The masquerade is over

I believe there are people who are not conservative ideologues who vote entirely on the basis of their opposition to reproductive rights. Likewise, I believe that there are people who are genuinely libertarians, not just conservatives who smoke pot. I also believe that there are white southern conservatives who are not racists.

Let’s be clear, though: much of the Catholic Church’s hierarchy consists of people who aren’t “pro-life” so much as they are right-wing ideologues. Reproductive rights are just a tool for them to turn force the Catholic Church to act as Republican political PAC. Many, many “libertarians” economics bloggers are just hateful wingers:

Some supposedly libertarian bloggers have let down their guard, coming out in favor of the vile Virginia probe lawand the Rush slut attack, and revealing in the process that all that reasonableness was just a facade.

And a large proportion of southern Republicans are insanely racist:

… PPP asks Republicans in Alabama, “Do you think Barack Obama is a Christian or a Muslim, or are you not sure?” Guess how many say Christian? 14%! Among the remaining 86%, “Muslim” slightly leads “not sure,” 45%-41%. (“Not sure” may by the demographic Rick Santorum is reaching out to when he accuses Obama of peddling a “phony theology.”)

But the Alabama Republicans are a thoroughly trusting lot in comparison with their Mississippi brethren. Among Mississippi Republicans, just 12% say Christian, 52% say Muslim, and 36% aren’t sure.

I guess the good news is that the internets make it harder and harder for all of these people to pretend to be decent, principled proponents of smaller government, or whatever it is they try to sell themselves as.

151 replies
  1. 1
    Mnemosyne says:

    That’s because “Muslim” is the polite way to use the n-word in public. I thought you knew that.

  2. 2
    schrodinger's cat says:

    Where does Andrew Sullivan fit in? What does he mean by radical tax reform, that he wants Obama to adopt?

  3. 3
    4tehlulz says:

    I’m sure it’s complete coincidence that Newt competes in the Confederacy Deep South.

  4. 4
    Belafon (formerly anonevent) says:

    I was hoping someone had finally said the n-word. Don’t get my hopes up like that.

  5. 5
    patrick II says:

    It has crossed my mind that the bishops came out with the anti-contraception position the same week that the trial of a bishop wanted to allow a document proving that of a recently dead archbishop had lied under oath about thirty four boy raping priests and also the same week a plaintiff attorney in the Milwaukee diocese bankruptcy hearing claimed he had evidence of 8,000 cases of abuse over the years by catholic priests and counselors.
    Both of those were wiped out of the news, and if Obama or the justice department goes after any broader conspiracy by the catholic hierarchy now it will seem like revenge not justice.

  6. 6
    Rafer Janders says:

    … PPP asks Republicans in Alabama, “Do you think Barack Obama is a Christian or a Muslim, or are you not sure?” Guess how many say Christian? 14%! Among the remaining 86%, “Muslim” slightly leads “not sure,” 45%-41%.

    And I’d bet a quite large portion of this 86% is simultaneously obsessed with the Reverend Jeremiah Wright. Because, of course, Obama is a Muslim who spent years attending a Protestant church.

  7. 7
    Steve in DC says:

    The libertarian movement has always been an odd ball. One part honest libertarians worried about civil liberties and state overreach. One part racists and cranks that are pissed they can’t get their bigot on. One part rich people that just don’t want to pay any taxes ever, and one part conspiracy theorists.

  8. 8
    PTirebiter says:

    Probably a mistake to not occupy Germany after WWI and it looks like restoring voting rights and removing our troops after the civil war was a mistake as well. I for one would welcome my northern overlords.

  9. 9
    butler says:

    (“Not sure” may by the demographic Rick Santorum is reaching out to when he accuses Obama of peddling a “phony theology.”)

    No. “Not Sure” means “I think he’s a muslim don’t want to say it out loud”.

  10. 10
    harlana says:

    Libertarians: whose liberty are we talking about here? Liberty to do what to whom?

  11. 11
    me says:

    Likewise, I believe that there are people who are genuinely libertarians, not just conservatives who smoke pot.

    Some don’t even smoke weed. They just only understand the word “liberty” in the “America, fuck yeah” sense.

  12. 12
    TenguPhule says:

    But the Alabama Republicans are a thoroughly trusting lot in comparison with their Mississippi brethren.

    I understand AIDS is worse then herpes too.

  13. 13
    shortstop says:

    I’d like to see these same questions asked of self-identified tea partiers from every corner of the land.

  14. 14
    catclub says:

    just remember, Obama got about 11% of the white vote in Mississippi. If he had gotten about 15%, he would have won the state.

    Makes me feel special. A white male in mississippi who voted for Obama.

    I really do not understand the person in a McClatchy article who DID vote for Obama in 2008 but now is leaning between Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum because we need a change. Kind of defines the low information voter.

  15. 15
    shortstop says:

    @Rafer Janders: I don’t think they really think Wright is a Christian. Most black people, and certainly the ones with opinions, are sneaky liars about what they believe, don’t you see?

    I’m really looking forward to Joel Pollak’s “vetting” of Obama over the next few months. I expect it to consist of photos of two black people in the same room, which obviously constitutes proof of radicalism.

  16. 16
    TenguPhule says:

    Where does Andrew Sullivan fit in?

    Antitax and Pro-Boyrape

  17. 17
    cat says:

    You left out the fact that only 2/3rd of Alabama and Mississippi Republicans think inter-racial marriage should be legal!

  18. 18

    I did a post today on the Democrats who are fighting all of these anti-woman state bills with their own “anal-probe-before-Vi@gr@” bills … there are quite a lot of them now, and I’m of two minds about some of it.

    I feel like we need to be doing more than just parroting the right and being as shaming and low as they are.

  19. 19
    redshirt says:

    I’d like to consider myself a true Libertarian, with the three following fundamental principles: 1. Equality for all. 2. The government has no business in the personal lives of citizens. 3. The government should be frugal and unobtrusive, while at the same time understanding there are many roles in which only the Government can act.

    Now, I know of no so called Libertarian or Republican anymore that believes these things, so I vote Democrat without hesitation.

    But I do long for a day when reasonable, fair people can unite under such a philosophy. Given the money/power associated with the American Empire, however, it ain’t gonna happen here anytime soon.

  20. 20
    Brazilian Rascal says:

    Where does Andrew Sullivan fit in?

    Tut-tutting the GOP madhouse while defending the very worst offenders (“Pat Robertson wrote me a nice letter! Andrew Breitbart let me look at his iPod song library! People that nice can’t be extremists!”) and splitting hairs to try to sell the latest New-Deal-destruction package.

    So, same as usual. Until a good enough GOP-daddy come along. Then he’s back to smoking out the 5th column.

  21. 21
    shortstop says:

    @Southern Beale: Yeah, I think one or two of these serves to illustrate the ludicrousness of the original legislation. More than that takes our eye off the ball and inspires onlookers to lose interest.

  22. 22
    Culture of Truth says:

    For reasons I do not recall I was following a supposed libertarian leftist on twitter, who turned out to be a conservative, then a Breitbart acolyte, then turned into, or turned out to be, a person with a keen interest in politics as long as it involved something nefarious and black people.

  23. 23
    Mike Goetz says:

    Year 2012: Assholes on Parade

  24. 24
    Democratic Nihilist, Keeper Of Party Purity says:

    You left out the fact that only 2/3rd of Alabama and Mississippi Republicans think inter-racial marriage should be legal!

    @cat: There’s no way it’s that high. Absolutely no way. I’d be shocked if the actual number was as high as 10%.

  25. 25
    Suffern ACE says:

    Won’t matter much what we think of the other side’s rubes since Obama would lose to Romney and barely beat Santorum if the election were held today. All they have to do is sound coherent making a bogus promise to lower gas prices and the election would be theirs for the taking.

  26. 26
    Alesis says:

    I live in Alabama (Birmingham) and it really is hard to overstate the racism, particularly among the older folks. Not to say that many Alabama Republicans aren’t basically decent people but… man.. do they hate them some black folks.

    They especially hate Birmingham as a symbol of the Civil Rights Movement. Anytime I hear the Islamist radicals ranting about pushing Israel into the sea I think of white conservative Alabamians and Birmingham.

    Well, nuts to them we ain’t going nowhere.

