Archive for the ‘Fun stuff’ Category

Why I didn’t get any sleep this weekend

March 3rd, 2009

Somehow, it’s talk radio’s fault. 

I picked up Glenn Beck’s 2003 book, The Real America, at CPAC.  It’s a lot like listening to him on the radio.  It’s a mixture of political opinion, personal stories, earnest appeals to our better nature, and humor.  I was enjoying it for the first eighty pages or so until I got to Chapter 4: Everything You Need to Know About Partisan Politics.  It’s one joke stretched over five pages.  “Blah blah blah blah Clarence Thomas, blah blah blah blah Anita Hill, blah blah blah…” (you get the picture).  I chuckled and was ready to breeze through the section until I read, “…can you find the one time in this chapter that blah is spelled backward? 

That started a fruitless, half-hour quest looking for “halb.”  I read every line of every sentence at least half a dozen times, scanning for the backwards “blah.”  Sensing my frustration (my muttering “what the @#$%!” may have helped) my girlfriend asked me what I was doing.  I told her, and then she proceeded to spend fifteen minutes of her life looking for “halb.”   It’s strained our relationship.  She insists “halb” isn’t really there, and I’m convinced that Glenn Beck wouldn’t do that to his readers.  A more irreconcilable difference between any couple has yet to be discovered. 

So instead of composing anything remotely interesting this afternoon for my blog, I’ve been scouring the internet looking for the key to finding the elusive word.  I typed in “halb” and “The Real America” on google.  Nothing.  I went to Amazon, searched inside the book, and typed in “halb.”  Nothing.  I even looked at Stu’s Blog (“Stu” is Glenn Beck’s executive producer).  Again, no luck. 

My current theory is that it’s a trick question, and “blah” isn’t said right up front.  Instead, it’s cleverly hidden, perhaps spelled out over the span of a few words.  Ex:  “Blah blah blah Alberta is cold.”  But then again, if I was on the right track, I probably would have found it already.  As soon as I get some free time at work, I’m going to scan these five pages into a .pdf file and see if it’ll let me search for the elusive bugger in Adobe.    

Perhaps that’s why hieroglyphics are so hard to understand.  Maybe the Egyptians were just playing a joke on future civilizations.  I can imagine Egyptian slave #1 saying to his co-slave: “So I’m going put these eyes here, even though it makes no sense.”  #2:  “Why”?  #1:  “Because no one will be able to understand it.  It’ll be hilarious!”

 

Update:  I just spent another fifteen more minutes looking for the damn “blah.”  I could’ve had this thing posted already.  I would like to write at least one intelligent post on a relevant issue before I leave for Vegas on Thursday (It’s for my job.  Fine, don’t believe me) but apparently Chapter 4 doesn’t want that to happen.

I hate Chapter 4.  

The case against the millennial generation: exhibit # N87960

February 24th, 2009

 

 

I was going to write about something else tonight, but this is too good to ignore.  Via Hot Air (warning: strong language): a video of the recent New York University “Kimmel occupation” being calmly dispersed.  If you don’t feel like watching the entire thing, (the narrator’s a bit much to take), jump to the temper tantrum at 5:36. 

 

 


 

 

The story is a that a group of mostly New York University students forcibly occupied the school cafeteria for three days.   During their sleepover, they produced a bizarre list of demands, which includes, among other things, full disclosure of NYU’s private budget, card check for a local union, a student elected finance committee, which will focus first on boilerplate leftist issues (investigation into possible “war profiteering,” possibly boycotting Coca-Cola), paid scholarships for Palestinian students, and donations to the University of Gaza.  The University promptly ignored the demands and broke up the packaged rebellion.  The aftermath, in the words of 18-year old Mitchell Goulding: “The general consensus right now among the student body is that they are a bunch of idiots,” (perhaps I’m too cynical about the younger generation).

 

To grasp the ridiculousness of the protestor’s behavior, imagine the same approach applied to another criminal activity:

 

Cops:  Freeze!

 

Bank robbers:  No. We need to democratically decide whether or not we should freeze.  This is supposed to be a consensus; I don’t know if you guys understand that.

 

Cops:  Put the money down!

 

Bank robbers:  Are those guns?  Don’t expect us to cooperate if you’re going to use devices of force.

 

Cops:  Step out of the vault!

