Thursday, May 14, 2009

Ugly is as ugly thinks

By Capt. Fogg

This is still America, the discomfiture of the Republican Party notwithstanding, and so no triviality, no irrelevant, inconsequential or plainly idiotic dispute is going to go away without the final word being had by our ad hoc committee on the meaning of everything. The current committee heads seem to be Sarah Palin and Joe the Plumber Wurzelbacher.

As the swells slowly die down on that limitless sea of Who Gives A Shit, we can hear the voice of Mrs. Palin (perhaps all the way to Russia) telling us that:

Our Constitution protects us all, not just those who agree with the far left.

Saving the discussion of just what, to her, constitutes the "far left" for another paragraph, it might be worthwhile to wonder just what protection it offers from the superstition and bigotry of those who listen to psychotic monsters like Pastor "death to witches" Muthee. We won't get an answer from her, I'm afraid, but her feelings are clear. The Constitution protects her religious views against the "liberal" onslaught.

It doesn't, of course -- and I have a hard time seeing the First Amendment as protecting someone's standing in a private, for profit beauty pageant, else we'd be hearing a lot of court cases from ladies with big noses, large bottoms and A cups, but that's the Procrustean bed Palin would like to strap the sad case of Carrie Prejean into, as poor a fit as it may be.

Does Sarah care who wins a contest designed to facilitate the commercial self-objectification of young women? I would guess that she is only interested in portraying her as a noble victim of people so un-American as to assert that the Constitution protects everyones rights, including the right to enter into a contract with another, regardless of race, creed, national origin or gender. That's being a farleftliberal, of course; the catchall term for anything that stands in the way of going back to the days when a real estate broker (we didn't have Realtors back then) could refuse to show you a house in a white neighborhood, a Jew couldn't book a hotel room in Palm Beach, schools, restaurants, public parks, drinking fountains train stations and city buses were segregated, marrying someone of the wrong race could land you in jail and non-missionary position sex was a crime -- and all was well with far right neanderthals like Sarah the moose killer and her Cave Christians. All was right with Sarah's Grizzly God.

No, “the liberal onslaught of malicious attacks” as Sarah growled from her wilderness den -- or in other words, the disgust with people like Prejean, Palin and the Plumber dude who want to have the law interfere with private and personal relationships and strip us of the right to determine just who our families are: the Liberal assault is what what we should be concerned about, or at least the losers who run and watch and participate in beauty pageants should be. It's a "onslaught!" We shouldn't notice that in fact nobody is censoring anyone and Sarah the Idiot is confusing equal protection under the law for all citizens with some kind of an outrageous affront to her primitive religious beliefs.

So it seems like Sarah's "far left" is actually the core of American values, at least the values the constitution was meant to be a means to facilitate. It seems like Sarah's center lies in a culture that died out with the "onslaught" of the Age of Enlightenment, if not with the disappearance of woolly mammoths. Far-left liberals like me feel little more than sad, queasiness at the ugly programmed responses of would be beauty queens, and that's about it. Some may be outraged at her, some might hate her, but they are a subgroup as small as Palin's witch hunters. Most of us care more about how our representatives vote and how well our freedom is protected against its atavistic enemies, but ugly words make people ugly, and this is a beauty contest, isn't it?

(Cross-posted from Human Voices.)

Labels: , ,

Bookmark and Share


  • Fogg -- you write frequently for a blog whose subtitle is "liberalism unbound," yet you constantly take deep offense to being called a liberal or leftist and repeatedly demand definitions. I'll refer you to two definitions of "liberal." There's the one in the dictionary; I'm sure you know it and it's easy to look up.

    The other definition is one of convenience. It's a label that gets attached to people like you, Stickings and Pelosi. The fact that the two definitions don't seem to cross paths is irrelevant. It's a label: like faggot or queer.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:28 PM  

  • "What's the ugliest
    Part of your body?...
    Some say your nose,
    Some say your toes,
    But I think it's your mind."
    Frank Zappa

    By Anonymous Dar McWheeler, at 11:06 AM  

  • Stay classy, Anonymous.

    By Blogger Mustang Bobby, at 12:42 PM  

  • Anonymous,

    I also write for blogs without that stipulation - same words - and I didn't of course put them at the top of the page.

    Labels don't "get attached," people attach them and most often as a cheap substitute for having anything to say or the ability to say it. I don't particularly like Nancy Pelosi so if you want to pin some tail on both of us, you're not going to prove anything but that you're playing childrens games, thinking you can somehow dumbfound the adults.

    I'm not a "leftist," I'm a multimillionaire capitalist who thinks markets need to be kept free by regulating them and who agrees with Teddy Roosevelt and Adam Smith that the wealthy should pay more taxes than the poor. I'm conservative because I believe government has to play a strong part in keeping a free society free. I take a conservative position against imperialistic and unjustified foreign wars. Before the word was hijacked, most would have called me a conservative. Most honest people that is.

    The dictionary is as much the tool of the snake as anything else, now isn't it?

    Liberal is a useless word, much as your comment is useless. It means anything that people who use it as a pejorative want it to mean. As to what your limp riposte means I have no idea except perhaps as another example of the difference between wise and wise-ass.


    Detox is down the hall on your right.

    By Blogger Capt. Fogg, at 12:52 PM  

  • "I'm a multimillionaire capitalist"

    Like Bernie Madoff?

    At any rate, NOW we know why "Cranky" married "I'm with the Band."

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:38 PM  

  • No, not like Bernie Madoff. You're either an idiot with such a low IQ you have to lump everything into half a dozen categories or the same deranged and compulsive stalker who's been pestering my family for several years now. Either way you're playing a dangerous game.

    Is it worth mentioning that I'm also a gun loving NRA type just waiting for an opportunity?

    By Blogger Capt. Fogg, at 3:47 PM  

  • "ugly words make people ugly"

    Love it, I'm gonna quote you on it too.

    Not to digress, but this is often the arguments that get used against people writing hate speech in comments on prog blogs (I see them most often on the feminist and queer one I read)--that it's their right to free speech and what not. But for venues that people control, you have a right to say what is acceptable or not. And the stupid pageant has a right to say how they want to represented.

    By Blogger lindabeth, at 11:32 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home