  27. 27
    Bruce S says:

    I think that Cowen’s name should have been put in the title of this post. This is shameful and, of all these douchebags, Cowen in particular who commands a certain level of respect (his recent e-book was discussed quite a bit among bloggers who do economics) and he deserves as much publicity on this as he does for….whatever…

  28. 28

    Colin Powell was the only one with the guts to say “And if he was a Muslim, what of it?”

    I cannot fucking believe that these pieces of garbage are even allowed in civil society. I hate religion, and I’ve got nothing to defend Islam itself, but fuck if I’m going to allow a bunch of knuckle-dragging brownshirts exploit religious intolerance for their own ends.

  29. 29
    Satanicpanic says:

    Is there anything that these people won’t believe about Barack Obama? What’s the limit?

  30. 30
    Chris says:

    Let’s be clear, though: much of the Catholic Church’s hierarchy consists of people who aren’t “pro-life” so much as they are right-wing ideologues.

    This. So, so this. As someone who was raised Catholic, I’m perfectly familiar with their ilk, and yes, they’re very definitely right-wing ideologues first and Catholic second (or third, because American nationalism’s in there too).

  31. 31

    I accidentally wallowed in the comments section of that The Blaze piece Krugman links to. The article itself was uncontroversial (just the facts), but the wingers posting there are racist, woman-hating, and blinded with anti-Obama rage. The sense of entitlement and “real ‘Merika” sentiment was dripping. Do any of the wingers know how god-awful they sound when they ask to see pictures/hear stories of Fluke’s relations, blame Hollywood for liberal elitism (and possibly spelling and grammar education), and mis-understand the concept of insurance so completely that they’ve convinced themselves that the fed is going to pay for contraceptive care, or any heathcare at all???

    Those were rhetorical questions, but still. Ignorance on the cat walk. Now I remember why I told my father to never, ever talk politics with me again (he’s gotten wingier as he’s gotten older, and better armed).

  32. 32
    runt says:

    Out pops the cloven hoof, as P.G. Wodehouse said.

    That’s the good thing about this campaign season: It’s getting increasingly difficult for the feeble excuse for a media you Americans have to ignore the ugly truth about this movement. For once in their life, people like Rush Limbaugh and Rick Santorum are actually performing a useful service to their nation.

  33. 33
    gnomedad says:

    @Satanicpanic:

    Is there anything that these people won’t believe about Barack Obama?

    Clearly, no, as long as it’s something “bad”. Even consistency is optional.

  34. 34
    fasteddie9318 says:

    Not Sure? Is he finally here to fix everything? I’m running out of burrito coverings!

  35. 35
    Jessie says:

    @shortstop: we follow politics here on a local, national, andinternational scale. There are many who only know what is in their local newspaper or on local radio or TV news reports. These stories get covered locally only if the state legislature introduces such bills.

  36. 36
    schrodinger's cat says:

    @Bruce S: Isn’t the Econ Dept in George Mason University where he teaches a haven for glibertarians and other assorted wingnuts?

  37. 37
    Hunter Gathers says:

    I thought we were supposed to be worrying about the new Kaplan Test Prep Daily poll showing Obama loosing to Mittens because of teh high price of gas.

  38. 38
    Tom Q says:

    @Suffern ACE: You really need to stop freaking out over every outlier poll, or you’ll never make it to November. For instructive analogy: Mondale led Reagan in some early ’84 polls.

    The basics of this election favor Obama massively. Keep that in mind, and ignore the emotionla contagion of the horse race reporting.

  39. 39
    schrodinger's cat says:

    @Suffern ACE: How do you figure that? Neither Romney nor Santorum seem to have won their party’s nomination yet.

  40. 40
    fasteddie9318 says:

    @The Other Chuck:

    Colin Powell was the only one with the guts to say “And if he was a Muslim, what of it?”

    Odd that these purported guts were nowhere to be found during, say, the My Lai coverup, or when the administration in which he served was inventing reasons to engage in an unprovoked war of aggression with Iraq.

  41. 41
    RP says:

    But is clowntime over?

  42. 42

    […] DougJ linked this GOP poll to the supposed “libertarians” in the GOP coalition who think it’s a fine idea for the state to mandate transvaginal probes for no medical reason. It’s evidence in support of the view that Republican identity is a tribal allegiance, revealed in a series of outbursts at out groups, with no ideological content whatsoever. Poison someone else's mind:FacebookStumbleUponDiggRedditEmailPrint This entry was posted in 2012, News and Current Events, Politics. Bookmark the permalink. ← The Party of Voter Fraud /* […]

  43. 43

    @Southern Beale:

    “anal probe before [the little blue pill]”

    I think the sponsors of these bills are trying to protect women’s heal care by playing the Sauce-for-the-goose card.

    I have no idea if they will be effective.

  44. 44
    Brachiator says:

    I guess the good news is that the internets make it harder and harder for all of these people to pretend to be decent, principled proponents of smaller government, or whatever it is they try to sell themselves as.

    Uh, isn’t this the same Internets that allows people to easily seek out like minded individuals at the speed of light, and reinforce and intensify their fear and bigotry?

    I believe that there are people who are genuinely libertarians…

    Have any genuine libertarians come out to oppose the war on women?

  45. 45
    jl says:

    @schrodinger’s cat:

    ” Isn’t the Econ Dept in George Mason University where he teaches a haven for glibertarians and other assorted wingnuts? ”

    To some extent. But like all academic departments, it’s not uniform.

  46. 46
    New Yorker says:

    And needless to say, the ones most likely to believe Obama is a Muslim or that inter-racial marriage should be illegal are voting for Gingrich or Santorum.

    But I’m sure it’s because those guys are pro-freedom.

  47. 47
    muddy says:

    @runt:

    Out pops the cloven hoof, as P.G. Wodehouse said.

    My new favorite phrase! Thanks.

  48. 48
    jl says:

    @Southern Beale:

    ” I feel like we need to be doing more than just parroting the right and being as shaming and low as they are. ”

    We should do both. I think part of the tactics behind a b0nR P1ll bill should be to educate people about the medical reality of birth control pills and reproductive health, and part of that is, as commenters have noted, most people on BC pill are not using it for birth control.

    And, some of the anti reproductive health bills are so harmful, I think extreme measures are justified to stop them in their tracks, and humiliate their sponsors, or more likely, give them an opportunity to humiliate themselves.

  49. 49
    Culture of Truth says:

    Obama is alternately, from Hawaii, Chicago, Kenya, Arabia, Indonesia, New Guinea and Mars.

    That’s almost as many home states as Mitt Romney.

  50. 50
    dww44 says:

    @shortstop:
    @Southern Beale: when the Dems are in a distinct minority in one’s state legislature, what more serious and effective tactics would you have them adopt? The female members of our State Senate walked out last week to protest an anti-contraception vote. There were like 8 of them, all but one were African-American. That bit of news made the Maddow show, but it didn’t register in our local news outlets.

    Living in these parts, ridicule is currently our most potent weapon, given the lack of viable Democratic candidates for state legislative offices. Would any of you want to move here and run for office? Seriously, we need some good candidates.

  51. 51
    muddy says:

    Even here in the socialwevist paradise of VT, I know many people who vote Republican because their families always voted Republican. I try to explain that olden R is not like now R, and also that national is not the same as what you see here. They are pro-choice, and if I describe a policy or a law they will nearly always pick the Democratic position, right up until they hear whose idea it was.

    “My family has always been Republican” is their final answer. It’s maddening.

  52. 52
    Steve in DC says:

    @Brachiator

    Define “war on women” because many on the left have used such a broad brush there it’s inane and isn’t more than a punch line now.

    If you mean the current fiasco on contraception. The libertarian position is that government shouldn’t be involved in healthcare at all. They are opposed to the entire healthcare act full bore. Several libertarians have come out and said that the pill should just be made available over the counter and call it a day. Others have said you shouldn’t be getting insurance from your employer either and want that to be over with as well.

    And the basic libertarian stance on sexual matters anyways is that the government has no business in it at all.

    They’ve spoken out against the idiocy of the forced ultra sounds, but that goes back to getting government out of healthcare.

    To sum it up, libertarians are certainly for getting government out of uteruses and out of reproductive decisions. But they are also dead set on everybody having to pay for their own regardless.

  53. 53
    rikyrah says:

    CAC is….

    as

    CAC does…..

