Skip to main content

Progressives' and Socialists' Hateful Invective

You may have noticed Socialist Democrats, so-called "Progressives", using the term "tea-baggers" to refer to the grass-roots protests against the massive government intervention in our economy led by Obama, Pelosi and Reid.

The actual name these protesters have taken on is "Tea Party" - as in, the Boston Tea Party.

"Tea-bagger" is quite a different thing.

According to WikiPedia,
"Teabagging is a slang term for the act of a man placing his scrotum in the mouth[1] or on or around the face (including the top of the head) of another person, often in a repeated in-and-out motion as in irrumatio. The practice resembles dipping a tea bag into a cup of tea."
This kind of base insult is unprecedented in our nation's political discourse.

This is the hateful disdain progressives feel for people exercising their rights to petition, to assemble, and to speak. This is the bile that Democrats are spewing against anyone who opposes their Glorious Leader's attempts to steal 20% of the economy. Keith Olbermann, MSNBC's biggest cheerleader for socialism, recently said this, on the air, about Scott Brown:
"In short, in Scott Brown we have an irresponsible, homophobic, racist, reactionary, ex-nude model, teabagging supporter of violence against woman and against politicians with whom he disagrees.

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2010/01/18/olbermann-scott-browns-irresponsible-homophobic-racist-teabagging-sup#ixzz0dSVRF30V"
And this is the sad, sorry state of liberals, that their only argument against the Tea Party protesters is to make a snide, childish insult against them. The socialists have been reduced to foaming at the mouth. Of course, that's how they were taught to react, by a public school system that places political correctness and lockstep social obedience, above independent thinking.

The good news is that this is just yet another demonstration of the total intellectual impotency of socialists/progressives/Democrats. They really have nothing to say that is worth listening. The bad news is that a substantial piece of the population thinks the above counts as high-minded political discourse.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Murder in the US

In 2011, I calculate the overall US murder rate as 4.6 per 100,000 population.

But if you recalculate this, and assumed that black men murdered at the same rate as everyone else, the overall rate would drop to 1.9 out of 100,000 population. That would give the United States the 147th highest murder rate in the world - or, the 60th best.

The insane disproportionate murder rate among US blacks is why the overall US murder rate seems so high.

I don't understand why liberals refuse to talk about this. I don't understand why blacks refuse to talk about this. Blacks are just as often the victim as the offender - almost SIXTY PERCENT of murder victims in the US are black. Shouldn't they care about this? Where are Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton to talk about this? Yet they are silent.

And it's not like this is any secret. This culture of violence, abuse of women, and plain thuggery is paraded around daily in pop music. It's glorified on TV shows like "The Wire…

The Root of Violent Extremism

We are too flippant about writing off violent extremists as "crazy", "psychopathic", etc.

Just because *we* have a hard time conceiving of doing violence to others, does not mean that those who do are insane.

Hitler was not insane. Hitler was evil. There is a distinction.

To be insane, to be "crazy", means you cannot understand the difference between right and wrong.

People like Hitler, like ISIS, these people are *evil*. They have, in what they believe to be a rational process, *chosen* to embrace a death-worshipping morality.

Such thinking is going to lead us down wrong alleys in dealing with violent political extremism.

Unless we understand the various reasons why such people embrace philosophies of death, we cannot combat the root causes and defeat violent extremism.

Obama's "they need jobs" is a juvenile approach at this. But you simply cannot ignore and dismiss the reality of life in the countries that are the flash-points of extremism…

Is Government "just the name we give to things we do together"?

"Government is just the name we give to the things we do together." Well, no. This is a truly deceptive statement. Because look here, there are many, many human institutions where people get together to do things. Churches.
Clubs.
Corporations.
Non-profits.
Families. And these all have their own unique characteristics. If government was simply a variety of these, or vice-versa, why would we bother to have a unique word for it? If government were *merely* a charity, wouldn't we just call it a charity? What is it about government then that makes it unique? I'll tell you. It's the use of force. Government is the sole human institution that legitimately exercises physical force against others. Churches don't commit violence. Corporations don't use physical coercion to get you to buy their products or to work for them. Families don't (shouldn't) do that. BECAUSE government's essence is the use of force, government simply should not do many things, eve…