Andrew Sullivan on Teabaggers and Nihilism

[mykevermin]

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/01/hello-to-all-that.html

Reader remarks bolded, Sullivan's intro is not.

I have to say that my deepest gloom right now is about how exactly the kind of red-blue, right-left, abstract ideological posturing that has bedeviled the US since Vietnam has come back with a vengeance. My hope was that Obama could get past this. He's trying and his record, to my eyes, is exactly as he promised. But old habits die hard, and the anger on the left and viciousness on the right seems straight out of a boomer playbook. I think the right is much more destructive right now, but the Hamsher left is driving me a little nuts as well. A reader echoes this sense:

My teabagger parents are gloating today about the Brown victory. To them, this whole politics game is like football: they simply cheer for the red team to beat the blue team. Period. They don’t know or care how Brown or any of their other preferred candidates are going to solve the real crises my generation will face.

And for all their slogans and smugness and phony outrage, the teabaggers are on the wrong side of the future in every way I can imagine: Entitlements will have to be cut. The eligibility age for Medicare and Social Security will be raised, benefits will be means-tested, and Medicare will eventually be rationed. Everyone in my generation knows this. We accept it. But we want those programs to stick around in at least a minimal, bare-bones form. The teabaggers just mindlessly shout “Don’t cut my Medicare!” But they don’t mind bankrupting it for my generation.

Taxes will be raised. This is a fact. But teabaggers keep demanding tax cuts, insisting that cuts increase revenues, a claim that can’t even be called discredited because it was never credible in the first place. Policy-smart conservatives know it’s hooey, but teabaggers love it because it’s a convenient, feel-good talking point, truth be damned.

The rest of our lives will be filled with economic stagnation and profound personal insecurity.

The health care system as we know it will fall apart, spiraling costs will destroy growth, and the government will be forced to take an ever-bigger role in health care, sooner or later. What it means to be middle-class will be drastically different in fifty years, maybe even twenty. The disruptions of globalization will require government to alleviate the economic risk on individuals through programs like expanded unemployment benefits, targeted job training (and re-training), and education reforms. Teabaggers’ answer? Scream “Socialism!” and argue for ending all regulations and social welfare programs.

The theme of the future will be the need to accomplish more with fewer government resources. This will require a generation of leaders committed to the old-fashioned conservative notion of good government. For teabaggers, though, it’s an article of faith that there is no such thing as good government, so they don’t care what kind of hacks they put in office.

American empire will have to be rolled back. We can’t afford it. The defense budget must be cut. But teabaggers just want more and more war, imperial occupations that never end, in every corner of the globe. You have to wonder if war simply makes them feel good. Climate change and peak oil are facts. They will alter our lives in ways that seem like science fiction to us now. But teabaggers grasp at any flimsy excuse they can find not to face these facts, from “Al Gore is a hypocrite!” to “Drill, baby, drill!” to “The emails prove it’s all a hoax!”

The ridiculous, exhausting culture war has to end. My generation is sick of re-fighting Vietnam and Selma and Stonewall. We don’t want to be defined by whether we eat arugula or wear Carhartt. But the teabaggers need the culture war to continue forever because it ratifies their prejudices. It justifies their hate. It prevents the change they fear.

Now who is better prepared to start solving these problems now, a pragmatist like Obama or the teabaggers? Who is the real small-C conservative? If teabaggers continue to stand in the way—or God forbid, if they take power—how much longer will it take for leaders to emerge who are willing to do the hard work? I asked my father what his solution would be. “Blow up the whole government,” he said. “I’m not responsible for your security.”

If that’s not nihilism, what is?

 

[fatherofcaitlyn]

I would rather run off the cliff while I'm still young and my parents aren't in nursing homes.

 

[usickenme]

Brav-ing-o

 

[speedracer]

Great post dude.

 

[evanft]

That was pretty ing awesome. I''m really starting to think this whole "democracy" experiment is falling apart. People are too stupid.

 

[Trancendental]

I didn't know bmulligan's son had a blog.

 

[dmaul1114]

Very much agree with everything that person said. Especially this part:

The ridiculous, exhausting culture war has to end. My generation is sick of re-fighting Vietnam and Selma and Stonewall. We don’t want to be defined by whether we eat arugula or wear Carhartt. But the teabaggers need the culture war to continue forever because it ratifies their prejudices. It justifies their hate. It prevents the change they fear.