  54. 54
    Steve in DC says:

    @muddy

    Voting Republican has always been a badge of honor, doing what’s right for America. It’s voting for America’s party, voting to keep the constitution. Voting for a strong America that stands up to it’s enemies and doesn’t appease them. Even if it’s not in your economic best interests at the time, it’s better for America. And it shows that those D’s can’t buy your vote. You won’t be bought and vote against America, you’ll take one for America because you have honor.

    That’s bullshit, but a lot of Republicans feel that way. GOP branding is strong.

    Keep in mind for a lot people political parties are like sports teams. The Cowboys may be horrible and may be full of scandals, but they are America’s team!

  55. 55
    ruemara says:

    Most of that libertarian crap is the reason why I love punching libertarians on the internet. It is, after all, a target rich environment. Most of them don’t know jack shit about Ludwig von Mises, don’t know what we are all austrians now means, have no clue what Ron Paul’s positions mean beyond free MJ and hookers for all. They, sadly, usually pasty, chunks o’ white dudes with IT employment. And it only takes a little poking to devolve them into frothing bags of spittle.

  56. 56
    fasteddie9318 says:

    Things will be better once President Santorum rids us of the teleprompter menace!

  57. 57
  58. 58
    Steve in DC says:

    @Ruemara

    Odd. Most libertarians I know are younger people who’s entire adult life was dominated by Bush shredding the constitution, the wars, and the drug war. Who bought into “vote Democratic it will change” and then when things didn’t change on those issues and got worse turned into Paultards.

  59. 59
    trex says:

    @Shortstop

    I don’t think they really think Wright is a Christian. Most black people, and certainly the ones with opinions, are sneaky liars about what they believe, don’t you see?

    I think you’re right about this. And amplifying this attitude, they’re not really geniuses at making important distinctions. “Muslim” has become an overarching epithet for anyone and anything they don’t like, like the word “French” was in 2002. It has found its place in the Wingnut Argot among such memorable classics as “commie,” “liberal media,” “Clintonista,” “Barbara Streisand” and the insult of the day: “slut.”

    In the ganglionic wingnut mind there are only ever two responses to stimuli: A) I like it, or B) I fear it. These feelings get self-explained variously as good and evil, right and wrong, or real ‘Merkin and everything else, and then buried under layers of victimized feelings and righteous indignation. On this model the term “Muslim” is evolving to become a catch-all for anything they dislike or fear.

    I think it would be interesting to quiz these same very poll respondents again and ask them: “Do you think Barbara Streisand is a Muslim?” I suspect her numbers would see a lot of overlap with Obama’s.

  60. 60
    Rafer Janders says:

    @Satanicpanic:

    Is there anything that these people won’t believe about Barack Obama?

    And one of the craziest things about this is that Barack Obama, as a person, is probably one of the mildest-mannered and least offensive people in politics. Hard-working and faithful family man who made his way up from nothing, not a hint of scandal, etc. — he’s basically everything that American society tells a man he should be.

    And yet, there’s something about him that really excites these people…what could it be, I wonder….

    Amazing that their racism is so virulent. They couldn’t react any stronger to a black man who actually was militant and controversial.

  61. 61
    Chris says:

    @Steve in DC:

    Voting Republican has always been a badge of honor, doing what’s right for America. It’s voting for America’s party, voting to keep the constitution. Voting for a strong America that stands up to it’s enemies and doesn’t appease them. Even if it’s not in your economic best interests at the time, it’s better for America. And it shows that those D’s can’t buy your vote. You won’t be bought and vote against America, you’ll take one for America because you have honor. […] That’s bullshit, but a lot of Republicans feel that way. GOP branding is strong.

    True.

    Whatever else it is, the Republican Party’s been the party of the “Real America” for pretty much its entire existence, and you can tell a lot about who is and isn’t considered “really American” just by looking at how many of them vote Republican. (E.G. Catholics and Southerners now vs one hundred years ago, Muslims now vs fifteen years ago, etc). A vote for the Republicans is a vote for the ethnic establishment. That emotional pull might be the reason (it’s at least one of them) why they were able to survive the Great Depression instead of dying out like Whings or Federalists.

  62. 62
    Waldo says:

    Just goes to show those inbred southerners love their stereotypes.

  63. 63
    Brachiator says:

    @Steve in DC:

    Define “war on women” because many on the left have used such a broad brush there it’s inane and isn’t more than a punch line now.

    Actually, it’s not.

    If you mean the current fiasco on contraception. The libertarian position is that government shouldn’t be involved in healthcare at all.

    A tiresome evasion. Where are the libertarians who are actively opposing state laws that would impose ultrasound or medically unnecessary counselling on women?

    Others have said you shouldn’t be getting insurance from your employer either and want that to be over with as well.

    This is absurd, even from a libertarian perspective. If a private employer wants to provide health insurance, why should it be any of a libertarian’s business?

    They’ve spoken out against the idiocy of the forced ultra sounds, but that goes back to getting government out of healthcare.

    Which libertarians, when, where?

    To sum it up, libertarians are certainly for getting government out of uteruses and out of reproductive decisions. But they are also dead set on everybody having to pay for their own regardless.

    Are you suggesting that libertarians oppose the concept of insurance altogether? So, there should be no car insurance, health insurance, or any rational means of spreading risk? Were libertarians opposed to derivatives and other financial products that were in effect insurance? I realize that this last bit goes further than the thread topic, but this seems to be a logical consequence of the idea that the lone individual must be responsible for his or her life.

  64. 64
    Steve in DC says:

    @Rafer

    I don’t think racism is the root cause of it. Clinton was as white as you can get and was accused of murdering Vince Foster, running a murder for hire ring, trying to kill people via FEMA, trying to turn us over to the UN and create a North American currency with Mexico and Canada.

    You forget what the 90s were like. The reaction to Clinton was just as nuts and out there.

  65. 65

    @ruemara: I’m a non-chunky white dude in an IT-related industry, and I resent your stereotype. Most of my colleagues aren’t white, many aren’t dudes (they’re dudettes), a few are overweight (but not outside the demographic trends of the population at large), and none of them know who Ron Paul is or even care. The only datum that I have that fits your profile is a friend of mine is a raving Democrat (can’t shut him up!). The few libertarians I’ve had the displeasure of chatting with in a work setting weren’t in IT, but in engineering management.

    So now that I’m done scolding, what stereotypes about your profession would you like dispelled while we’re on the topic?

  66. 66
    Amanda in the South Bay says:

    @Steve in DC:

    *sigh* do we have to go over this again? Please, state Ron Paul’s position on the drug war with respect to states, cities and counties. Sometimes, young people are stupid. Especially when they think going full Paultard is the logical alternative to the Democrats.
    You really do live in a privileged bubble where the Federal Government’s enforcement of drug laws (recession proof Fed employment in and around DC) is your main concern.

  67. 67
    Steve in DC says:

    @Brachiator

    Reason.org had several writers cover this. One, they opposed the forced ultrasounds. Two, they stated that BC pills should be an over the counter drug. Three, they stated that having your insurance tied to your employment is pretty stupid and helps cause this. Four, they oppose the entire ACA as well.

    That’s pretty much a non starter in the “war on women” which is a nebulous term. If you’re defining “war on women” as forced ultra sounds then yeah they are against it. If you’re defining war on women as mandated BC coverage than who the hell knows since they are against mandated anybody having to cover anything for anyone.

    @Amanda

    Again, and for the 60th time, I am not supporting him. However the people I do tend to be young. And for them, that’s one of the reasons. Paultards tend to be the younger demographic out there.

  68. 68

    @Rafer Janders:

    And one of the craziest things about this is that Barack Obama, as a person, is probably one of the mildest-mannered and least offensive people in politics. Hard-working and faithful family man who made his way up from nothing, not a hint of scandal, etc.—he’s basically everything that American society tells a man he should be.
    __
    And yet, there’s something about him that really excites these people…what could it be, I wonder….
    __
    Amazing that their racism is so virulent. They couldn’t react any stronger to a black man who actually was militant and controversial.

    That’s because, I think, while they can’t understand a concept like cognitive dissonance, they can (in limited circumstances, to be sure) experience it. And in their world, an uppity black man is by definition militant and controversial, not to mention not a churchgoing loyal family man. So the experience of Obama, who is the antithesis of the wingnut image of a black man,
    is upsetting for reasons they cannot understand. That’s my hypothesis.

  69. 69
    Catsy says:

    @Suffern ACE:

    Won’t matter much what we think of the other side’s rubes since Obama would lose to Romney and barely beat Santorum if the election were held today.