 

Bank robbers:  You guys busted in here. Give us ten minutes to decide what we want to do.  You’re making us very upset, and we can’t guarantee our cooperation if you don’t negotiate with us. 

 

Cops:  Move over, ma’am.

 

Bank robbess:  HE TOUCHED ME!  HE @#$%^&! TOUCHED ME!

 

In another part of the bank:

 

Robber #1:  O.K., we’ve got three duffle bags full of large bills. Those greedy corporate lackeys will be interested in that.

 

Robber #2:  I’ve got Melanie’s diary.

 

Robber #1:  What’s it say?

 

Robber #2:  “I hate it when people touch me.”

 

Robber #1:  They’ll definitely be interested in that. You know they have nothing better to do than obsess over our opinions.

 

In all seriousness, this is the perfect storm (such an overused term anymore) of the worst elements of left-wing protest:

 

1. Entitlement.  The students presumed that the private property they were squatting on was their “space.”  The same mentality drives ACORN’s latest escapades.  Entitlement was also exposed when the narrator demanded that campus security tell him what they were doing, as if they answered to him. 

 

2. An exaggerated sense of victimhood.   The young woman screamed “he touched me!” with enough decibels to slice through a rock concert as campus police dragged her off of the balcony. 

 

3. Convoluted notions of propriety.  Is there anything more cloying than young adults using buzzwords such as “consensus” and “devices of force”?   Like an immature version of the U.N., the students attempted to give an air of dignity to their radical politics by repeatedly calling for “dialogue.”

 

4. Self-important rage.  One gets the impression that some of the students were  dying to be slighted, just so they could scream “(expletive) scumbags!” without seeming out of place. 

 

5. Arrogance.  I could probably roll this into entitlement, but when the narrator stated ”…they need to come back here and report to us,”  pure arrogance is the first thing that came to mind. 

 

6. Wistful symbolism.  The girl holding up peace signs around 6:40 into the video was being passive-aggressive.  Her silent protest reminded me of when Martin Sheen covered his mouth with a piece of duct tape with the word “peace” written on it a few years ago.  It’s such an obvious stunt, about.com archives a photo of it in their political humor section. 

 

7. A conspiratorial worldview.  I know I’m hard on the conspiracy theorists, but there are few things police are less interested in than a common college student’s journal and computer files.  I don’t know if NYU’s protestors know this, but cops can tell the difference between suspected terrorists and overly dramatic twenty-year-olds. 

 

8. General cluelessness about the world at large.  The narrator’s nonsensical comment about “corporate water” towards the end suggests he hasn’t grown out of the simplistic worldview that frames everything as a struggle between groups of victims and oppressors.   The fact the students were demanding that a private entity publically disclose nothing less than it’s entire corporate strategy also betrays naiveté on their part. 

 

New York University should be proud of the way they handled the situation.  They didn’t cave into the student’s unrealistic demands, and the campus police were able to keep composed in the face of ceaselessly aggrivating protestors.  If the comments I’ve been reading on this story are accurate, than even some Obama supporters are turned off by the student’s inchoate activism.  That’s right, the NYU protestors are even an embarassment to Democrats. 

 

Cross-posted on: logo-l-web

 

8-bit Slayer

February 22nd, 2009

For Mike and Jim:

 

8-bit Slayer.  I love the scream.

 

Dark Tranquility: Monochromatic Stains

February 20th, 2009

Dark Tranquility has a video showing what’s it like to grow up in Europe:

 

Music Video Code by Metal Video

Top five most annoying liberal subgroups

January 29th, 2009

Last Friday I put together a list of the top six most annoying conservative subgroups, which didn’t sit well with some of my peers.  That’s o.k.; I didn’t start blogging to make people feel good about themselves.  Case in point: the following list of annoying liberal groups:  

#5 9/11 Truthers

I know not all conspiracy theories are leftist, but come on.  Has anyone witnessed a large anti-Iraq war protest that didn’t have a contingent of truthers waving more poster board than an arena full of pro wrestling fans?  Their major arguments are based on ambiguous photography, a half-educated grasp of engineering, and the government’s initial difficulty explaining exactly how two huge planes flying into two massive buildings caused a smaller building right beside them to collapse.   Yet the boring, somewhat complex reality of tragic events isn’t as satisfying to truthers as their own dramatic narrative.  The endurance and intelligence that goes into supporting these theories would be commendable if it wasn’t coupled with paranoid contrarianism. 