I'll give a case in point on this. I'm a big fan of West Virgina University sports having been born and raised in the state and doing my undergrad there. A while back I made the mistake of starting to post on a WVU sports forum, and especially the mistake of the Off Topic forum (I knew better than to bother with the Politics & Religion forum there for the most part!).

This culture war stuff was just incredibly pervasive there.

Someone mentions seeing some foreign film in the movie thread--they at best get hassled as being part of the "whine and cheese crowed" and mor often got called a homo or other gay slug.

Someone posts about some great ethnic food or other "high brow" cuisine they enjoyed--homo.

Saw a play, musical, opera, ballet etc.--homo.

Drink lattes, cappuccinios or anything other than tastless Folgers/Maxwell house black--homo.

Drink microbrew beer or drink wine--homo.

And on and on and on. And there's no hyperbole or exaggeration there. There's a huge section of the right--especially the lower class to middle class right in rural areas--that just have an abject hatred of anything remotely tied to liberalism or what they perceive as the "elites."

And it ranges from petty shit like that, to this ing retarded fear/hate of intellectualism that's growing in this country with the rise of these people and figure heads like Palin and Limbaugh. Now people that are smart and highly educated are something to be hated and feared and ridiculed. Shunned as out of touch elites.

One can only hope this movement will subside some as each generation is having higher and higher percentages of college graduates. If not, this country will be come a ing unbearable place to live.

 

[fatherofcaitlyn]

[quote name='evanft']That was pretty ing awesome. I''m really starting to think this whole "democracy" experiment is falling apart. People are too stupid.[/QUOTE]

You're under the impression that the lowest level of people have a say.

People are too stupid, but, more importantly, people are kept too stupid.

The occasional odd soul can rise above the ignorant masses, but only temporarily.

Stupidity is like the Pacific Ocean and intelligence is like the Hawaiian Islands that are eventually weathered into oblivion.

 

[mykevermin]

I wear Carhartt and eat argulua.

I'm so ing moderate I want to puke.

 

[dmaul1114]

[quote name='mykevermin']I wear Carhartt and eat argulua.

I'm so ing moderate I want to puke.

[/QUOTE]



It's great how those people make everything so black and white. Yeah I like lattes, and I buy flavored creamer for my coffee at home. I like good food, good beer, indie films, etc. etc.

But I also visit my parents in WV a few times a year and spend a lot of time fishing with my dad and doing other "redneck" hobbies that these idiots think us "elites" threaten some how.

But they're so blinded by their irrational hate and fear that they're unwilling to see any common ground. Even being on the WVU site where everyone is a fan of the same team, the animosity was incredible. If you were a member of that "wine and cheese" crowed you weren't a "true fan." Kind of ironic since those wine and cheeser's they so hate are who make the big donations to to the athletic department that makes the teams they root for so good in recent years. Yet they're not true fans or true West Virginians because they've gotten and education, found success and moved away because there's no job and little cultural options (entertainment, dining etc.) in WV.

 

[spmahn]

So he's countering the same tired right wing talking points and rhetoric with the same tired left wing talking points and rhetoric, what's so new about that? What pisses me off is that both parties continue to get increasingly polarized, and there seems to be fewer and fewer voices of reason.

Any time I see a debate on any subject, I rarely seem to find rational discourse. With Global Warming for example the argument is always either "It's definitely happening and if we don't make huge change and revert ourselves technologically back to the stone age, we're all going to be dead in 5 years" or "You're nuts, Global Warming is definitely not happening, pollute all you want it doesn't matter". Can't we ever get any reasonable voices from the middle, or will both sides perpetually drown them out and continue to make such sides irrelevant?

 

[speedracer]

[quote name='spmahn']So he's countering the same tired right wing talking points and rhetoric with the same tired left wing talking points and rhetoric, what's so new about that? What pisses me off is that both parties continue to get increasingly polarized, and there seems to be fewer and fewer voices of reason.[/quote]
There's many reasons to dislike the Democratic party, but polarization doesn't strike me as one of em. The Senate majority leader is a pro-life Mormon. The House Speaker is a San Fran liberal.

Internet supporters aside, the reality is that the Dems are all over the map and not united under a single polarity (which is how they've always been). A far cry from the crushing of anything even somewhat moderate on the Republican side via the teabaggers and litmus tests that even Saint Ronnie would fail (lulz).

Just sayin.