    I want what you’re smoking.

    No, on second thought I don’t.

  70. 70
    Satanicpanic says:

    @Rafer Janders: Can somebody think of the children? If you’re a child of color in the USA and when Obama was elected you were thinking Yay, I can be president now! now you’re probably thinking, you mean being elected President isn’t good enough? There’s no way to win!

  71. 71
    Amanda in the South Bay says:

    @Steve in DC:

    Again, privileged government employees wanting to be able to smoke dope, voting for the ostensible anti-government candidate. Love the irony.

  72. 72
    rita forsyth says:

    Generation after generation carry forth the traditions they were “carefully taught” since pre civil war. The war tore our nation apart and still does today. It seems hatred is a stong emotion when coupled with white supremecy. It will end but not for several more generations. I was a New Yorker working out of North Carolina for many years(based in NYC) reporting to NC. The hair on my head would stand up when I heard the discussions!!! Bless your heart is an arrow ponted at peoples hearts Yikes

  73. 73
    Steve in DC says:

    @Amanda

    Actually mostly college students.

  74. 74
    Redshift says:

    @Tom Q: Not to mention that “if the election were held today” the Obama campaign would have been quite a bit more active in the past several months.

  75. 75
    shortstop says:

    @ruemara: How dare you make such sweeping stereotypes! At least half of them are engineers, not IT.

    I trust you learned something today.

  76. 76
    Chris says:

    @Steve in DC:

    I know people like that too and it depresses me to no end, but I think Paul’s base has more ex-Republicans than ex-Democrats in it. Most of those I know who actually vote for him are young people who grew up in conservative environments and witnessed the utter disaster that was the Bush years – but still preferred to rally to outlier Ron Paul (who criticizes the mainstream GOP in their language and from their side of the aisle) than risk exploring the other side of the aisle (and face the unpleasant possibility that not only was your side wrong, but the other side may have been right).

    In other words, just another search for an ideologically pure True Conservative who won’t let them down like all their other idols who turned out to be RINOs and Liberals (translation: their ideas didn’t work). It’s no accident that the Tea Party Movement sprang partly from Paultard roots.

  77. 77
    ruemara says:

    @Steve in DC:
    @pacem appellant (formerly Vince CA):

    There are also stupid people on the internet who can’t fucking read. At no point did I say “ALL LIBERTARIANS ARE ___”. So go scold yourself.

  78. 78
    ruemara says:

    @shortstop: Yes, I did. People can’t read, but they will die to the death to protect the libertarian brand. And Ron Paul is irrelevant to them.

  79. 79
    ericblair says:

    @Brachiator:

    Are you suggesting that libertarians oppose the concept of insurance altogether? So, there should be no car insurance, health insurance, or any rational means of spreading risk?

    It seems to me that libertarians like the idea of insurance, since depending on the flavor of libertarianism it papers over a whole lot of missing pieces in the theory about what to do when bad shit happens to people. However, I haven’t seen much actual analysis of how insurance would work in libertarian systems, since it tends to bring up uncomfortable questions about the benefits of collective action, free rider problems, contract enforcement, fairness, and the like. Not to mention the issue that you’re tacitly fine with someone dying in a ditch if they don’t get their premium in on time.

  80. 80
    shortstop says:

    @ruemara: Also, you forgot to mention that they usually have food on their shirts and in their unstylin’ beards. (No, really, they do — I had to cover a libertarian conference more than once and I was appalled at the amount of edible material being worn.) Otherwise, 100% spot on (heh).

  81. 81
    john f says:

    @patrick II: Yes and it’s crossed my mind also as this blogger was pointing aspects of this recently as well

    “…To connect the dots and return to my primary point, which is Lori’s emergence now to the very center of the stage of both the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and of the American public-media square: “large anonymous gifts” pour in to enable him as bishop of the Bridgeport diocese to fight against disclosing his records about priests abusing minors and, voilà, he’s suddenly right in the center of the stage and the eye of the media leading the U.S. bishops’ battle against the Obama administration and for religious freedom.It’s almost as if the two are connected, isn’t it? It’s almost as if whoever provides those “large anonymous gifts” is also greasing the palms of some powerful people somewhere to assure that these very same bishops whose fights against gay marriage or against transparency and accountability in the abuse crisis also occupy center stage in the fight against the Obama administration in a spurious battle for “religious liberty.”

  82. 82
    Chris says:

    @trex:

    This. I don’t think they actually know much about what either Muslims or Reverend Wright’s congregation believe, nor do they give a damn. It’s enough to know that they’re on The Other Side.

    But I also think “Muslim” is a synonym for “nonwhite” rather than “everything they don’t like.” I don’t think the “Muslim” slur would ever have worked on Clinton and Carter – they may have loathed these guys, they may believe they were Muslim sympathizers, but they don’t think they were actually Muslims themselves – they’re too white (and I suspect Barbara Streisand would be too). “Muslim” applies to Obama (and Jeremiah Wright, and his church) because they’re ethnically different.

  83. 83
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Steve in DC:

    Several libertarians have come out and said that the pill should just be made available over the counter and call it a day.

    In other words, they just don’t want to be bothered having to think about all of that chick stuff when they have important things to worry about. Otherwise, I’m not sure which idiot is advocating that a drug that can cause blood clots and strokes (among other serious side effects) should be sold over the counter.

  84. 84
    GregB says:

    Between the resumption of Israel/Palestinian violence, the reports from Iraq of the stoning deaths of emos and gays, the murderous rampage by a US soldier in Iraq, reports of a rise in fascism in Russia and the open embrace of religious fascism in the US, I am feeling pretty fucking grim about what is going to happen in the world in the next few months.

  85. 85
    eyelessgame says:

    The libertarians I know are, pretty much, people who took Microeconomics 101 and read The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress, and now they think they know everything there is to know about economics and society. If they’re racist it’s unconscious racism (or racism in the “black people vote for the wrong candidates, therefore are stupid” sense); they oppose Democratic policies because they believe in slippery slopes and ‘people can vote themselves bread and circuses’, and there’s no room for nuance because they were told what they wanted to hear (basically, “selfishness, fuck yeah”).

  86. 86
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Chris:

    I don’t think the “Muslim” slur would ever have worked on Clinton and Carter – they may have loathed these guys, they may believe they were Muslim sympathizers, but they don’t think they were actually Muslims themselves …

    That’s what I mean when I say that “Muslim” is the new, “polite” substitute for n*gger. They basically called Clinton a n*gger-lover, and they would mean the same thing if they called him a “Muslim sympathizer” instead.

  87. 87
    muddy says:

    @shortstop: It’s called “saving it for later”, they should be commended for their foresight.

  88. 88
    KG says:

    @Suffern ACE: based on what? All the latest polling data shows Obama trouncing Romney and Santorum in the “swing states”, up double digits in Virgina, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Ohio. Leading in Nevada, Florida, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania. Hell, there’s a chance that Arizona and Texas could be in play (the latest poll as Obama trailing Romney by 1 in Texas among all voters but about 10 among likely voters, and it’s tough to figure out what the likely voter model is in that poll).

    All of this without Obama actually engaged in anything that would constitute campaigning.

  89. 89
    muddy says:

    @eyelessgame: That fits libertarians of my acquaintance pretty well. The leader of this pack generally resorts to, “Shut up, muddy” in the end. I say Fine, if you have nothing worthwhile left to offer, I guess I win.

    What’s funny to me is that sometimes I just open my mouth and before I even give my argument I get, Shut up muddy. This is my absolute favorite, as it demonstrates that he already knows he’s wrong before he even hears the objection. It really cracks me up. What cracks me up more is that even with this poor debate showing, his groupies think he has won the day because he said, “Shut up!” psh

  90. 90

    @ruemara: Well, no, I actually can fucking read, no thank you very much, and you said that libertarians are “usually pasty, chunks o’ white dudes with IT employment.” So yeah, you didn’t say “all” but I never said that you said “all”. To reiterate, you’re stereotyping. White, obese IT professionals are not “usually” glibertarians, any more so than any person of any gender, proportion or skin tone might be.

  91. 91
  92. 92
    Chris says:

    @muddy:

    Fits conservatives of all stripes pretty well, IMO, whether or not they’re masquerading as “libertarians.”