The truthers are not only annoying, but offensive.  Truthers, not “neocons,” politicized the most horrible tragedy in recent American history.  Instead of respecting the memory of 9/11’s victims, they use it as a springboard for self-indulgent activism.  I can barely tolerate the prospect of “investigating” what caused 9/11, but it would be hypocritical of me to deny the importance of dispassionate inquiry in the midst of emotional events.  Yet thoughtful curiosity isn’t what has leftist college students marching behind Republican crank Alex Jones (although after perusing his site, I’m more comfortable calling him  the kind of libertarian whose adolescent conspiracy fetish keeps sensible libertarians form becoming a viable third option).  9/11 truthers are simply in it for the attention, using the tragedy as a proxy to act out. 

The sad thing is half the truthers I meet cannot possibly believe 9/11 was an inside job, if only because they’re informed.  It seems to be something they say just to needle conservatives.  There is no “truth” behind the 9/11 Truther’s words, just a deep commitment to positing themselves on the opposite side of conventional wisdom.  Even Al Franken , whose political career has consisted primarily of calling Republicans liars, doesn’t buy into the conspiracy.  The fact that’s it’s impossible to tell the insincere sophists form the imbalanced true believers makes them especially irritating, earning them a spot on this list. 

Telling Phrase: “Selected, not elected!” (This doesn’t have anything to do with 9-11?  Well, neither does 9-11 trutherism).

Say something nice:  As a whole, they’re interesting people. 

#4 Europeans

Picture a vast group of people whose fundamental understanding of America comes from a half-educated knowledge of the young nation’s most damning history, coupled with western pop culture.  Despite their limited perspective, they’re certain of their opinions about America, and as a consequence have no ability to relate to American conservatives, whose worldview rests on an entirely different foundation.  Nothing about their approach to politics suggests that this will change in the foreseeable future.  No, it’s not college freshmen.  It’s not the entertainment industry.  It’s not 9/11 conspiracy theorists, I just did them.  It’s not even Detroit’s citizens (God help them).  It’s Europeans. 

Europeans think Americans are lazy, uncouth, easily lead dullards, and when the candidate who doesn’t reflect European sensibilities wins an election that has nothing to do with them, they publish snooty headlines asking “How can 59,054,087 people be so DUMB?  They’re right to say our media plays to the lowest common denominator, but this is coming from a continent where less than two-thirds of the population acknowledges that Al-Qaeda was behind 9/11.  While 9/11 truthers are a vocal but rightly marginalized minority here, in Europe they’re prevalent enough to form their own party!

Even though the American right owes much to Europeans such as Friedrich Hayek and Ludwig Von Mises, Europe seems to have forgotten its libertarian heritage.  Elections on the other side of the Atlantic are usually choices between varied big-government nationalists and big-government internationalists.  To put it in American terms, modern Europe’s political spectrum spans from Joe Biden to Barack Obama.  Their phobia of successful businesses such as Wal-mart makes our most committed environmentalists anti-capitalists look sensible by comparison.  A British jury once acquitted six Greenpeace activists for the vandalism of a coal power plant, which cost 35,000 British pounds to clean up, because the threat of global warming gave them a “lawful excuse.”  We should expect no less from the continent that gave the world fascism, Nazism, and a generation of “youths” who apparently think rioting is a legitimate form of dissent. 

Europeans are on this list because all of the politically active Europeans I’ve met are leftist tits.

Telling phrase: “Americans are stupid. ” 

Say something nice:  Europe produces a lot of great Metal and techno music.  Henrik Zetterberg is my favorite active hockey player. 

#3 Aging feminist baby boomers

Stubborn, moralizing, and unteachable, old liberal women may be the hardest people in the world to engage in constructive dialogue.  It’s not that they’re incapable of it; it’s just that they don’t want to.  They’ve spent decades marinating in their self-absorbed liberal revolution, and all the charm and logical force in the world could not convince them of anything but what they want to believe.  As their lives are ending and their influence has been waning, the second wave of liberal feminism is collectively clinging to their perceived victimhood (which is paradoxically the foundation of their influence) despite evidence that women are doing all right in America. 

At its worst, feminism is a microcosm of liberalism’s biggest flaws.  It’s preoccupied with victimhood, it’s statist, and it’s emotive, rather than contemplative.   The corny chanting and curious affection for mostly redundant legislation that comes and goes among mainstream Democrats has always been prominent in the feminist movement. 