 

[mykevermin]

I almost ended up in a fistfight at a bar a few years ago when I got crabby with a Cincinnati sports fan. They were furious that Bob Huggins was shitcanned by the president (at the time, a woman named Nancy Zimpher, who's moved on to the SUNY system). So it naturally led to a venomous amount of sexist tirades from sports fans everywhere - including this dude at the bar.

So I snidely pointed out that Zimpher was a great president to the UNIVERSITY of Cincinnati, and I snidely reminded him that it was a school and not his personal playground.

I didn't make friends with that dude.

But that neighborhood I lived in was a gentrified area with loads of money (how I got the rent I did I'll never know) - on the cusp of a white lower working class neighborhood. Both classes of folks shopped at the same Kroger. I was always amazed at the animosity when I went grocery shopping - folks who largely bought the same shit and crammed it into the same bascarts would sneer at each other and throw the hairy eyeball at anyone who wasn't like them, despite their glaring similarities.

Whatever happened to that Huggins guy? Is he still coaching basketball somewhere? Is he still alive? Is he still relevant?

 

[mykevermin]

[quote name='spmahn']So he's countering the same tired right wing talking points and rhetoric with the same tired left wing talking points and rhetoric, what's so new about that? What pisses me off is that both parties continue to get increasingly polarized, and there seems to be fewer and fewer voices of reason.

Any time I see a debate on any subject, I rarely seem to find rational discourse. With Global Warming for example the argument is always either "It's definitely happening and if we don't make huge change and revert ourselves technologically back to the stone age, we're all going to be dead in 5 years" or "You're nuts, Global Warming is definitely not happening, pollute all you want it doesn't matter". Can't we ever get any reasonable voices from the middle, or will both sides perpetually drown them out and continue to make such sides irrelevant?[/QUOTE]

I don't think that's a good example because that's not a reconcilable issue.

The centrists on global warming: we are absolutely certain that global warming is or is not happening.

 

[spmahn]

[quote name='mykevermin']I don't think that's a good example because that's not a reconcilable issue.

The centrists on global warming: we are absolutely certain that global warming is or is not happening.[/QUOTE]

I would think that a more moderate stance on Global Warming would be "Well, it may be happening, but then again it may not, we're not really sure, but if we all make some common sense changes that won't cause a great inconvenience and don't unnecessarily waste resources, we'll all be a lot better off in the long run."

 

[mykevermin]

That seems overly idealistic to me, yet overly vague at the same time.

Finding common ground that would identify how we can slowly amend our way of life to be more sustainable is a dastardly task. For instance, I think Cap and Trade is a nightmare of a proposal, but for reasons different than those on the right despise it. I see it as a shell game that's not going to curb emissions one bloody bit.

But perhaps there is common ground between "let's return to styrofoam mcdonald's containers!" and "we should all drink our own urine to preserve water" after all. I'm very skeptical that we'll accomplish this, however, in any reasonable amount - people love them some convenience. Ever see how much bullshit packaging goes into those off the shelf microwave meals (I think they're called "compleats")? That shit should be against the in' law, man. And that's not hyperbole from me.

 

[dmaul1114]

[quote name='spmahn']So he's countering the same tired right wing talking points and rhetoric with the same tired left wing talking points and rhetoric, what's so new about that? What pisses me off is that both parties continue to get increasingly polarized, and there seems to be fewer and fewer voices of reason.
[/QUOTE]

The problem is a centrist stance isn't always (or even most of the time) the voice of reason.

The voice of reason is looking at the facts and finding the best solution to a problem that can be implemented in practice and not being sway too much by ideology to where you oppose things that common sense says will work because it goes against your belief system.

And that solution will more often than not be a good bit to the left or right of center depending on the issue. As centrist policies are neutered, half assed policies most of the time that due little to bring about the needed change to resolve the problem.

[quote name='mykevermin']
But that neighborhood I lived in was a gentrified area with loads of money (how I got the rent I did I'll never know) - on the cusp of a white lower working class neighborhood. Both classes of folks shopped at the same Kroger. I was always amazed at the animosity when I went grocery shopping - folks who largely bought the same shit and crammed it into the same bascarts would sneer at each other and throw the hairy eyeball at anyone who wasn't like them, despite their glaring similarities.

Whatever happened to that Huggins guy? Is he still coaching basketball somewhere? Is he still alive? Is he still relevant?

[/QUOTE]


Yep, that grocery store example is a great illustration of what I was talking about. I don't run into that much in WV, since there are no big cities so you don't have those kind of gentrification issues many places. Well maybe there's more of that in the Charleston area, but I never lived near there. But you definitely see it on the WVU boards.

