Posts Tagged ‘Conservative pathologies’

Conservative Pathologies

October 27, 2010

"I may have met him...I can't recall"

The Rand Paul supporter and campaign official that stomped on a woman’s head outside of a campaign rally thinks that the victim owes him an apology.  Yep.  Tim Profitt said to the following to WKYT (via TPM):

“I don’t think it’s that big of a deal.  I would like for her to apologize to me to be honest with you.”

It’s hard to even find adequate words to describe this other than to say it confirms the fact that some of these people pathologically cling to, and reside in, an alternate reality.

This ‘man’ also said:

“I think when all the facts come out, I think people will see that she was the one that initiated the whole thing.”

That was after he blamed his actions on the police, his “back problems” and said that he feared for “Rand’s safety” and that the “incident appeared worse than it was.”  It is just so brazen, callous and stunning.  It must be noted that the conservative echo chamber was still too busy crying over, and pretending to care about, the firing of Juan Williams to condemn and denounce this ridiculous, scary assault.  It is also just the latest example of the upside-down, persecution fueled parallel universe that conservatives promote as “reality.”  One of the other rednecks involved in this assault was actually wearing a “Don’t Tread On Me” button while actually holding a woman on the ground so his buddy and fellow PATRIOT could literally, actually tread on her skull.  This also serves as a prime example of the conservative tendency to strip all tangible, literal meaning from words, slogans and sentences like “Don’t Tread On Me.”  I’m sure if you asked the guy why he was wearing the button he’d give you the whole run-down on how the Federal gub’ment was out to steal all of his freedumbs and precious bodily fluids–so the first thing he does in response to these imaginary affronts is violently restrict another person’s freedom of speech in a literal (not to mention brutal and hypocritical beyond words) translation of his own “Don’t Tread On Me” button; the essence and meaning of which he obviously does NOT understand because his actions are the complete and utter inversion of what it means and how it came to be.  Just like all of the toothless people walking around Appalachia talking about “socialism” because millionaires and corporations are being asked to pay their fair share of taxes.  These people continue to obliterate the boundaries of irony and satire daily.

Almost as brazen, callous and stunning as the Rand Paul headstomping, is Supreme Court Justice and ‘alleged’ porn enthusiast Clarence Thomas’s wife Ginni actually having the guts to call Anita Hill and say this:

“Good morning, Anita Hill, it’s Ginni Thomas,” she said, according to ABC. “I just wanted to reach across the airwaves and the years and ask you to consider something. I would love you to consider an apology sometime and some full explanation of why you did what you did with my husband. So give it some thought and certainly pray about this and come to understand why you did what you did. Okay have a good day.”
You see, even though her husband has lifetime tenure on one of the most powerful institutional bodies in our nation and has helped decide pivotal presidential elections, helped open the floodgates of corporate money into our elections  etc. etc–all despite considerable evidence that he was an under-qualified appointee laden with chronic and credible accusations of sexual harassment at damn near every place he worked–he is somehow still angry and, more importantly, still a victim, both in his own mind, his wife’s and in the larger conservative collective consciousness.  This move has backfired because it has prompted other women from Justice Thomas’s past, like Lillian McEwan, to come forward and corroborate Anita Hill’s testimony and truthful allegations from back when.  McEwan spoke to the Washington Post in a devastating article which includes her assertions, eerily similar to Hill’s, that Thomas was “obsessed with porn.”   The Post article goes on to recount the following:
“However bizarre they may seem, McEwen’s recollections resemble accounts shared by other women that swirled around the Thomas confirmation.  Angela Wright, who in 1984 worked as public affairs director at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission — which polices sexual harassment claims — during Thomas’s long tenure as chairman, shared similar accounts with Senate investigators.Once, when walking into an EEOC seminar with Thomas, he asked her, “What size are your breasts?” according to the transcript of her Senate interview.Her story was corroborated by a former EEOC speechwriter, who told investigators that Wright had become increasingly uneasy around Thomas because of his comments about her appearance.” 