What earns old, liberal feminists a spot on this list is a personal as it is political.  In a country infested by a fair amount of terrorist sympathizers, eco-terrorists, and race baiters, I can’t think of a crowd more unpleasant than defensive, over-intellectualized suburbanites such as Maureen Dowd and Gloria Steinem.  If I were the list the ten most unpleasant experiences I’ve ever had, most of them would involve feminists.

Telling Phrase:  “That’s not funny.”

Say something nice:   Legal equality for women is a worthy ideal.  Americans should keep living up to it. 

#2 Teachers for social justice

There, I said it.  Teaching for social justice is the practice of conflating education with politicization.  It’s not good enough for some educators to raise self-sufficient, intelligent students; they have to be left-wing activists too.  Whether they’re teaching in middle schools or graduate seminars, anyone who “teaches for social justice” falls into this category.  Just to be safe, include those who administrate for social justice as well.  While a good education is an irreplaceable component of progress, not all educators are praise-worthy. 

Why I am being so hard on a certain segment of teachers, especially granted the fantastic job many of them do?  For starters, teachers for social justice insist that their trendy educational approach isn’t ideological, just a way to make students “ask questions” and “challenge their own assumptions.”  Take my word for it, they will ask you for an apology if you suggest otherwise.  Many of those in charge of informing an entire generation won’t even acknowledge that their own paradigm of race, sex, and class is firmly rooted in leftist political tradition.  To be fair, they probably never learned that in graduate school.      

If your profession supposedly calls on you to convince young minorities and women that society is dominated by white males, and bellicose activism is the only way they can experience modern-day emancipation, your profession is demanding that you become a political being.  If your overarching goal is to convince impressionable students that society is stacked against them, you’re only going to codify their worst fears, affirm their anger, and give credence to conspiratorial narratives.  Teaching for social justice doesn’t encourage students to open their minds and understand America as it really is.  No, it trains students to view society through a rigid, left-wing standpoint, inhibiting their understanding of everything that isn’t framed as such.  They’ll grow up and confuse conservative arguments concerning civil rights as racism and critiques of feminism as sexism, because they will have never been given the tools to understand it any other way.  In short, they’re making America more like the rest of this list. 

Don’t even get me started on their sense of entitlement.  For their truly hard work, public school teachers are paid more per hour than mechanical engineers, psychologists, chemists, and they only make 3% less than physicists.  Yet one cannot escape complaints about how they’re underpaid.  Then again, one shouldn’t expect gratitude from people who are put on a pedestal just for working with children.  The only other job as universally praised as education is a career in the military.  But everyone who joins the military is potentially risking their lives.  In addition, military training, in contrast to grad school, isn’t meant to boost soldier’s egos, but to humble them.  Perhaps the Secretary of Education should start running prospective teachers through boot camp. 

Drill sergeant:  “Face forward, Rainbow Brite.”

22-year old:  “Excuse me, but my name is…”

Drill Sergeant: “Your name is Rainbow Brite, and if you don’t like it, you can spend the rest of the day in the cafeteria preparing square pizza!” 

If you don’t believe that there are a core group of teachers who have allowed liberal politics to get in the way of their profession, consider that more than 4200 people, most of them educators, signed a petition in support of Bill Ayers, the self-satisfied domestic terrorist most Americans were introduced to in 2008.    Nothing in the petition they signed denies that he was part of a terrorist group; they just gloss it over because he serves a purpose.  

The most depressing part is that most of these folks are genuinely trying to make the world a better place.  But just because they’ve been professionally trained to irresponsibly collapse personal activism with what is ideally an objective profession doesn’t make them right. 

Telling Phrase:  “I have to teach from a multi-cultural perspective because students can get the white, male, Eurocentric point of view everywhere else.” 

Say something nice:  I have friends who are teachers for social justice, and they’re generally okay people. 

 

#1 Left-wing Evangelicals

“Not God bless America, but God Damn America.” Few things are more insulting than the premise that you’re not worthy in God’s eyes because you don’t adopt man’s earthly politics.  Everyone knows about the right’s religious elements, but if Americans learned about their own culture in school, they would understand the left’s religious heritage as well.  The reason left-wing evangelicals are #1 on this list isn’t due to their self-righteous ranting, which doesn’t distinguish them from their peers, but because without the Christian left, liberalism wouldn’t have such deep roots in American soil.  According to historian Daniel J. Flynn, the very first communist community on American soil were the pilgrims in Plymouth colony from 1620-1623, who were forced to abolish private property.  They were followed by numerous European imports, including the Shakers, Harmonists, and Owenites.  Long before the 1960’s, the evangelical left would rail against capitalism, “false consciousness,” and the traditional family.  Before the collapse of the U.S.S.R., these communities had already buckled under their economic ignorance and disregard for human nature. 