As for Huggins, we're very happy to have him back in his home town and coaching at his alma mater!

 

[Strell]

Which one are you, Myke? Guitarist? Drummer? Dood-in-green-hat?

 

[mykevermin]

The guy that was too cool for the opening act.

 

[Strell]

Oh, I figured you were the opening act.

 

[usickenme]

[quote name='dmaul1114']
This culture war stuff was just incredibly pervasive there.

Someone mentions seeing some foreign film in the movie thread--they at best get hassled as being part of the "whine and cheese crowed" and mor often got called a homo or other gay slug.

Someone posts about some great ethnic food or other "high brow" cuisine they enjoyed--homo.

Saw a play, musical, opera, ballet etc.--homo.

Drink lattes, cappuccinios or anything other than tastless Folgers/Maxwell house black--homo.

Drink microbrew beer or drink wine--homo.

And on and on and on. And there's no hyperbole or exaggeration there. There's a huge section of the right--especially the lower class to middle class right in rural areas--that just have an abject hatred of anything remotely tied to liberalism or what they perceive as the "elites."

And it ranges from petty shit like that, to this ing retarded fear/hate of intellectualism that's growing in this country with the rise of these people and figure heads like Palin and Limbaugh. Now people that are smart and highly educated are something to be hated and feared and ridiculed. Shunned as out of touch elites.

One can only hope this movement will subside some as each generation is having higher and higher percentages of college graduates. If not, this country will be come a ing unbearable place to live.[/QUOTE]

I can't help but feel that much of that sentiment really got going with Reagan.

 

[AdultLink]

I love the timing of this whine fest. How ironic that this came right after MA lost the dem seat, ior is that just me?

My teabagger parents are gloating today about the Brown victory. To them, this whole politics game is like football: they simply cheer for the red team to beat the blue team. Period. They don’t know or care how Brown or any of their other preferred candidates are going to solve the real crises my generation will face.

And if the tables are turned, do the democrats care about how republican candidates will solve crises? The fact that this guy acts like a reppulican candidate is automatically bad shows his partisan bias.

And for all their slogans and smugness and phony outrage, the teabaggers are on the wrong side of the future in every way I can imagine: Entitlements will have to be cut. The eligibility age for Medicare and Social Security will be raised, benefits will be means-tested, and Medicare will eventually be rationed. Everyone in my generation knows this. We accept it. But we want those programs to stick around in at least a minimal, bare-bones form. The teabaggers just mindlessly shout “Don’t cut my Medicare!” But they don’t mind bankrupting it for my generation.

Taxes will be raised. This is a fact. But teabaggers keep demanding tax cuts, insisting that cuts increase revenues, a claim that can’t even be called discredited because it was never credible in the first place. Policy-smart conservatives know it’s hooey, but teabaggers love it because it’s a convenient, feel-good talking point, truth be damned.

REALLY NOW? Truth be damned? I thought the lib talking point of this health care plan is that taxes wouldn't be raised and health care wouldn't be rationed!

... Or is the point that if we pass the DEMOCRATS VERSION of healthcare suddenly everything will be better? What about the fact that healthcare (as well as government, and pretty much everything) will become bankrupt not because of one side, but by both sides having out of control spending?

The guy is right (Andrew Sullivan, although the comment about Obama doing well...). People are simply fighting left and right politics when really, both parties are to blame.

 

[Papa Neorev]

[quote name='AdultLink']I love the timing of this whine fest. How ironic that this came right after MA lost the dem seat, ior is that just me?
[/QUOTE]

It's not just you. Everyone does it, just few can admit it.

 

[depascal22]

I guess you completely missed the first few months after Obama got elected. You would've thought the anti-Christ got elected but then I can't imagine you having any sort of objectivity, Toon.

 

[mykevermin]

[quote name='AdultLink']And if the tables are turned, do the democrats care about how republican candidates will solve crises? The fact that this guy acts like a reppulican candidate is automatically bad shows his partisan bias.[/quote]

The context is specifically about Scott Brown, and there are plenty of exit polls that show Brown voters are vastly more likely to be disaffected with "Washington" (not to mention nonplussed with Martha Coakley) than they are to be supportive of Brown's policies or platform. To try to contest the sentence you selected from the op-ed, you'd have to believe that voters supported Brown's policy proposals (which he has none at the moment, making that impossible) or his platform (which is scant at best). The deep cynicism that permeated Masschsuetts public opinion polls suggests that Brown was elected solely because of what he does not support and what party he is not affiliated with.