All of these woman tell strikingly similar tales.  Yet obviously they are all part of a well-coordinated liberal trap to victimize poor defenseless ole’ Justice Thomas.   In 1992 a conservative cottage industry dedicated to bashing Anita Hill sprung up overnight and wasted no time and spared no expense to damage and destroy this woman’s reputation.  They largely succeeded.  The American Spectator (as an aside-I’d like to say that even if the people that read this blog consist of  just my father and a few assorted friends, it’ll still be superior in integrity and quality to the American Spectator) and other fonts of conservative rubbish devoted months worth of ink and entire issues to Hill.  David Brock wrote one of the many books defaming Anita Hill, but when the dust settled, and he learned more about Thomas’s true nature from fellow travelers in the conservative movement, Brock realized that much of what she’d testified to regarding Thomas was true.  But by then the damage was done and Thomas was on the Court so he could deliver the man who appointed him’s son to the Presidency eight short years later.  This painful realization, recounted by Brock in his excellent book, Blinded by the Right, was one of the catalysts leading to his eventual renunciation of conservatism and his subsequent co-founding of Media Matters for America.   But in what passes for conservative reality, Mrs. Thomas is the aggrieved party holding her hand out scrounging for an apology.  It astonishing that the accumulated weight of the grudges, crocodile tears and self-pity carried around by the Thomas family hasn’t plunged DC to the bottom of the Potomac, yet.

So to recap-

Brave freedom loving patriots wearing “Don’t Tread On Me” buttons tread on a woman’s head for having the gall to exercise her own freedom of speech and they are the victims who’d greatly appreciate an apology.

According to his wife, one of the most powerful men in the United States is owed an apology for being victimized by a relatively powerless woman, who was mercilessly marginalized and largely destroyed by his brain-dead conservative minions and shock troops, even though mounting evidence corroborates that what she said about him was true.

2 textbook examples of conservative pathology: No matter how wrong you are, no matter how much power and control you accumulate-you are always the one being persecuted.  No matter how many women you batter, or how many female heads you step on (literally in Kentucky/figuratively in Thomas’s world)-the cameras lie, liberals are the true villains and you are the victim.

Target Rich Environment Vol. II (Post and Examiner edition)

October 7, 2010

Examining conservative pathologies:

One of my guilty pleasures since moving to D.C. has been reading the Washington Examiner a few times a week.  It’s funnier than the Washington Times because it exudes this sort-of faux intellectual seriousness, Reverend Moon and the Times just can’t aspire to, while spouting the exact same, straight from the playbook, conservative gibberish you hear in every other conservative media outlet.  Yesterday I had to laugh while reading an article titled “GOP Star Chris Christie endorses Bob Ehrlich” which was filled with breathless, fawning quotes about Christie being “a big star” and providing the “type of leadership voters want to see everywhere.”  The smiled faded when I encountered the following passage (emphasis mine):

“Since taking office, Christie has identified more than $2 billion in unspent funds, forced schoolteachers to pay for their health care benefits and slashed state spending by $3 billion without raising taxes.”

The fact that Christie forced teachers to pay for their own health care benefits was actually offered as evidence of his AWESOMENESS in a supposedly serious newspaper in our nations capitol.  I never cease being shocked and saddened by the pathological hatred and contempt conservatives have for teachers.  It’s mind-blowing.  The “heroic” Christie “slashed” $560 million in education funding for New Jersey schools.  Think about that.  Imagine the impact those cuts are having on teachers and schools in places like Camden, Hoboken and Newark.  Christie said he’d free up some of that aid if teachers agreed to a wage freeze and pay for a higher percentage of their benefits out of pocket.  Here is one of the many places the conservative mind goes entirely off the rails and out of the realms of reality: people like Christie and bottom-feeding, dime a dozen, radio hacks such as Neal Boortz actually seem to think that teachers are rich, pampered, overcompensated “terrorists.”  Part of me understands the reasons for this pathological antipathy towards teachers (in as much as I can as someone with a brain/soul).  Conservatives entire world view, ideology and conception of history shrinks and recedes further into fantasy every time a textbook is opened and a lesson is taught.  The shallowness, inadequacies and failures of their philosophy is laid bare as a child progresses through junior high and beyond.  They know this, so they do things like labeling plain-old curriculum based teaching and learning “indoctrination,” because it doesn’t adhere to, or reinforce, the fantasies conservatism depends on.  Modern education can’t nurture conservative fantasies because as Stephen Colbert once famously said: “Reality has a well-known liberal bias.”  Labeling education “indoctrination” hasn’t gained much traction outside of the closed circle of the same-old fevered minds, so they are stepping up their efforts by going straight to the source and writing their own textbooks; objective reality be damned.
The other reason conservatives hate teachers so much is that they are unionized.  Not satisfied with decimating and destroying labor unions in almost every other economic sector, conservatives demonize unions like the National Education Association incessantly.  Starting in 2004 when Secretary of Education Rod Paige actually referred to the NEA as a “terrorist organization” in a speech, this dangerous and despicable slur has been echoed by unoriginal con-men like Boortz who took it a step further declaring teachers unions to be “more dangerous than Al-Qaeda.”
Why because they refuse to let what’s public be privatized?
Look, these teachers could get paid more money annually than Rush Limbaugh, Bill Gates and Tom Brady combined and it still wouldn’t enough in some cases.  Schools are underfunded from the outset and falling part, morale is low, parents expectations are different etc. etc. and there is always a conservative ‘star’ like Christie looking to squeeze blood from a stone and take more and more funding away.   Harold Meyerson said it eloquently in his Washington Post column yesterday, describing the conservative penchant for scapegoating teachers pitch-perfectly:
“Blaming teachers for the dysfunction of inner cities and the decline of American industry lets a lot of other, more culpable, parties off the hook.”
My biggest fear is that one day the idealism and commitment to public service that drives most men and women to become teachers will no longer be strong enough to withstand the low-pay, the demonization, the deteriorating schools, etc.  The conservative con-men and women like Sarah Palin who thrive on un-educated, so-called “low information” voters may then, finally,  be ensured of Rove’ “permanent majority” and Mike Judge’s prophecy of an Idiocracy will be fulfilled.

