Andrew Breitbart: Mall Cop

Cow Towing to Other Countries

Archive for the ‘Godwin’d’ Category

They Make Take Our Lives, But They Will Never Take Our Dadrock

leave a comment »

Man, what is with conservative columnists having epiphanies about AMERICA while dragging their kids to museum-of-boomer-rock shows?  First David Brooks tossed his advanced degrees in the gutter in favor the “emotional education” given to him by Bruce Springsteen (yeah, I don’t know what the fuck he was talking about either), and now Big Hollywood’s Joseph F. Connor has learned, with some help from Tom Petty, that everything about America statehood is awesome, except for, you know, the American government, which is evil.

I have never heard Tom Petty talk politics. When it comes to performers, that generally is a good thing.

Connor really hates it when musicians get all political.  That is the WORST.  He’d like to sit at home and vibe on “Soak Up the Sun,” but instead he’s got to listen to all these terrible NUGE records to maintain his pristine conservative earspace.  Now that Connor’s done admonishing artists for having political views and speaking about them, he’s going to spend the next few hundred words straining to read a political message into a Tom Petty song (spoiler: it lines up perfectly with his own ideology!  Who would have thought?):

Last week my wife and I took our kids, 13 and 11, to see Petty and the Heartbreakers…

As the band played “Refugee” I couldn’t help but focus on the audience, including my children, singing in unison “everybody’s got to fight to be free.” Like many Petty lyrics, its a simple, direct, powerful line; easily repeated but probably rarely internalized.

Dude, next time just let little Johnny and Susie go see Soulja Boy like they wanted to.  Or get a sitter and just take your wife; she deserves a night out if she’s dealing with preteens belting out “Refugee” around the house.

We, as Americans, do have to fight to be free.

Who am I supposed to be fighting again?  The British?  The concept of tyranny?  I guess terrorists, maybe, but that’s not something “we, as Americans” all have to deal with.  It’s not like those guys are running up all in my and Joseph F. Connor’s grills, personally, telling us we can’t do stuff.  Just for you, Joseph F. Connor, next time a jihadist comes up to me all, “Hey, dieblucasdie, stop being free,” I’mna punch that guy and sing “You Don’t Know How It Feels” to him.

The upcoming generations need to understand that. Our grandparents had to fight to be free of Nazism. Our parents and my generation (though we can discuss The Who at another time) fought to be free of Soviet style communism.

But for this generation and the at least the next, not only do we have to fight to be free of radical Islam but more insidiously we have to fight to be free from the tyranny of our own federal and even local governments’ designs on our liberty. We, who are parents, have a responsibility to educate our children. Our freedoms are threatened by those within and without.

Oh, I see, it’s my local aldermen I should be punching.  He isn’t clear about which liberties my local government might have “designs” on, so how am I supposed to educate the kids?

We must teach our children about the Declaration, the Constitution, our God given individual rights, the brilliance, morality, sacrifice, and bravery of our forefathers and instill in our kids the motivation to become active participants in guaranteeing their own freedoms. Pink Floyd asked, “Mother, should I trust the government?” The answer is “no.” It is filled with too many people who would gladly step in and decide our freedoms for us.

I’ve often wondered how the paranoid anti-government right manages to reconcile such an intense distrust of American institutions with a stringent, no-caveat dedication to American exceptionalism/American nationalism.  My pet theory has always been, “They just don’t think about both at the same time,” but here’s Connor, disproving it.  For him, hatred of American government isn’t just compatible with true American patriotism, it is American patriotism’s defining feature.  Oh, whatever, let’s just go watch some VH-1 Classics.


Some of Those that Work Forces are the Same that Burn Crosses

leave a comment »


While Steven “There’s No Such Thing as a Good Liberal”  Crowder certainly wins for biggest jackass on Big Hollywood‘s (metaphorical) payroll, and Doug “Intelligence Has Only Made Us Immoral with More Knowledge”  TenNapel owns the sheer-stupidity department, Charles Winecoff is definitely king when it comes to hysterical overreactions.  

Recently, at the office (a place I sometimes affectionately refer to as Obama Central), I made the mistake of printing out a Washington Post editorial that questioned the foreign policy expertise of our new Commander-in-Chief.  By the time I got to the printer to pick it up, someone else had already seen it – and stamped “DENIED” across the top of the page in red ink.  Next to that was scrawled, “RIGHT WINGER GO HOME.”

The first thing that went through my mind was: cross burnings.  The second was: children are evil (my workplace is overrun by hundreds of twentysomethings).

Yeah, that’s EXACTLY like cross-burnings.  Jesus fucking Christ. The first time I read this, I thought he was joking, making a comical exaggeration for effect.  But no:

As I headed back to my office, images of the Ku Klux Klan, going after people they didn’t know in the middle of the night, raced across my brain.  Then I had to stop myself.  And chuckle.  There was no comparison.