The control freakishness comedians frequently attribute to the religious right is actually common in all types of moral crusaders; the religious left is no exception.  Early twentieth century prohibition was a product of the puritanical Christian left.  It was the leftist book Bible Communism which insisted that “God the creator has the first and foremost right to all property” in 1848.  Today, multiculturalism and environmental regulation are often framed in religious terms.  The evangelical left is no less prone to cheap, obvious appeals to faith such as “Jesus was a community organizer,” which insults the intelligence of faithful people everywhere. 

For what it’s worth, I believe God’s a libertarian.  He allows us to mess up our own lives and communities without divine interference, knowing full well that we’ll all be judged in the end.  From war to high taxation, any coercion undertaken in God’s name should actually be credited to mankind.  Anything else would be to impose our will on God’s, and I think we can humbly presume he’s not keen on that. 

Telling Phrase: “Who would Jesus bomb?” 

Say something nice:  They have better things to do than sue people because a cross is mounted on a hill on public land. 

 

Cross-posted at Modern Conservative.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PETA!

January 26th, 2009

Via Cracked.com, a giggle from Daisy Owl

Another Day Ruined by PETA.

Some people are just born funny.

January 23rd, 2009

I thought I was done with my first week of blogging, but after a loooong day at work, this made me smile: 

http://iowahawk.typepad.com/iowahawk/2009/01/i-am-look-for-the-job.html

This one from December is even better!

http://iowahawk.typepad.com/iowahawk/2008/12/senora-kennedy-is-make-very-good-senator.html 

You have good weekend!  I will make sleep now.

The top six most annoying conservative subgroups

January 23rd, 2009

Be honest, fellow conservatives, there are some right-wingers who are so irritating and/or disloyal we wish they were liberals.  It happens.  Usually they’re acquaintances who talk way too much.  But out of politeness or strategy, we avoid calling them out on it.  Sooner or later we’re going to have to suck it up and trim the fat from our ranks.  Please allow me to get the ball rolling.

#6 Libertarians

I have to mention up front that I love libertarianism; I was introduced to politics through a libertarian-feminist perspective.  Frankly, libertarianism is invaluable because it’s what gives American conservatism its unique flavor.  In a desperate situation, I would go to war to make America’s two-party system one that sets libertarians against classical conservatives.  Last but not least, libertarians don’t have any hang-ups about outrageously mocking liberals; they’re willing to do the jobs polite republicans won’t do. 

But with that being said, there’s one thing about so many libertarians that make them freaking insufferable.   They’re obsessed with the religious right!  Like John Goodman relating everything to Vietnam in The Big Lebowski, libertarians are liable to turn a conversation about cabbage into a rant against Pat Robertson.  I imagine more than one libertarian thinks that thousands of Jerry Falwell clones are waiting for us to fall asleep so they can sweep in like a thief in the night and swap every packet of birth control pills with sugar pills, only to hector us with scripture when we confront them about it.  Never mind that real Christians, just like libertarians, come in all kinds.  Some of them are moralizing jerks; that doesn’t indict the whole group.    

Anytime Republicans are in a bind, libertarians rush to tell us that we should stop catering to the religious right; we should quit prattling about abortion like misogynistic theocrats.  When one points out the libertarians’ manifest ecclesiophobia, they claim they don’t hate religion, just “organized religion.”  Bullcrap.  Religious people are a convenient target.  The easiest way to get cheap accolades from intellectuals is to argue that seriously religious people are hypocrites/authoritarians/science-hating luddites; even high schoolers know this.  What?  You think Marilyn Manson was popular for his looks? 

Don’t even get me started on their conspiracy theories.  Or the fact seemingly every road sign in San Diego was slapped with a “Ron Paul 2008” sticker during the last election cycle. 

Telling phrase:  “What you really need to do is throw out the fundamentalists.”

How to deal with libertarians:  Pick their brains; they’re generally smart, observant people.  Just be ready to cut your losses the moment you brush across the slightest reference to abortion or stem-cell research. 

