I’m self-hating).

Even the failed nomination of the laughably unqualified Harriet Miers to the SCOTUS (that really happened – I didn’t just dream it, right?) was used as an example of liberal sexism, even though it was Republicans who ultimately shot her down.

To some extent, we play into the Republicans’ hands every time we so much as mention their race, sex, or orientation while attacking them (although it’s kinda the whole point in Gannon’s case). However, the sad fact is that even if we scrupulously referred to, say, Ramesh Ponnuru or John Yoo as snivelling, sadistic little cockroaches without ever once mentioning their race, we would still be accused of racism, even if that is precisely what we are attacking them for. Such is the opportunistic illogic of the Republicans and their captive media.

Believe me, I am no civility advocate, even if I don’t swear much on this blog (what can I say, my Dad reads it). If you want to curse these fuckers out, feel free. But just remember that they are trying to bait you. They want to collect and display as many samples of liberal “intolerance” as they can, the higher-profile the better. Don’t make it easy for them. Besides, it’s not like there isn’t a wealth of material to work with – why waste time on cheap shots that are beside the point, which is not that Coulter and Malkin are women, but that they are evil.

One additional recommendation: Keep a bunch of minority, women’s, and gay rights issues in your back pocket to wave at the conservative flying monkeys whenever they start insincerely protesting their compassion for the oppressed. Surely they should be willing to go on record with their support of gay marriage to prove that they’re the tolerant ones, right? Or at least to condemn the Right’s shabby treatment of women like Cindy Sheehan and Valerie Plame. Or ask them how the glorious liberation of the women of Afghanistan and Iraq is coming along.

Thankfully, in the case of the recent civuffle, the conservatives were pretty quiet; but I think my point is still valid.

Entry Filed under: Media,Politics,Wankers


  • 1. a former commenter aka timewarp  |  December 2nd, 2006 at 2:09 pm

    Great post! I think there are 2 reasons the wingnuts haven’t picked up on any of this.

    1) Election season is over (for now) and they have nothing to gain by attacking biases on the left.

    2) Enough lefty blogs weighed in first, before they had an opportunity to make it their own.

  • 2. Eli  |  December 2nd, 2006 at 2:35 pm

    I’m not sure I believe #1: Making liberals look bad is a full-time job for them, whether there’s an election coming up or not. Defining and maintaining a negative image for us is their key to survival.

    #2 is a possibility, but I’m not sure that’s ever stopped them before.

  • 3. Anonymous  |  December 2nd, 2006 at 4:50 pm

    Eli, I have had these same suspicions about the right’s choices for whom to elevate as lightning rods.

    In many ways it forces us to always keep to the high road, which keeps the focus on substance, where it belongs, and also makes us look like the adults.

    They have made it hard to call bullshit, but I still don’t think fighting fire with fire, which seems to be the preferred approach in other corners of the blogosphere, does anything more than burn everything down.

    In the end, I think it hurts them, or at least I’d like to think so.


  • 4. charley  |  December 2nd, 2006 at 6:19 pm

    three words, Barack Hussien Obama.

    and condi is the c word. nothing to do with her being a woman, it’s ’cause she’s a lying bitch.

    look, being a black, gay, or female person and voting or supporting the republican party is like being from kansas.

    maybe harry belafonte was a bit extreme, but i think he called it. and look how they cut that mutherfucker off at the knees. bad house nigger, bad. fuck republicans, they suck, and they are evil.

    sorry eli, i might be carried away. feel free to delete if necessary. it just pisses me off that americans are so freak’n stupid.

    ooh, lionfgd verification.

  • 5. spork_incident  |  December 2nd, 2006 at 6:27 pm

    Is “civuffle” a word?

    It seems to fill all the criteria – save being defined in the OED – as a word.

    So, “civuffle” is a word.



  • 6. Eli  |  December 2nd, 2006 at 8:36 pm

    In many ways it forces us to always keep to the high road, which keeps the focus on substance, where it belongs, and also makes us look like the adults.

    Unfortunately, even if you attack purely on substance, they’ll *still* accuse you of racism/sexism/homophobia. But at least that way the people with functioning brains will see that those accusations are bullshit, and by extension, that the accusers are opportunistic liars.

    look, being a black, gay, or female person and voting or supporting the republican party is like being from kansas.

    At the peon level, yes. But for the people I’m talking about, they definitely get something out of the deal.

    You’ve heard of wingnut welfare? This is wingnut affirmative action.

    It seems to fill all the criteria – save being defined in the OED – as a word.

    I figured the etymology would be self-explanatory.

  • 7. Anonymous  |  December 3rd, 2006 at 12:37 am

    Oh cut the fucking crap.

    You fuckwits hate Rice, for instance, precisely because she’s black. She’s a walking rejection of your belief that black people are the exclusive property of white liberals. You people are just too intellectually dishonest to admit it to yourselves.

    Then you pile on the projection by calling political opponents like Michelle Malkin and Anne Coulter evil. Okay, get a fucking clue liberals: Hitler was evil, Himmler was evil, Heydrich was evil, Stalin was evil, Bin Laden is evil.

    Malkin and Coulter are merely extremist conservatives, in the same way that you people are extremist liberals.

    You don’t realize that to ordinary Americans, people like you, Coulter, and Malkin are goddamned irritating, and are part of what is wrong with the country, as you try to convince America that yes, Bush truly is Hitler.

    The reason why your leadership is trying to distance itself rom you is that you people come across as fanatical and embarrassing. Especially in front of ordinary Americans. Nobody but you people are really broken up over the fact that Ned Lamont got his ass kicked by JoeMentum. Especially Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer.

    The Democrats take your money and then run the fuck as far away from you nutters as fast as they can. Think of the way Karl thinks of the Elmer Gantry crowd and you’ll begin to understand how Bill and Hillary really feel about you.

    But don’t forget to send that big fat check so they can tie one on at Tavern on the Green. It’s all for The Cause, you know….

  • 8. charley  |  December 3rd, 2006 at 7:01 pm

    well you know what anonymous, there is evil, and there is evil.

    bush and condi aren’t hitler, but they are bad enough. fer chrissakes they blew a hole in the side of world with out consideration of the consequences. they aren’t just evil, they are very stupid, and arrogant.

    i just dropped by to apologize for using the N word. but harry called it.

    At the peon level, yes. But for the people I’m talking about, they definitely get something out of the deal.

    i see your point, but it’s the same difference, these people are suposed to represent the peons, all the peons, black, brown or white. and then there is the matter of self respect. i’d like to hear colin talk about that.

    and as bad as they are, bill and hill are not as bad as bush and condi. ok, joe might be worse, but it’s not because he’s jewish.

  • 9. Eli  |  December 3rd, 2006 at 7:54 pm

    If the Republicans can call us traitors, I figure we can call them evil.

  • 10. The Ripper  |  December 7th, 2006 at 10:37 am

    great post–thanks…don’t know if you’ve seen this video of Ann Coulter, but it’s pretty classic:

Contact Eli



Most Recent Posts




December 2006
« Nov   Jan »

Thinking Blogger

Pittsburgh Webloggers

Site Meter

View My Stats *