Instead of gossiping at the water cooler, today’s privileged jugend hover in packs around TV monitors to mock the usual suspects – poor old Sarah Palin, the Tea Partiers, Elisabeth Hasselbeck, Miss California (chivalry is deader than dead).  Together, they telegraph their warning to anyone who might disagree: don’t

But my gut kept telling me there was.  Whoever stamped ”DENIED” across my document clearly felt justified in defacing it.  Though petty, this was a hostile act – another tiny blow in the insidious war on free thought.  And one thing I’ve noticed in the stifling PC smog of LA: the Obama generation doesn’t think twice about openly ridiculing folks who don’t follow in lockstep.  They’re still acting like there’s a Texan in the White House.  They can’t let go.  They don’t want to.  Because, like the believers of a certain 7th century ideology that’s made a big comeback in recent years, their objective is not, despite claims to the contrary, to coexist.  To quote Obama advisor Valerie Jarrett, it’s “to rule.”

Yeah, poor Elisabeth Hasselbeck.  She’s a fucking modern-day Emmett Till.

I tried to be rational.  Whoever defaced the page had no way of knowing who had printed it out – just as I had no idea who the defacer was – so it wasn’t personal.  Still, it was hurtful.

And it was bigoted. The defacer didn’t know anything about me – my political affilitation (sic), my sex, my race, nothing.

I love how he’s perfectly willing to jump to the conclusion that every liberal in LA is some sort of hideous Michael Moore/Adolf Eichmann/Lord Voldermort hybrid, but balks at the (plainly accurate) characterization of himself as a “right-winger.”  

Don’t worry though, this piece takes a turn for the AWESOME when Winecoff decides to make it a generational call-to-arms of the “Johnny Unitas, now there’s a haircut you can set your watch to” variety.  

They believe Loose Change is an important documentary, Al Franken a natural for the Senate, and Arlen Specter a hero.  They judge people not for their principles or achievements, but by the letter that comes after their name.  The one coworker I saw who dared walk the Yes We Can-festooned halls in a McCain T-shirt last fall got singled out by a supervisor (”Are you serious?”).  The answer?  Of course not – the tee had been donned as a joke.

Kids today.  They enjoy complete freedom to open their pieholes at the slightest brainfart.  Not that there’s anything wrong with that.  That should be a benefit of freedom.  Yet despite the apparent spontaneity of their farts, a strange uniformity pervades.

Yeah, kids today.  With their “voting” and their “engagement in politics.”  What is the world coming to?

Twenty-somethings are fond of declaring, “It’s a free country!”  But is it?  Really?  And what exactly does that notion mean to them, anyway?  Because from what I can tell, they believe the First Amendment is a natural phenomenon which, unlike the climate, will never change.  At the same time, these kids – who see nothing odd about surrounding themselves with creepy, halo’d icons of The One – mock folks who actually make the effort to exercise their right to free speech on talk radio, at Tea Parties, and at workplace printers.  Talk about a false sense of security.  They think this double standard is perfectly normal..

hahahaha “It’s a free country” is the best example of youth slang Winecoff can come up with?  I feel like I should send him a hip-hop mixtape or something.  Lord knows he needs it.  Good thing, that, contrary to what Winecoff seems to think, mockery is also a form of speech.  Mocking you does not actually curtail your right to free speech!  It’s just an exercise of mine!

In 1983, best-selling shrink M. Scott Peck published his second book, People of The Lie.  In it, he tells the stories of several patients whom he came to believe could be clinically diagnosed as “evil” – a character disorder he describes as “militant ignorance.”  According to Peck, an evil person prefers to psychologically destroy others rather than face his (or her) own faults, exhibits zero empathy towards his targeted scapegoat, and enjoys falsely labeling other people as evil.

You know, like spending eight years comparing people you disagree with to Hitler.

Yeah, this comes after he compared literally everyone under 30 to the Hitler Youth, and to sociopaths (which is what that Peck book is about).  These liberals are sociopaths!  They see conservatives as less than human! 

Oh, wait:

In Don Siegel’s classic sci-fi flick, Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956), the citizens of Santa Mira, California, are gradually replaced in their sleep by emotionless impostors – the proverbial “pod people.”  The film is often interpreted as an allegory for Communism and McCarthyism (a tactic first reviled, then hijacked, by the Left).  But Body Snatchers is more relevant than ever – right here, right now.

And then they’ll come after you.

You walk the halls, wander the streets, visit the homes of other two-legged beings who appear to resemble you on the surface.

When did they all fall asleep?  When are they going to wake up?  Perhaps when they learn, the hard way, that freedom is not just another convenience.

Meanwhile, try not to express a dissenting or individual thought – and don’t gasp if one of them lashes out viciously at a friend who steps out of line – because that’ll clue them in that you’re still human.



Chatty Cathy

with 2 comments


I’m a little proud of John T. Simpson today.  Looks like someone’s been reading my blog!  He manages to avoid the strawman-ey “YOU LIBERALS THINK THAT…” thing that Big Hollywood normally does, and restricts his attacks to actual flesh-and-blood liberals.  He even attacks actual quotes instead of his own paraphrasings!  And when he brings up that DHS publication they’ve been harping on, he links to the real report!  Instead of like, a Confederate Yankee post on it or something.