Lobbyist/Oil Industry exec. or Senator?

Senator of British Petroleum, Mary Landrieu wrote a letter to the Washington Post yesterday in which she attempted to defend her hold on Jacob Lew’s nomination to be director of the Office of Management and Budget.  The language is interesting to say the least.  I can’t tell if it was written directly by one of her BP colleagues, only to have her name stamped on it at the last minute, or if she can no longer publicly maintain the fictional notion that she works for the people of Louisiana.   Let’s take a closer look at the language and tone (emphasis mine):

“Since the day an unprecedented moratorium shut down deep-water oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico for every company except the one that was drilling relief wells after causing the April oil spill, I have tried in vain to show the Obama administration how its handling of this situation completely missed the mark. In the parlance of the industry, the administration’s policy struck a dry hole.”

Senator, you know what else is “unprecedented?”  The scale and scope of BP’s negligence in the destruction of the Gulf Coast.  You can actually sense the mask slip while reading the “In the parlance of the industry…” sentence.  I’m sure if Landrieu actually wrote this she had to hit the backspace key a few times to fix the initial draft where she’d no doubt instinctually written: “In the parlance of our industry.”

She, or the lobbyist, continues:

“My hold on Jacob Lew’s nomination to be director of the Office of Management and Budget comes as a last resort, after months of meetings, hearings and testimony from citizens and experts failed to move the administration from a misguided course. Instead of curtailing “big oil,” administration policy has crippled independents and smaller operators.”

You gotta love the paternalistic tone of the oil companies seeping directly through Senator Landrieu in the use of the phrase “misguided course” to describe Administration policy.  It is corporate speak extraordinaire.  Also note the dismissive use of quotes around the phrase “big oil” like it’s some radical, out-of bounds, Marxist epithet.  Then comes the predictable chorus of how it’s the poor small “operators” who are being hurt.  There is nothing like the spectacle of monolithic multinational companies speaking through corrupt Senators and hiding abjectly behind the concept that they are acting nobly in the interests of the little guy.

Cue the strings for Landrieu’s grand finale:

“When we met some weeks ago, Mr. Lew gave no indication that he understood how devastating the moratorium’s effect is on the Gulf Coast economy or how a prolonged blockage of new offshore oil production can affect the national economy. As the president’s top economic adviser, the budget director has the power and responsibility to overturn a detrimental economic policy. Mr. Lew simply repeated the administration’s policy stance and refused to consider the economic hardships it is causing. That is not good enough for me or the people I represent.”

It can, almost, go without comment and/or explication.   You cannot tell me a lobbyist or BP employee didn’t write this letter/press release.

The moratorium is “devastating” and “detrimental” (to BP’s bottom line).   A “prolonged blockage” will effect the “national economy.”  Can you sense the vague threat and overt fear-mongering in that sentence?   Finally, this policy just isn’t “good enough” for the Oil execs. “I represent.”

The truth at last.