    I knew one of them back in the health care debate whose boyfriend was a liberal, a pre-med and knew a hell of a lot about the health care system. She didn’t know shit about it and admitted as much, but then told me she’d started attending Heritage Foundation type events about health care, “so she’d know what to argue back at him.”

    Hey, look at me! I don’t actually know jack fucking shit about this issue, but I’m dying to get the Ideologically Correct talking points so I can start reciting these by rote, rather than consider for one minute the horrifying thought that maybe, just maybe, they might not be right about this one.

  93. 93
    Rafer Janders says:

    @jwb:

    That poll doesn’t appear to be broken out by state. Since we have an Electoral College system, any raw percentage versus percentage numbers are essentially meaningless unless Romney has a convincing shot to win in battleground states such as Michigan, Ohio, Pennsyslvania, etc. And he really doesn’t. In fact, he has to play defense in traditionally Republican states such as Virginia and North Carolina that Obama won last time.

    Simply put, poll or no poll, there’s almost no way Romney can win in the Electoral College.

  94. 94
    MCA1 says:

    @a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q): My hypothesis is that it’s basic jealousy. Same as for Clinton. A guy who came from modest background, wholly outside of our political aristorcracy (just like them), and MADE IT, not just to Harvard or a Rhodes Scholarship, but all the way. Obama’s success points up either how lazy/shiftless/stupid they are, or how they were also really hardworking but didn’t have opportunities thrust upon them and hence were frustrated by a less meritocratic than advertised society.

    Anyway, everybody likes to talk about the American Dream, but they can’t stand to see someone other than themself living it. There’s a pretty illustrious history of class-traitor treatment from the middle and lower classes in this country, just as in others with a more open economic class system. It makes us feel better to have someone like a Bush or a Rockefeller or a Kennedy [or a Romney] running the show, because then we can just piss and moan about how they were born with a silver spoon in their mouth, and keep an artificial distance between us based on class. With Obama, we have to recreate that distance. And the GOP and its underground have been pretty good at generating tools with which to do so via dressing up jealousy in different clothes.

  95. 95
    Redshift says:

    @pacem appellant (formerly Vince CA): And again, you’re demonstrating you still fail at reading comprehension. “Libertarians are usually X” does not equal “X are usually libertarians.”

    You want to get outraged at the second statement, go wild. I’d strongly disagree with that, too. Which is probably why no one actually said it.

  96. 96
    trollhattan says:

    @shortstop:

    How dare you make such sweeping stereotypes! At least half of them are engineers, not IT.
    __
    I trust you learned something today.

    I demand Venn diagrams!

    That there might be any over 25 is a disturbing thought.

  97. 97
    Brachiator says:

    @Steve in DC:

    Reason.org had several writers cover this. One, they opposed the forced ultrasounds.

    Interesting. I stopped paying attention to reason.org when they seemed to simply genuflect to the GOP. But I took a look at a couple of articles, and got the typical bland libertarian nonsense that simply restates their “preference” for small government, seeing what these states were doing not as harmful to women, but just typical state overreaching.

    Elsewhere, they ignore the claims that religious insitutions have some right of conscience, and look at a refusal to provide birth control as part of insurance as simply a preference, using auto insurance as an analogy:

    What you could not do—at least not without inflicting grievous bodily injury on the English language and basic logic—is contend that a company which preferred not to provide brake-pad coverage to its employees was somehow denying people access to them. After all, those employees could still walk into any mechanic’s shop, Pep Boys, or Advance Auto Parts and buy all the brake pads they wanted.

    Nonsense. Typical libertarian nonsense.

    Two, they stated that BC pills should be an over the counter drug.

    This is, I suppose, consistent with libertarian views that there should not be any such thing as prescriptions. But again, this gets into libertarian fantasy land in which any kind of insurance would be in practical terms impossible, since there would be nothing but individuals singly trying to cover their medical costs.

    That’s pretty much a non starter in the “war on women” which is a nebulous term. If you’re defining “war on women” as forced ultra sounds then yeah they are against it.

    It’s pretty simple. You have the government forcing unnecessary procedures and counselling on women, interfering with their liberty, and permitting states to pass laws making lies to prevent abortion legal. If libertarians don’t oppose this, and do not take action to vote against the lawmakers who seek to impose such laws, then they are a bunch of fools.

  98. 98
    jwb says:

    @Rafer Janders: Lord knows, it’s one poll out of many, and I don’t put a lot of stake in it; but if you think Obama could lose the nationwide popular vote by three points and he wouldn’t have an Electoral College problem, you’re deluded.

  99. 99
    Mnemosyne says:

    @pacem appellant (formerly Vince CA):

    White, obese IT professionals are not “usually” glibertarians, any more so than any person of any gender, proportion or skin tone might be.

    I think you’ve fallen into a logical fallacy here — just because most glibertarians are white, obese IT professionals, that doesn’t automatically mean that most white, obese IT professionals are glibertarians.

  100. 100

    @Steve in DC:

    I don’t think racism is the root cause of it. Clinton was as white as you can get and was accused of murdering Vince Foster, running a murder for hire ring, trying to kill people via FEMA, trying to turn us over to the UN and create a North American currency with Mexico and Canada.
    __
    You forget what the 90s were like. The reaction to Clinton was just as nuts and out there.

    I am so fucking sick of people always trotting out this nonsense when the discussion turns to the obvious racism motivating a large part of the unprecedented obstruction President Obama is facing.

    Did they spend year after year saying Bill Clinton WAS NOT A LEGITIMATE CITIZEN OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA?

    No, they did not.

    What in the fuck is it going to take for people to realize that the level of hatred and obstruction being aimed at President Barack Obama is largely driven by the fact that he is a successful, competent, moral black man serving as Leader of the Free World?

    Is it going to take them calling him a nigger? Are people going to need their fucking hands held all the way up until that moment in time?

    I mean, for fucks sake, it’s so obvious. It is SO.FUCKING.OBVIOUS.

    EDIT:

    You forget what the 90s were like. The reaction to Clinton was just as nuts and out there.

    I also love how this gets tossed around like minorities (especially black people) don’t remember the 90s, and are incapable of accurately comparing and contrasting the two political environments.

  101. 101
    polyorchnid octopunch says:

    Speaking for myself, nowadays when I hear most of those folks start talking about Burkean bells, what I hear in my head is “the sherrif’s a ni-CLANG!”

  102. 102
    Sophia says:

    As an at least nominal Catholic, I can’t help but feel that calling the Catholic hierarchy right wing ideologues is giving them too much credit. There are a lot of similarities, sure, but the peculiar strain of evil that has been nurtured by the protect-the-rapists racket is a distinguishing characteristic worthy of note.

    Meanwhile, the Vatican is probably busy finding a position for Bishop Finn in Rome:

    Prosecutors seek trial for Finn and diocese

  103. 103
    PTirebiter says:

    Reproductive rights are just a tool for them to turn force the Catholic Church to act as Republican political PAC.

    Republican is just the latest manifestation. From the beginning its been about power. The Hierarchy was modeled after the Roman Army and we all know the role women played in that. Abortion, like contraception was about aquiring as many loyal soldiers as possible. The recommendation of the majority at Vatican II to overturn the contraception ruling was in the end vetoed by the Pope out of concern that it might undermine his authority.

  104. 104
    muddy says:

    @Chris: That’s about the size of it. This guys’s wife told me that he gives her a list of who to vote for, and how dare he, she would choose in secrecy as is her Constitutional right. I said, Good for you, so how did you vote? Well, she voted for Clinton because she thought he was sexy, swore me to secrecy on that. Okay. I said whatabout now? Oh, my church gives us recommendations.

    I said, Talk about your unconstitutional, due to separation of church and state. And how come their list is okay, but not his? Jesus didn’t write that list personally. Sadly she has not called me since. oh well

  105. 105
    muddy says:

    @Brachiator:

    If libertarians don’t oppose this, and do not take action to vote against the lawmakers who seek to impose such laws, then they are a bunch of fools.

    And ought not be calling themselves Libertarians with a straight face.

  106. 106
    shortstop says:

    @pacem appellant (formerly Vince CA):

    To reiterate, you’re stereotyping. White, obese IT professionals are not “usually” glibertarians

    Perhaps you can read, but you apparently can’t do enough basic analysis to pass a freshman logic course. Can you spot the difference between these two statements?

    1. Most libertarians are pasty chunkboys.

    2. Most pasty chunkboys are libertarians.

    Take your time.