#5 Intellectual elitists

By this, I don’t necessarily mean educated rightists, but arrogant ones.  The all too common type of guy who minored in political science ten years ago and still acts as if his knowledge is exponentially larger than yours is an intellectual elitist.  His mastery of presidential anecdotes and useless trivia such as the origin of the Republican Party’s elephant mascot overinflates his ego.  But his preening isn’t nearly as annoying as his willingness to exploit controversial conservatives like a vulture.  A conservative elitist will throw Ann Coulter, Dick Cheney, and even you under the bus to make his self look wise in comparison. 

The difference between an elitist and a RINO is that elitists are genuinely conservative, but nevertheless disloyal.  By all accounts, William Kristol is a steadily conservative man, but his willingness to accuse John McCain’s conservative opponents of throwing “temper tantrums” betrays how he sees himself in relation to common republicans.  One conservative no one has heard of has attempted to ride Ann Coulter’s coat-tails by accusing her of hate speech while passing out pamphlets calling her an “acid-tongued blond” one year at the Conservative Political Action Conference.  I would like to point out that it’s possible to criticize loyal conservatives without snarky self-promotion, but elitists are smart enough to know that; they just don’t care.  This ultimately makes their behavior that much more annoying. 

Telling phrase:  “It’s nice to see that Ann Coulter is getting airtime LISP! but better specimens SLURP! of conservative thought LISP! could be chosen.”

How to deal with intellectual elitists:  Insist that you’re just as smart and thoughtful as they are.  Then demonstrate it.  They’ll either begrudgingly tolerate your opinion or go away. 

#4 Racists who think their bigotry makes them conservative

Many racists think they have a friend in the conservative movement.  If one were to ask these bigots who they’re voting for, they would likely state the republican candidate if only because they’re presumably against affirmative action, too.  The fact that Lincoln’s party freed the slaves, pissing off the south for generations, seems to be lost on them.  Yet even though the Republican Party is not courting the racist vote, racists imagine they relate to us.  I can proudly say they have no grounds to. 

Racism isn’t conservative on any level.  It isn’t libertarian.  It isn’t consistent with an enduring moral order, because the ideal of universal morality depends on judging others by their behavior, not their ancestry.  At least in modern America, it’s not rooted in tradition; Racism as a custom was rejected in the states a long time ago; if that wasn’t the case, Don Imus wouldn’t have been fired for saying something that sounded racist.  It isn’t based on the wisdom of generations past, which have learned the lessons of racial favoritism.  It’s not prudent, nor is it marked by affection for variety, both of which are timeless themes in conservative thought.

Even though nothing about conservatism even suggests inherent racism, conservatives have enough problems being called racists by liberals, who don’t need evidence to perceive bigotry.  Even genial rightists such as Ronald Reagan are routinely branded as racists by the left.  Because of that, the first step anyone on the right must take when reaching out to any minority community is to demonstrate in some way that we’re not a subtle extension of the KKK.  Every single American we meet needs to be convinced on some level that our opposition to reparations, et al. is not rooted in hatred for African Americans.  Racist losers who call themselves conservative only make it easier for other groups of losers to “prove” we’re pining for a pure, white America. 

If it seems as if I’m kicking a dead horse, I didn’t think there were a significant number of these people until I moved to California and became acquainted with greater Los Angeles.  L.A. is littered by a fair number of groups that have little to zero influence in Iowa: Skinheads, self-described Aryans, and the like.  Politically, the city is stuck in 1968, where everything is so racialized that callous bigotry seems to be the only alternative to backwoods ethnic communitarianism.  This creates tension between blacks, whites, Latinos, and less prevalent minorities.  If anything bad ever happens to President Obama, stay out of L.A. (especially you truck drivers) because the results will certainly be interpreted through racial animus. 

Telling Phrase: “I don’t hate black people, I hate ni–ers.”

How to deal with racists who think their bigotry makes them conservative:  Stay out of Valencia. 

#3 Populists

Temperamentally opposite from elitists, populists have an annoying habit of fixating on an otherwise pure conservative’s not-so-conservative transgressions.  They seem to apply the “one-drop” rule to ideological apostasy.  Thus a conservative who supports free markets, stands strongly behind the traditional family, takes a hard line on crime, supports school vouchers, opposes gas taxes, but is ambivalent on abortion and moderate on gun control would be jeered by populists as a fake.

