"Real meaning of life...stuff" - Daniel Jackson
Friday, May 06, 2005

     OK conservatives, here’s the play.  You’re in charge.  You’ve got the ball, and you’re running with it.  You’re supposed to be the grown-ups, at least that’s what you keep telling us.  You’re in control, and you’ve got responsibilities.

     So, control your boyz, dawgs.

     You’ve got Pat Robertson saying that Federal judges are more of a danger to this country than Al Queda.  You’ve got Tom DeLay running around accusing a poor man who’s a victim of unimaginable tragedy of being a wife-killer.  You’ve got a handful of people publicly advocating the murder of judges and doctors.  You’ve got Ann Coulter saying our government should kill journalists and that liberals should be given cause for fear.  She has said we need a return to McCarthyism.  She has publicly called for a witch-hunt style mob action against any dissent from our government.

     You have a political machine that has been running full-bore to demonize a minority for the purpose of increasing your political power, and to permanently entrench them as a legally defined class of sub-human sub-citizens.

     And you expect people to disagree with you nicely?

     What’s “nice” going to get anyone?  Is Alan Colmes more than just a well-paid shill?  Is he actually an example of what you expect “liberals” to act like? 

     “Oh Mr. Hannity, I wish I could be like you, so All-American looking with the square jaw and all.  If I didn’t need my inhaler and nasal spray so much I could be a ruggedly individualistic conservative like you.  But I’m a pussy, and your strong leadership makes you say things that hurt my feelings?”

     Screw that.

     You hold the power, you set the tone.  The opposition will not be held to civil dialogue while you invite people who encourage political murder, violence, and persecution to speak at your fundraising events and political rallies.

     And then you raise a hue-and-cry over some young college liberal who asks Ann Coulter what she would think of a man who “only fucks his wife up the ass”?

     Do you seriously expect any liberal who’s been paying attention to blush at this question?

     Your dogs have been howling for quite some time about how consensual sodomy is an automatic ticket to hell.

     You’re boyz Dobson and Falwell will tell anyone that a wife has to do whatever her husband says.  I believe that’s Coulter’s position too.

     I’m sure you don’t understand the confusion on the point of when sodomy is a mortal sin and when it is something endorsed by God and the sanctity of marriage.  I’m sure you don’t get why “liberals” would think that consensual sodomy between two men was miles more OK than possibly non-consensual, religiously forced sodomy between a married husband and wife.

     I’m also sure that you don’t get how someone might think that dropping an “F bomb” might not seem like that big of a deal when the agenda of the evening is set by an honored speaker who advocates politically motivated murder, terrorism, vigilantism, and government violation of constitutionally guaranteed and protected human rights (and does it while pouting provocatively, giggling like a school girl, and tossing her mane of blond hair as if she’s talking about her naughty prom date rather than the destruction of all that is American…THAT’S just creepy as all hell).

     “There were children in the audience!”  you cry?  Do you mean to tell me that people brought their children to hear a fascistic cocktail waitress advocate political murder, and got upset because their child heard the “F word?”

     You can decry the “F word” all you want.  You can complain about the “lack of civility in public debate”, you can cry all you want about the “hate-filled, intolerant left”…but those crocodile tears won’t fool anyone.

     I say again.  You hold the reins.  You are moving the ball.  You are setting the tone and the agenda.  You’ve got most of the press bought and paid for, and the rest cowed.  You are in control of most of the speech in this country right now.

     You got McCain and Powel to fall into line and pimp for this president, you herded numerous dissenting R.I.N.O.s along on your little campaign cattle drive…

     Do you expect anyone to believe for a second that the people out there talking and agitating for the destruction of the press, the independent judiciary, and the dehumanization of various classes of people are doing so without your blessing and silent approval?

     Then repudiate them.  Come right out and say “The Republican party supports the basic, fundamental human rights of all Americans.  The Republican party does not support any form of assassination or political murder.  The right to dissent is a fundamental American right.  The voicing of and following of personal conscience is the right and duty of every American, and the defense of that right and duty is the primary role of government.”

     Go ahead.  I dare you.

     Until then, shut up about civility.  If you can’t have the decency to act like real Americans, then at least don’t be hypocrites.

Friday, May 06, 2005 12:43:40 PM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [4] | #
Friday, May 06, 2005 4:17:19 PM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00)
You fail to point out the astomishing hypocrisy on the "F-bomb" issue when you have a GOP vice president who has no problem using it on an open mike on live television and is lauded for it by the same people who say it's wrong in this case.
The Evil Cub
Friday, May 06, 2005 4:44:24 PM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00)
Cub,

Don't you remember how the police swept in, grabbed Vice President Cheney, hauled him outside, slammed him down on the hood of the squad car, handcuffed him, and charged him with public indecency?

No better treatment than this young man recived for his lewed behavior at Ann Coulter's speech.

WE're an egalitarian society, you know. No special treatment here.

Trees
kemaris
Monday, May 09, 2005 4:04:07 PM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00)
I've thought about this. I've decided that a good way to decide what is acceptable to say in public is by thinking about what I could say in front of my mom without making too many waves. If I were to decide to make a strong political statement juxtaposing gay sodomy to heterosexual 'fucking up the ass', I wouldn't feel the need to censor myself. I think that the topic calls for a pragmatic kick, which we achieve linguistically through using obscenities. Since the whole issue of gay sex is an emotionally charged one, there is certainly a time and a place for charged language.

I think that there is a definite difference in the semantics of "making love," "copulating," "mating," "having sex," and "fucking". Of course we have many other expressions for the act of inserting a phallus into something/someone. Some of our terms needn't even involve a phallus, though. What I'm getting at, is that there are much different implications emotionally and I would also argue morally between 'fucking one's wife (potentially against her will)' and 'making love to one's same-sex lover.' Is one better than the other? Yes, I think that consensual, loving acts between two adults, regardless of gender is morally more acceptable than an act that would be non-consensual and/or considered degrading by one of the participants. I'm certainly not saying anything against heterosexual couples that engage in consensual anal sex. I am saying, though, that consent is necessary and it is up to the couple, regardless of gender, to make such decisions mutually.

For those interested, "fuck" comes from an old Indo-European root meaning 'to slide back and forth, insert'.
Karen
Monday, May 09, 2005 8:44:26 PM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00)
Fucking linguistics.

:-)
kemaris
Comments are closed.
Search
Archive
Links
Categories
Admin Login
Sign In
Blogroll
Themes
Pick a theme: