Wow, Walt. The "shameless people" quote was from another post about blaming Jim DeMint for the failure to intercept the Pantybomber. Why use it here, totally out of context?
So when you say "these people are absolutely shameless," you're referring only to Margaret Talev? Anyone who reads your blog knows that there is a context here that's larger than the individual anecdotes you collect. Would you disagree with that?
@Wally: in the "Wow, That Takes Chutzpah" post I am referring to the MSM in their role as protectors and defenders of Barack Obama; those are the shameless people. They've let Obama get away with blaming George W. Bush for all the country's problems for the last year with not a voice raised in disagreement. Many of us on the Right are wondering just how many years it will take before Obama actually accepts any blame for something that happens in his administration, and if any in the MSM will ever call him out on it.
The "Ultimate Blame The Victim Argument" post struck me because it had a woman arguing that Berlusconi and the Pope somehow deserved the attacks on them because they comported themselves shamelessly and dressing in an "exhibitionist" manner. This is nothing more than the "blame the victim" scenario seen in most rape cases, where the victim is faulted for "dressing provocatively" or "behaving shamelessly." To have a female "psychoanyalyst" making that same argument in reference to Berlusconi and the Pope struck me as ironic, given that feminists have been very careful to educate us that "blame the victim" for dressing/acting provocatively is wrong.
And as for context of blogs, it's hard to avoid concluding that when you talk of conservatives/Republicans in your own blog, Wally, that you are somehow referring to a more primitive, retarded species of human. It's a practice that many of your "progressive" fellow bloggers engage in.
You'll notice that I didn't say anything disparaging about the larger context of your blog, Robert, I just contended that you had one.
I admit to being disappointed in the Obama apologists; I had hopes that they were really committed to acting less like politicians and more like real people. The fact that you give Bush and Cheney and Republican apologists a pass I chalk up not to primitivism on your part, but to a willingness to put victory ahead of reality. It's a practice that many of your "conservative" fellow bloggers engage in.
@wally: I put "progressive" in quotes because I know that many of you on the Left are ashamed to call yourselves "liberals," since conservatives were so succesful at re-defining liberalism during the 80's and 90's. Funnily enough, though, you guys were never as succesful at re-defining conservatism to the point that we would wear the label as a badge of shame. I actually have more respect for those of you who glory in your liberalhood and proudly fly your freak flag.
Wow, we're simultaneously shameful and shameless! We should just crawl off and shoot ourselves and leave the country to you conservatives. What a wonderful place that would be!
A newsroom comprised entirely of leftists/liberals is no more capable of ideological objectivity than an all-white newsroom would be of racial objectivity, or an all-male newsroom of gender objectivity.
Captain Louis Renault
"Round Up the Usual Suspects."
The Drawn Cutlass Philosophy
Be as decent as you can. Don't believe without evidence. Treat things divine with marked respect, and don't have anything to do with them. Do not trust humanity without collateral security, it will play you some scurvy trick. Remember that it hurts no one to be treated as an enemy entitled to respect until he prove himself a friend worthy of affection. Cultivate a taste for distasteful truths. And, finally, most important of all, endeavor to see things as they are, not as they ought to be.
Ambrose Bierce
The Foe
When I am free to walk the streets of Mecca or Medina as the agnostic I am and receive nothing but curious glances, I will believe Islam is a religion of peace and tolerance.
Sign On. You Know You Want To.
A Few Words From Some Founding Fathers
All Men Are Created Equal. (Thomas Jefferson, Founding Father)
But Differ Greatly In the Sequel. (Fisher Ames, Founding Father)
Jeff Cooper's Rules of Gun Safety
All guns are always loaded. Even if they are not, treat them as if they are.
Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy. (For those who insist that this particular gun is unloaded, see Rule 1.)
Keep your finger off the trigger till your sights are on the target. This is the Golden Rule. Its violation is directly responsible for about 60 percent of inadvertent discharges.