REALLY NOW? Truth be damned? I thought the lib talking point of this health care plan is that taxes wouldn't be raised and health care wouldn't be rationed!

They were talking about what must be done if health care reform is not passed - estimates about the continuing trends of rapidly increasing health care costs if no reform is passed is more than a mere talking point - it's a fact of life.

... Or is the point that if we pass the DEMOCRATS VERSION of healthcare suddenly everything will be better? What about the fact that healthcare (as well as government, and pretty much everything) will become bankrupt not because of one side, but by both sides having out of control spending?

I'm not sure what you're getting at here. You're being quite vague in drawing a concluding line from "demcrat health care reform" (which one: house, senate, or single payer universal coverage?) to "out of control spending." You'd do well to elaborate your point here.

The guy is right (Andrew Sullivan, although the comment about Obama doing well...). People are simply fighting left and right politics when really, both parties are to blame.

The Democrats are doing a magnificent job of beating themselves up from the inside - that's the huge difference. Republicans align themselves far easier than Democrats do - which is why the tongue in cheek Village Voice headline "Republicans take on 41-59 Senate Majority with Brown Win" (or whatever the headline was) is more reality than humor. The Democrats couldn't pass a bill in 12 months with a supermajority in the Senate and a majority in the House.

As Theda Skocpol noted (with a beautifully pointed note at the end): "Democrats are so regionally and ideologically diverse that they not only cannot sustain filibusters when in the minority, they have a hard time getting their act together in the majority, even the near super-majority. What is more, after Al Franken’s election, the media told us the Democrats had 60 Senate votes, and Republicans taunted them with that. But of course they never did. They had Lieberman, a one-man wrecking ball beholden to no party."

It's more complex than "right versus left" indeed; the problem stems from the political right finding harmony in policy and votes far, far, FAR more easily than Democrats.

 

[RedvsBlue]

The biggest threat our government faces right now is the spend happy attitude BOTH parties have adopted in the last decade. There is no need for the bloated spending that has occurred as of late. Whether it's the "faith based initiatives" of Bush or Michelle Obama's new "war on childhood obesity" or even Bush's entry into Iraq. Neither party takes spending into account anymore.

Why is it that the Senate receives automatic pay increases each year that can only be stopped by a vote they take(which is rare). The vast majority of the citizens of this country don't get that, why should they? The president has just about every single living expense paid for by us citizens and yet they still make a salary of $400,000.

Yes these are all small percentages of the budget but eating out at restaurants is a small part of my budget as well that I have had to give up since the economy has taken a hit. The private sector feels it when there's a recession and yet the government just keeps on chugging along sayin' "what recession?"

 

[mykevermin]

[quote name='dmaul1114']Yep, that grocery store example is a great illustration of what I was talking about. I don't run into that much in WV, since there are no big cities so you don't have those kind of gentrification issues many places. Well maybe there's more of that in the Charleston area, but I never lived near there. But you definitely see it on the WVU boards.[/quote]

There's elements of class warfare and antiintellectualism that surrounds this (and I'm sure a few other things as well). I never understood why people despised the NYT the way they did. It's a "liberal" rag because of a well articulated op-ed page? I guess so. It's news coverage is top-notch, deep, and among people who aren't anti-intellectuals, it's the one of the most respected papers globally, and easily the most respected of US papers.

But I stumbled across a headline this morning on the Conan/Leno fued (see, NYT covers bullshit too!). The byline is what hit me like a ton of bricks. A ton of pretentious, thesaurus-laden, polysllabic ton of bricks.

Viewers of the Leno-O’Brien fracas witnessed an explosion of incivility burning through the late-night bonhomie.

That was the byline underneath the headline on the main portal page. The sentence that was to draw you in. But it's written in a way that you can visually see how anti-intellectuals would read that and say "this' a homo paper" and walk away.

But if you turn the frame into "NYT is a biased liberal rag," then the tables are different. It is their fault, their ineptitude, their inadequacies why you aren't reading the paper. It is not that you are afraid of encountering global topics that frighten the xenophobic, ethnocentric mind, or that you're afraid of discovering something written at a 12th grade reading level. It's more comforting psychologically to say it's not my fault, it's your fault.