Particularly irritating are a strain of populists known as “Huckabites.”  Mike Huckabee is good man.  From what I can tell, he’s sincere, honest, and a great campaigner.  His speech at the 2008 GOP convention was arguably the event’s second best to Sarah Palin’s energizing masterpiece.  I didn’t resent him or any of his supporters until Huckabee went all populist on Mitt Romney, the most competent (if occasionally tone-deaf) conservative running for his party’s nomination in 2008, and whined that he didn’t want Romney to buy the election.   Never mind that the National Review correctly identified Romney as “the most conservative viable candidate” in 2007.

On top of that, every so often Huckabee’s populist supporters would come out and threaten to vote for someone other than John McCain if he selected Romney for his V.P.  Like a bitter divorcee with thousands of lawyers, the green-eyed Huckabites dogged Romney at every turn, effectively sabotaging his ascendance in the Republican Party.   One can only conclude they did it out of spite because it was obvious to everyone in America that Huckabee’s massive support among Southern evangelicals was diffused by the rest of the country’s equally prevalent contempt for Southern evangelicals—McCain would have been crazy to select Huck as a running mate.  Either that or someone should let conservative populists know that the good preacher is the Republican version of Dennis Kucinich: ideologically consistent, but fundamentally unelectable.

I may be venting.  Romney was my favorite candidate last year.

Telling Phrase:  “Romney is a phony.” 

How to deal with populists:  Let them know you respect their conservative perspective.  Demand the same in return.

#2 RINOs

You knew they had to be on this list.  RINOS are Republicans In Name Only.  It describes registered Republicans who are pro-choice, anti-war, and supportive of suffocating environmental regulation, but for some reason or another, they think their values align them with the traditionally right-wing party.  They’ve been spotted all over America, but most anthropologists think they’re indigenous to the Northeast and upper Midwest.  They differ from intellectual elitists in that (1) they’re not really conservative and (2) they’re not necessarily educated. 

What’s frustrating about RINOs isn’t that they deviate from classical conservatism, but their tendency to use the left’s hateful rhetoric when doing so.  They’ll oppose tax cuts as “tax cuts for the rich,” and will fight libertarians all the way to the front of the line when it comes to denouncing the religious right.  RINOs are the bisexuals of the conservative movement.  They want to be aligned with the party symbolically associated with tradition and patriotism, but they also want the cheap camaraderie that comes from calling conservatives bad names.  Experts have debated whether or not this is inherent to their species or an environmental adaptation needed to survive among sensitive suburbanites. 

Telling Phrases:  “Talk radio is running America.” 

“I’m Republican, but not that Republican.”

How to deal with RINOS:  Pretend they’re moderate Democrats and use them to practice your debate skills. 

#1 Actual Republican officials

Imagine you’re unhappy with the direction you local GOP officials are taking your community.  So you take the time to mail them, leave a message at their office, or even join their campaign.  Imagine, either through chance or hard work, finally meeting your official Republican Representative.  Imagine politely and eloquently airing your concerns about the party’s support for amnesty or some other issue close to the heart.  Now picture them reciting the line that political parties are volunteer organizations, and the best way to influence them is form the inside (By the way, could you make a donation)?  

You say you don’t want to become a volunteer.   You work forty hours a week, and don’t have the cash on hand to risk quitting and become a party activist.   Besides, you like how you spend your time out of work.  By the way, why can’t I expect you to do your job and represent me, since I have a life and all?  The representative just smiles, says something vague, and hands you a business card. 

Frustrating isn’t it?

American is a constitutional democratic republic.  We elect politicians to represent us.  We vote for individuals who share our values to run the government so we can live a fulfilling life with our friends and family, as opposed to living every minute with a grand political cause in mind as if we’re robots.  Ideally, politicians keep our communities running smoothly and undermine unconstitutional efforts to reshape America so we don’t have to.  When the representative who promised to share my values betrays them, he should be receptive to my concerns.  Remember Dickhead, you serve the people, not vice-versa. 

Telling Phrase: “There is no Republican Party, per se.” 

How to deal with actual Republican officials:  Vote them out of office. 

 

Next Friday:  The top five most annoying liberal subgroups. 

Things I don’t understand: Nobama Prius

January 21st, 2009

I found this in a Wal-mart parking lot. 

Nobama Prius