  107. 107
    sherparick says:

    It is kind of interesting what happen to the American hierarchy over the last 20 years. During the first part of John Paul IId’s Papacy he picked bishops who were moderates and very much part of the spirit of Vatican II. But after the wall came down, in 1989, and JP II became more concern with the came effect of hedonism of the West on his dear Poland and the child abuse scandal posed a crisis for him and Ratzinger, his friend. They could have realized that general celibacy in the priesthood and ghettoizing women as not quite human were the source of this crisis, and reverse these very man made policies. Instead, under the influence of some very conservative American catholics, they instead decided to blame the whole problem on the “sixties” and Vatican II, and started a counter-reformantion and filling the hierarchy with arch-reactionaries over the last 20 years. Well, the Church hierarchy is about the reap the whirlwind for stepping so hard into politics.

  108. 108

    @Midnight Marauder:

    I am so fucking sick of people always trotting out this nonsense when the discussion turns to the obvious racism motivating a large part of the unprecedented obstruction President Obama is facing.

    Amen. And the Clinton hate did not come near rabid enough to get fat ass republicans off their asses and out into the streets al la The Tea Party. You can find the difference right there. Clinton just gave the wingers enough silly fodder to flog in the press and sound louder, but not near as virulent as with Obama. ie as you say with citizenship. And all the other coded dog whistles.

  109. 109
    The prophet Nostradumbass says:

    @Culture of Truth: Was his name Stranahan?

  110. 110
    Amir Khalid says:

    @Sophia:
    Broken link alert.

  111. 111
    Steve in DC says:

    You can claim Obama had it as bad as Clinton if/when they impeach him over nonsense. Till then it’s just ignoring the past to try and make Obama a sacred cow here. It was worse in the 90s. I’ll think it’s worse now when they are actively pushing murder theories and impeaching him for no real reason. Neither of those has happened yet.

    @Muddy

    There is such a thing as ranking what your values are. And the idiocy of many on both the left and the right of cherry picking one issue and then screaming “so if you don’t vote on this one issue it means you are full of shit on it and thus everything” is mind bogglingly stupid.

    I can say “if you don’t support murdering Americans and bailing out Wall Street you must vote out politicians who have done this” and say you support killing Americans if you vote for Obama and can’t call yourself a progressive with a straight face. Which is just as stupid as what’s being done with the current contraception fiasco.

    There are multiple issues in play and these effect our votes. I place economic issues and civil liberties issues above everything else. That’s my litmus test. Beneath those I place foreign policy issues. Last I place social issues.

    That doesn’t mean I don’t hold those beliefs on social issues, it just means economic issues and civil liberties issues are far more important to me. And if I’m going to have to suck it up on something, I’ll cave on the other items far before I cave on those.

    Plenty of Democrats have been throwing social security and the new deal under the bus while pushing social issues. I’d be willing to throw my social values under the bus for social security and other issues.

    We all have different values.

  112. 112
    ...now I try to be amused says:

    @Rafer Janders:

    Amazing that their racism is so virulent. They couldn’t react any stronger to a black man who actually was militant and controversial.

    I’m convinced that Barack Obama is the Jackie Robinson of our time.

    Still, I have to nod at Steve in DC’s comment (#64) about the wingers’ freakout over Clinton. When their leaders tell them that all Democrats are the Antichrist, that’s what happens when any Democrat is elected president. But a black Democrat being elected president? That was a double blow to them: not only is the Antichrist in the Oval Office (again), it drove home the point that they’re losing the war to preserve white privilege.

  113. 113
    Amanda in the South Bay says:

    @Steve in DC:

    Same difference with regards to people who want to get high and don’t have a lot of responsibilities IRL. I don’t think a lot of Paultards realize that if the DEA were to cease to exist tomorrow, you still have 50 states who are more than willing to continue the drug war.

  114. 114
    Chris says:

    @MCA1:

    This.

    Your mileage may vary, but it’s been my experience that middle-class conservatives are as epically bitter and resentful of success as we are. (As well they might be, since their ideology ties EVERYTHING in a human being’s worth to their financial success).

    It’s a bizarre love-hate relationship with the elites, where they both idolize the successful ones because their worldview tells them they’re the best, while resenting them for succeeding where they couldn’t.

  115. 115
    muddy says:

    @Steve in DC: I’m not sure which comment of mine you are replying to. If it’s because I replied to Brachiator that they ought not call themselves that name, you need to look at the rest of the paragraph I quoted from.

    It’s pretty simple. You have the government forcing unnecessary procedures and counselling on women, interfering with their liberty, and permitting states to pass laws making lies to prevent abortion legal. If libertarians don’t oppose this, and do not take action to vote against the lawmakers who seek to impose such laws, then they are a bunch of fools.

    If you are okay with the gov’t jamming probes up inside citizens that they have not requested, then you are no Libertarian.

  116. 116

    @Steve in DC:

    Till then it’s just ignoring the past to try and make Obama a sacred cow here

    WTF you talking about with “sacred cow” bullshit. Are you saying all the racist shit that the right wing, and some from the left wing, is any way comparable to sheer ideological differences. And I would take issue with Clinton giving the wingers no reason for a lot of their stupidity, up to and including the reasons they gave for impeachment. It was just that lying under oath about consensual sex, didn’t reach the level of high crimes and misdemeanors required for impeachment.

    Obama has been running a much MUCH tighter ship with no such handovers to the wingnuts to make hay with. So instead, they filibuster everything he proposes, and claim he is a foreign terrorist, and are willing to destroy the world economy by not raising the debt ceiling. And Clinton wasn’t impeached until his second term. Not to mention the fact that the goopers paid a political price for that particular act of stupidity. And even an earthworm will wiggle away from known hot flames. Though they will and have found unknown hot flames immolate themselves with.

    And again, The Tea Party that has no comparison during Clinton’s presnitcy.

  117. 117
    Chris says:

    @sherparick:

    It is kind of interesting what happen to the American hierarchy over the last 20 years. During the first part of John Paul IId’s Papacy he picked bishops who were moderates and very much part of the spirit of Vatican II. But after the wall came down, in 1989, and JP II became more concern with the came effect of hedonism of the West

    If they’d spent a fraction of the energy agitating against the excesses of capitalism in the West and the U.S. run world order abroad, that they did agitating against Teh Ghey, Teh Secularists and just the people who thought the priesthood should actually be accountable just like the rest of us, that might actually have been an admirable shift.

  118. 118
    pseudonymous in nc says:

    As others have noted, these are just shibboleths.

    But as Faulkner said: “The past is never dead. It’s not even past.” And Faulkner knew the Deep South.

  119. 119
    Chris says:

    @General Stuck (Bravo Nope Zero):

    Amen. And the Clinton hate did not come near rabid enough to get fat ass republicans off their asses and out into the streets al la The Tea Party.

    I wasn’t old enough to follow politics back then, but wasn’t the 1994 Republican Revolution sort of the Tea Party Movement of its day? That and the rise of populist right-wing insanity in the form of the militia movement, etc…

  120. 120

    @Steve in DC:

    You can claim Obama had it as bad as Clinton if/when they impeach him over nonsense. Till then it’s just ignoring the past to try and make Obama a sacred cow here. It was worse in the 90s. I’ll think it’s worse now when they are actively pushing murder theories and impeaching him for no real reason. Neither of those has happened yet.

    You write all of this without addressing the key fact that there was never a sustained movement to deny that Bill Clinton was an American citizen.

    What happens when they do file impeachment charges during Obama’s second term? Are you going to come back and acknowledge all the racism just because they added “impeachment” on top of “Presidenting while black”?

    What a fucking joke.

    EDIT: Also, just to be clear, transparently bullshit murder theories trump having your opposition party unite around pushing a theory that you are not a legitimate citizen of the country you’re in charge of governing.

    Oooooooooookay. Yeah. That is a very logical thing that makes perfect sense. Who cares if they claim you aren’t a legitimate American?! At least they aren’t spreading murder rumors like all the people starting to clamor that President Obama had Andrew Breitbart killed…

    Oh wait.

  121. 121
    Nerull says:

    @Mnemosyne: These are people who also want to get rid of the FDA. You have no right to expect the drugs you buy to be tested. You have no right to know what is in them. You have no right to be made aware of their side effects.

    But hey, you can get everything over the counter! Freedom!