Identify your target, and what is behind it. Never shoot at anything that you have not positively identified.
Bob's Addendum To Cooper's Rules
A Gun is not a Toy. Don't Play With It.
Bob's Theory of Hush Puppies
Bob's Theory of Hush Puppies: The best hush puppies are oblong shaped, rather like dog turds. The worst ones are spherical, like balls. The spherical ones are usually made from the recipe on a pre-packaged box of hush puppy mix.
Restaurant Ratings
My restaurant ratings, mostly intended for BBQ restaurants, will be on a 1-5 scale, with 1 being the worst and 5 being the best. Unlike most reviewers, I don't intend to play games with the rating scale by introducing fractions such as "2 and 1/2" or "4 and 3/4," I've always considered that stupid and a signal that the reviewer is trying to avoid making an honest 1-5 judgment.
Here is the breakdown of the ratings:
1 out of 5: waste of time, crap, unable to finish eating; apathy by staff/ownership
2 out of 5: edible, but no effort to impress; staff/management going through motions; desultory.
3 out of 5: average; reasonably good food, moderate effort by staff/management
4 out of 5: good; tasty, well-prepared food, staff alert, restaurant clean.
5 out of 5: great; excellent food, cooked fresh. Staff attentive and proactive, management responsive to complaints. Restaurant spotless.
On Self-Reliance
"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects."
7 comments:
Well, no, she didn't claim they were responsible. But don't let that stop you, Robert. "These shameless people" must be exposed!
Wow, Walt. The "shameless people" quote was from another post about blaming Jim DeMint for the failure to intercept the Pantybomber. Why use it here, totally out of context?
So when you say "these people are absolutely shameless," you're referring only to Margaret Talev? Anyone who reads your blog knows that there is a context here that's larger than the individual anecdotes you collect. Would you disagree with that?
@Wally: in the "Wow, That Takes Chutzpah" post I am referring to the MSM in their role as protectors and defenders of Barack Obama; those are the shameless people. They've let Obama get away with blaming George W. Bush for all the country's problems for the last year with not a voice raised in disagreement. Many of us on the Right are wondering just how many years it will take before Obama actually accepts any blame for something that happens in his administration, and if any in the MSM will ever call him out on it.
The "Ultimate Blame The Victim Argument" post struck me because it had a woman arguing that Berlusconi and the Pope somehow deserved the attacks on them because they comported themselves shamelessly and dressing in an "exhibitionist" manner. This is nothing more than the "blame the victim" scenario seen in most rape cases, where the victim is faulted for "dressing provocatively" or "behaving shamelessly." To have a female "psychoanyalyst" making that same argument in reference to Berlusconi and the Pope struck me as ironic, given that feminists have been very careful to educate us that "blame the victim" for dressing/acting provocatively is wrong.
And as for context of blogs, it's hard to avoid concluding that when you talk of conservatives/Republicans in your own blog, Wally, that you are somehow referring to a more primitive, retarded species of human. It's a practice that many of your "progressive" fellow bloggers engage in.
You'll notice that I didn't say anything disparaging about the larger context of your blog, Robert, I just contended that you had one.
I admit to being disappointed in the Obama apologists; I had hopes that they were really committed to acting less like politicians and more like real people. The fact that you give Bush and Cheney and Republican apologists a pass I chalk up not to primitivism on your part, but to a willingness to put victory ahead of reality. It's a practice that many of your "conservative" fellow bloggers engage in.
@wally: I put "progressive" in quotes because I know that many of you on the Left are ashamed to call yourselves "liberals," since conservatives were so succesful at re-defining liberalism during the 80's and 90's. Funnily enough, though, you guys were never as succesful at re-defining conservatism to the point that we would wear the label as a badge of shame. I actually have more respect for those of you who glory in your liberalhood and proudly fly your freak flag.
Wow, we're simultaneously shameful and shameless! We should just crawl off and shoot ourselves and leave the country to you conservatives. What a wonderful place that would be!
Post a Comment