 

[RAMSTORIA]

this took longer than i thought because im at work...

fixed

My teabagger liberal parents are gloating today about the Brown victory Coakley loss. To them, this whole politics game is like football: they simply cheer for the red team to beat the blue team. Period. They don’t know or care how Brown Coakley or any of their other preferred candidates are going to solve the real crises my generation will face.

And for all their slogans and smugness and phony outrage, the teabaggers socialists are on the wrong side of the future in every way I can imagine: Entitlements will have to be cut. The eligibility age for Medicare and Social Security will be raised, benefits will be means-tested, and Medicare will eventually be rationed. Everyone in my generation knows this. We accept it. But we want those programs to stick around in at least a minimal, bare-bones form. The teabaggers pink diaper doper babies just mindlessly shout “Don’t cut my Medicare!” But they don’t mind bankrupting it for my generation.

Taxes will be raised. This is a fact. But teabaggers pinkos keep demanding tax increases, insisting that cuts increase revenues, a claim that can’t even be called discredited because it was never credible in the first place. Policy-smart conservatives liberals know it’s hooey, but teabaggers far left loves it because it’s a convenient, feel-good talking point, truth be damned.

The rest of our lives will be filled with economic stagnation and profound personal insecurity.

The health care system as we know it will fall apart, spiraling costs will destroy growth, and the government will be forced wants you to think that take an ever-bigger role raising taxes on a scale never seen before will fix health care, sooner or later. What it means to be middle-class will be drastically different in fifty years, maybe even twenty. The disruptions of globalization illegal immigration problem will require government to alleviate the economic risk on individuals through programs like expanded unemployment benefits, targeted job training (and re-training), and education reforms. Teabaggers’ The far left's answer? Scream “Socialism!” "Tax the rich!" and argue for ending expanding all regulations and social welfare programs.

The theme of the future will be the need to accomplish more with fewer greater government resources. This will require a generation of leaders committed to the old-fashioned conservative liberal notion of good big government. For teabaggers the far left, though, it’s an article of faith that there is no such thing as good big government, so they don’t care what kind of hacks they put in office.

American empire will have to be rolled back. We can’t afford it. The defense entitlement budget must be cut. But teabaggers socialists just want more and more war welfare, imperial occupations food stamps and foreign aid that never end, in every corner of the globe. You have to wonder if war inflation simply makes them feel good. Climate change and peak oil are facts pseudo-science at best . They The taxes the liberals want will alter our lives in ways that seem like science fiction to us now. But teabaggers pinkos grasp at any flimsy excuse they can find not to face these facts, from “Al Gore George Bush is a hypocrite!” to “Drill, baby, drill!” "Everyone drive hyrbids!" to “The emails prove it’s all a hoax true!”

The ridiculous, exhausting culture war has to end. My generation is sick of re-fighting Vietnam and Selma and Stonewall. We don’t want to be defined by whether we eat arugula beef or wear Carhartt Cabella's. But the teabaggers socialists need the culture war to continue forever because it ratifies their prejudices. It justifies their hate. It prevents the change they fear.

Now who is better prepared to start solving these problems now, a pragmatist like Obama or the teabaggers real conservatives? Who is the real small-C conservative tax and spend liberal? If teabaggers the far left continue to stand in the way—or God forbid, if they take use their power—how much longer will it take for leaders to emerge who are willing to do the hard work? I asked my father what his solution would be. “Blow up the whole government,” he said. “I’m not responsible for your security.” "It worked for the Weather Underground."

If that’s not nihilism, what is?

my point? as much as some people (especially on this forum) would like you to believe that republicans are responsible for all the woes in the country, the fact is the democrats are just as much to blame. who ever this reader is just happens to be liberal and blames the red states... ive slightly adjusted the rant to show the opposite (and equally stupid) side. (i probably missed something or made a mistake somewhere, i blame my job not giving me enough free time to slack on the internet).




[quote name='dmaul1114']
Someone posts about some great ethnic food or other "high brow" cuisine they enjoyed--homo.

Saw a play, musical, opera, ballet etc.--homo.

Drink lattes, cappuccinios or anything other than tastless Folgers/Maxwell house black--homo.

Drink microbrew beer or drink wine--homo.

And on and on and on. And there's no hyperbole or exaggeration there. [/QUOTE]


[quote name='mykevermin']

That was the byline underneath the headline on the main portal page. The sentence that was to draw you in. But it's written in a way that you can visually see how anti-intellectuals would read that and say "this' a homo paper" and walk away.
[/QUOTE]


hmmmm