  122. 122

    @shortstop: Oooh! Condescension. What a clever rhetorical trick. I wish I’d thought of that.

    Regardless of anyone’s reading comprehension skills and whether they pass college muster, saying that pasty white boys who work in IT are libertarians is a) stereotyping, and b) not very nice to IT professionals, or pasty white boys, who are, by and large, not libertarians (and I think we can all agree that “libertarian” is an invective, can’t we?).

    And before anyone else starts screaming that “most” libertarians fit ruemara’s stereotype, I’d like to see something other than anecdotal evidence to back it up. Jesus, is it so much to ask that people not automatically malign my profession because some jerkward with a cola addition once read The Fountainhead and couldn’t stop talking about it at the lunch counter?

    It’s a bad stereotype for lots of reasons, but it somehow implies that the nameless, powerless people that keep the internet tubes lubricated so we can read the NYT on our iPads are all a bunch of sedentary shut-ins who can’t wait for the aPaulcalypse so they can finally get some quality pot and stock their harems is just absurd. The glibs we need to be worrying about are people like Steve Jobs (culturally influential) and Ron Paul et fils (who hold political power).

    We are not going to win the hearts and minds by running logical rings around the guy who fixed MS Outlook for you that one time you accidentally clicked “download attachment” and brought your system to a halt.

  123. 123
    LanceThruster says:

    I went to Catholic grammar school and have them to thank for my current atheism. Even as a child I found them honest and thoughtful with their answers to difficult questions (this was the rank-and-file clergy and nuns…though we were also on the heels of Vatican II; guitar masses, liturgy in English, etc.)

    At my Confirmation (I sincerely meant it at the time), the priest officiating told us that if we didn’t get something out of the mass, out of going to church to fellowship each Sunday, then for god’s sake, “Don’t go!”

    It took about 4 years to sink in but I’ll always be grateful to him for his candor.

    I wish someone would point out to Southerners (broad generalization here) when they grouse about the harm to the Republic the darker skinned minorities are doing just who brought them here en masse.

    It is clear their beef isn’t their presence per se, but rather that they are afforded equal rights which just screws up everything that they hold near and dear (the freedom to treat another human being with less concern you might have for a pet goldfish).

  124. 124
    pragmatism says:

    @Chris: this morning I attended a discussion panel with Donna Brazile and Dana Perino. Brazile didn’t show so it was all perino. Anyhoo, she said, “George W Bush would tell you that there has always been a tea party and that they voted for perot in 1992.”. Still protecting his daddy.

  125. 125
    shortstop says:

    @pacem appellant (formerly Vince CA): I thought I might be a little over the top when I suggested sarcastically that you might not be able to discern the side-of-a-barn-sized fallacy in your confused rendering. Now your doubling down on your error proves I wasn’t condescending enough? Yikes.

    Fear not, other IT people posting here. We don’t lump your brain in with Vince’s. We recognize that his density is very much an outlier.

  126. 126
    Chris says:

    About Obama impeachment – http://www.wnd.com/2012/03/oba.....at_orig=us. No, Rep. Jones isn’t introducing impeachment, per se, but damn if he isn’t itching for it…

    @pragmatism:

    Good point, I hadn’t even thought about Perot.

  127. 127
    Gian says:

    As for the clinton to obama hate comparisons. Yes obama has it worse. But some if you forget… maybe because there was fake scandal after fake scandal with clinton. But one of the fake scandals was that he had gone to moscow and was a secret soviet agent. There were bumper stickers with the hammer and sickle in place of the C in Clinton. There was much complaining that he wasn’t legitimate because of Perot. (Despite exit polls saying that Perot probably hurt Clinton more than Bush or Dole)
    Suggested reading … The hunting of a president. Suggested movements to remember and compare to teabaggers. The militia movement the montana “freemen” and the child killing domestic terrorists mcveigh and nichols

  128. 128
    Rafer Janders says:

    @jwb:

    Lord knows, it’s one poll out of many, and I don’t put a lot of stake in it; but if you think Obama could lose the nationwide popular vote by three points and he wouldn’t have an Electoral College problem, you’re deluded.

    I don’t think there’s the slightest chance that Obama could lose the nationwide popular vote by three points to any Republican, especially given the GOP’s ongoing efforts to alienate women, racial and ethnic minorities, and the non-insane. I think he’ll win both the Electoral College and the popular vote handily.

  129. 129
    rikyrah says:

    What in the fuck is it going to take for people to realize that the level of hatred and obstruction being aimed at President Barack Obama is largely driven by the fact that he is a successful, competent, moral black man serving as Leader of the Free World?

    Is it going to take them calling him a nigger? Are people going to need their fucking hands held all the way up until that moment in time?

    I mean, for fucks sake, it’s so obvious. It is SO.FUCKING.OBVIOUS.

    tell it.

    tell it.

    tell it.
    EDIT:

    You forget what the 90s were like. The reaction to Clinton was just as nuts and out there.

    I also love how this gets tossed around like minorities (especially black people) don’t remember the 90s, and are incapable of accurately comparing and contrasting the two political environments.

    Considering that BLACK FOLK were the ONLY ones supporting Bill Clinton during the height of Monica-Mess, yeah, I really have to roll the eyes at anyone talking about ‘folks don’t remember’.

    HELL YEAH, we remember.

    and, we STILL KNOW that the root of it all

    THE FUNDAMENTAL LEVEL OF DISRESPECT SHOWN THIS PRESIDENT.

    IS BECAUSE HE IS BLACK.

    PERIOD.

    the only folks who won’t admit it are White folks with the ‘luxury of delusion’

    and Black folks who should be ashamed of themselves.

  130. 130

    @Gian:

    As for the clinton to obama hate comparisons. Yes obama has it worse. But some if you forget… maybe because there was fake scandal after fake scandal with clinton. But one of the fake scandals was that he had gone to moscow and was a secret soviet agent. There were bumper stickers with the hammer and sickle in place of the C in Clinton.

    And some people forget that Obama was tagged as a Kenyan usurper before he even officially assumed the fucking office of the presidency.

    This comparison isn’t even close.

  131. 131
    Recall says:

    @Amanda in the South Bay: Except for the ones that have already moved to decriminalize.

  132. 132
    Gex says:

    @shortstop: The shrieking and the inability to understand the nuances in the discussion smell very libertarian-y to me.

  133. 133
    Gian says:

    Primacy. Recency and repetition … its been over a decade since the clinton scandalpalooza. While things like “you lie” are fresh in our memories the threat suggested by then senator helms about clinton traveling to north carolina is not all that fresh. Its also been over 20 years since the 1992 election.
    Since im posting on a phone. I think its the murrow news service that did a story on the southern poverty law center’s report on the post 2008 election of Obama and the resurgence of the militia movement.
    In 1992 AOL was still small and growing. The world was a very different place. Helms sort of apologized for the comment about Clinton visiting North Carolina.
    Even so, a visit to snopes and a search on Clinton might be worth it to see some of the made up crap.
    To put it as simply as I can, the right wing hate mongers had to work harder and be more creative with clinton. They couldn’t. Simply point to his shin color and middle name and have their base figure out that he was the “other”

  134. 134
    Dave L says:

    Have to agree with the general sentiment on the board: Obama’s treatment has been a lot worse than Clinton’s.

    And on that topic, I want to throw in a little South-bashing. Remember, the modern Republican Party is dominated by its southern wing. And I’ve seen any number of polls that clearly show how much the Tea Party is a southern-led movement — something like about 50% of those identifying with it are from the South.

    This morning’s story about the PPP poll this morning reminded me of a bit of exit-poll research I’d been wanting to do. Fortunately, CNN still has these available back to at least the 2004 election. And here it is, further empirical evidence of the un-regenerate Deep South:

    In 2004, John Kerry got 18% of the white vote in Mississippi, to Bush’s 81%. In 2008, Obama got just 10%.

    Well, you say, maybe Republicans were just generally worked up about the prospect of a socialist, anti-colonialist president? Maybe Mississippi’s swing just reflected national trends?

    There’s a perfect control for this experiment — Utah, the most reliably Republican state in the country. And here’s what happened in Utah:

    2004: Kerry got 24%; 2008: Obama got 31%, surely one of the higher totals in a long time for a Democratic candidate for president in Utah.