Well, OK, he still gets Godwin’d

Good question. I’m keeping my eyes peeled, people. You should too. For any more government issue insanity like DHS’ Right Wing Extremism report which, though not as severe as Hitler’s Night and Fog Decree, is just about as broad. Or the Fairness Doctrine, which is less fairness and more doctrine, and could even regulate web content. Just like Iran and China do. Feeling better now?

and it happens after he’s already complained several times about liberals’ comparisons of Bush and Hitler, but he still makes it a solid 500 words before that happens.

Really, though, the introduction of basic intellectual rigor only serves to better illustrate how dumb his argument is.  Simpson:

And now we find that NSA intercepts of Americans have skyrocketed in recent months under the Obama Administration, and well beyond limits set by Congress. The NSA called it “an over-collection of domestic communications in America.”

Over-collection on whom, exactly? DHS-declared extremist threats? Or ‘right wing chatter’? Funny. I never saw the term ‘left wing chatter’ used in any government report. In fact, the term ‘left wing chatter’ isn’t even in the DHS report on possible left wing cyber attacks! How bad is that? In fact, the only other place I’ve seen that term used by the government is for ‘chatter’ on Al Qaeda websites.

If people like Simpson are spending time worrying about DHS’ reports’ diction, then I think the Dems have 2010 in the bag.  Or did I miss the word “chatter” becoming an offensive term?  Sheesh, I thought YOU LIBERALS were supposed to be the overly PC ones.

I do agree, though, with the main thrust of Simpson’s argument, which is that it’s ridiculous for Susan Roesgen to prize dissent from the left, and deem dissent from the right unpatriotic.  With a few caveats:

1) Some of the dissent has been, by definition, unpatriotic, such as raising the specter of secession, or threatening to “Go Galt.” I understand Perry and Dr. Helen do not represent everyone on the right, but y’all are supposed to be the ones who are good at message discipline.

2) Roesgen notwithstanding (and I have no objection to the assertion that she is a total tool), by and large the left’s reaction to the Tea Parties wasn’t “You guys are Anti-American!  You should be censored!”  It was “LOL.”

I may laugh my fucking ass off at what you say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.

Written by dieblucasdie

April 19, 2009 at 5:29 pm

Just Because You’re Paranoid Doesn’t Mean They’re Not After You

with 10 comments

easy-to-readJohn Romano manages, for the first time, not to link to his myspacemusic page in his piece today about a nefarious Department of Homeland Security report on rightwing extremist groups.


Today the Washington Times printed an article about Obama’s DHS crew releasing a report about, and plans to step up efforts to watch, “Right Wing Radical extremists.”  Interesting that this is released just before the Tea Parties are scheduled to happen across America.

From the article itself:

A footnote attached to the report by the Homeland Security Office of Intelligence and Analysis defines “rightwing extremism in the United States” as including not just racist or hate groups, but also groups that reject federal authority in favor of state or local authority.

“It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single-issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration,” the warning says.

Notice the clever use of “immigration” instead of “illegal immigration.”  


Look, if you’re going to comment publicly on a specific government publication, maybe you should, you know, read it.  It’s here (pdf). It contains a section titled “Illegal Immigration,” in giant bold letters.  It uses the phrases “illegal immigration” and “illegal immigrants” repeatedly.  

That footnote quoted by The Washington Times  is a benign attempt to define “rightwing extremism” for the purposes of clairty, since the assessment goes on to take great pains in consistently pointing out that the vast majority of what it defines as “rightwing extremism” is constitutionally protected speech.  Romano:

This is just one step closer to the normative labeling of anyone that disagrees vocally with the Obama administration as extremist.  Speak out heavily against illegal immigration; be careful you could be tagged as a right-wing extremist.  Listen to Rush Limbaugh; be careful you could be tagged as a right-wing extremist.

The section on illegal immigration is entirely concerned with white supremacist militia groups using the immigration issue as a recruiting tool.  From the report:


Over the past five years, various rightwing extremists, including militias and white supremacists, have adopted the immigration issue as a call to action, rallying point, and recruiting tool.

Debates over appropriate immigration levels and enforcement policygenerally fall within the realm of protected political speech under the First Amendment, but in some cases, anti-immigration or strident pro-enforcement fervor has been directed against specific groups and has the potential to turn violent.


The assessment then goes on to list specific hate crimes carried out by various militia groups.  Rush Limbaugh is not mentioned (though he did call for riots at the DNC last year).  

Finally, here is the report’s key finding, in bold letters right at the top:


Threats from white supremacist and violent antigovernment groups during 2009 have been largely rhetorical and have not indicated plans to carry out violent acts.


Run, John Romano!  The Obama Gestapo is coming for you any minute!  Take to the hills!  WOLVERIIIINES!


Written by dieblucasdie

April 15, 2009 at 6:31 am

Providing Skip Press With Helpful WICKEDpedia Links

with 6 comments

otto_welsSkip Press’ new piece is so heavy on teh Godwin it’s difficult to know where to begin, so I’m just going to rip on this one, completely stupid assertion:

Let’s review. The totalitarian National Socialists, a radical left-wing group headed by elected leader Adolf Hitler

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by dieblucasdie

April 5, 2009 at 6:12 pm