    Southern whites have acquired a veneer of sophistication in their racial discourse, but the reality is that they are still unreconstructed bigots. And that’s the driving force behind the insanely over-the-top Obama hatred. (Are there bigots elsewhere? – Of course there are, in large numbers. But only in the South do they control the political establishment, and leverage that into near-control of a national political party.)

  135. 135
    Cain says:

    @ruemara:

    mean beyond free MJ and hookers for all. They, sadly, usually pasty, chunks o’ white dudes with IT employment. And it only takes a little poking to devolve them into frothing bags of spittle.

    Yeah, IT folks are prone to libertarianism is because people who write code tend to think they are all independent and don’t need anybody. Of course, they are dead wrong, because they are dependent on everyone especially the computer science departments who are doing research into computing.

    It’s dumb. I hate libertarians.

  136. 136
    MoeLarryAndJesus says:

    I also believe that there are white southern conservatives who are not racists.

    Just not enough of them to matter much.

  137. 137
    shortstop says:

    @Gex: Lord, they’re not even nuances. They’re variances in meaning the size of elephants’ asses. Oh, well, remember: All libertarians are dishonest and illogical, but not all dishonest and illogical people are libertarians. That’s a distinction that will fly right over poor old Vince’s head.

  138. 138
    Julie says:

    @Gian: It was indeed the Murrow News Service, and it can be found here.

  139. 139
    Nutella says:

    The internets make it hard to hide things, but some people can’t even find things that are right out in public on the internet: NYC has issued a subpoena for data including “demands that Twitter hand over a list of data, including all public tweets from Rae’s account between September 15 and October 31, 2011.”

    Public tweets. They’ve subpoena’d PUBLIC tweets. That’s like issuing a subpoena for the picture on the billboard across from the police station.

  140. 140

    @Cain: @shortstop: I basically rest my case. (I would insert a Latin phrase that demonstrates the end of a proof, but that might go over your head).

    Also, you’ll find more glibs in the hallowed halls of a university’s CS dept than in the real world of IT. Nothing breeds libertarians more than a few tenured sociaphobes and their graduate student minions.

  141. 141
    Cain says:

    @pacem appellant (formerly Vince CA):

    @ruemara: I’m a non-chunky white dude in an IT-related industry, and I resent your stereotype. Most of my colleagues aren’t white, many aren’t dudes (they’re dudettes), a few are overweight (but not outside the demographic trends of the population at large), and none of them know who Ron Paul is or even care. The only datum that I have that fits your profile is a friend of mine is a raving Democrat (can’t shut him up!). The few libertarians I’ve had the displeasure of chatting with in a work setting weren’t in IT, but in engineering management.

    Well I am in IT and a senior guy at that, and I see it plenty of times both in management and otherwise.

  142. 142

    The President has some alphabet problems, a D and a couple Bs – Democrat – Black – Barack. Clinton had a D.

  143. 143
    Egg Berry says:

    @Nutella: This isn’t surprising, really. Twitter only keeps old tweets for something like 7 days in search. Unless they were collecting them in real time, they have to have a way to ask for older tweets.

  144. 144
    BrianM says:

    I was adult and paying attention during Clinton’s term, and I honestly can’t tell whether he or Obama have gotten the most unhinged vitriol. I mean: what units do you use for unhingedness (the Robertson?), and what are the values for “had Vince Foster murdered” and “Kenyan anti-colonialist”? How do you compare two mountainous piles of all-over-the-place fabrications? Isn’t it enough that they’re both huge?

    However, despite what some say about it applying to all Democrats, I don’t believe the attitude that Clinton was by definition an illegitimate President was nearly as obvious as it is for Obama. I’m sure that Obama’s skin color (and name) are responsible for that.

    As for the birthers: which strikes your gut as more plausible: that a man with a Kenyan father is foreign, or that a man whose father was on his fourth US wife is foreign? Clinton’s family shouted out “white trash!”, and his own story shouted out “first boomer(=hippy) candidate!”, and that’s what the Village and the Republicans ran with.

    No expert in propaganda, me, but I suspect the Big Lie works best with a big, obvious hook (Kenyan dad or Barack Hussein Obama).

  145. 145
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Steve in DC:

    That doesn’t mean I don’t hold those beliefs on social issues, it just means economic issues and civil liberties issues are far more important to me.

    It’s hilarious to me that you keep proving our point over and over again that somehow civil libertarians don’t see the freedom to control one’s own body as a necessary civil liberty, just a dispensable “social issue” that can be ignored.

    Apparently the freedom to put currently illegal drugs into your body is worth fighting for, but the freedom to make your own choices about when and how to have children is just a frivolous “social issue.”

  146. 146
    Catsy says:

    @Steve in DC:

    You can claim Obama had it as bad as Clinton if/when they impeach him over nonsense.

    You are not the sole arbiter of which criteria are acceptable for defining how much worse one was than the other.

    I’ll think it’s worse now when they are actively pushing murder theories and impeaching him for no real reason. Neither of those has happened yet.

    Oh, I see! So since they haven’t actually impeached Obama yet and and nobody is actively pushing murder theories, it can’t possibly be worse than the 90’s. Because you said so.

    Well then.

    I can only assume you’ve been in a coma for the last four years, or otherwise inhibited from paying attention to what has been going on. There is no precedent–none, absolutely none, not even in the Clinton years–for the kind of blatantly racist, xenophobic delegitimization the right has waged against Barack Obama as a human being, American citizen, and president.

    The comparison is not even close. Both are the subject of bizarre murder conspiracy theories, both presidencies have been rejected as legitimate by the right, and both were relentlessly attacked by Republicans. The Clinton impeachment farce was unique, but it was also in many respects a self-inflicted scandal with at least some distant basis in fact.

    The birther nonsense alone would be enough to render any direct comparison ridiculous–for all that the wingnuts freaked out about Clinton, there was nothing to compare to the way they’ve relentlessly demagogued the question of whether the President is even an American citizen, or found countless other ways to suggest that For Some Unspecified Reason He Is Not Like You And I. And we’re not talking about any kind of irrelevant lunatic fringe–we’re talking about a sustained, ongoing belief by a nontrivial chunk of Republicans, including members of Congress.

    I mean, seriously? Are you fucking kidding me?

    EDIT: FYWP, moderated for links. Exactly how fucking hard is it to configure the incompetently-coded, worthless excuse for a spam filter so that it doesn’t trigger on that?

  147. 147
    catclub says:

    @sherparick: “Well, the Church hierarchy is about the reap the whirlwind for stepping so hard into politics.”

    I hope you are right, but I do not see how this follows from what came before.

  148. 148
    Recall says:

    @Catsy:

    Oh, I see! So since they haven’t actually impeached Obama yet and and nobody is actively pushing murder theories, it can’t possibly be worse than the 90’s. Because you said so.

    I think there’s a difference between a couple of wingnut tweets and official investigations by the DOJ, FBI, and two special prosecutors.

  149. 149
    Catsy says:

    @Recall: Way to totally miss the point.

  150. 150
    Karen says:

    1. Clinton got more respect than Obama has. If you’re saying it’s exactly the same then you’re either selectively blind or oblivious.

    2. PUMAs have become Paultards.

    3. If Peggy Noonan is agreeing it’s a war on women, it’s a war on women.

    4. From now on I’m calling the state next to mine Vagina.

  151. 151
    Nutella says:

    I find what libertarians claim to believe to be ridiculously naive. If only the government would stay out of the way, everything would be wonderful! Right.

    I find what libertarians actually believe is that government and their fellow citizens should give them everything they want and everybody who is not like them can be treated like shit with no complaints at all from the libertarians. They’re selfish bastards, in sum.

    A classic and very common example is someone like Steve who thinks he’s for civil liberties but is not at all opposed to women being treated as chattel because he’s not a woman so what does it matter? It’s just a social issue, you know. I say any system that can, for example, force a woman to bear her rapist’s child, is not a system that has civil liberties at all.

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. […] DougJ linked this GOP poll to the supposed “libertarians” in the GOP coalition who think it’s a fine idea for the state to mandate transvaginal probes for no medical reason. It’s evidence in support of the view that Republican identity is a tribal allegiance, revealed in a series of outbursts at out groups, with no ideological content whatsoever. Poison someone else's mind:FacebookStumbleUponDiggRedditEmailPrint This entry was posted in 2012, News and Current Events, Politics. Bookmark the permalink. ← The Party of Voter Fraud /* […]

Comments are closed.