Posted on May 28, 2015 in Authoritarianism Clueless Oafs Hypocrites Stigma
Those who follow the Duggars are the significant statistic, not the mentally ill.
Posted on April 22, 2011 in Hypocrites Liberals & Progressives
Since 1980, when I voted for Anderson instead of Jimmy Carter, I have followed the rule that unless the man or woman the Democrats elect is Adolf Hitler, I will support her or him over the Republicans. That is my personal narcissistic contribution to the defeat of good Democrats. But I have seen white male progressives repeat the act over and over again. And they do it when it is most critical that they don’t.
The first time was when a fine Senator named [[John Tunney]] (father of [[Robin Tunney]]) was defeated by [[S.I. Hayakawa]] back in the seventies. Tunney’s crime was that he had withdrawn an early health care reform bill. Otherwise, his record was exemplary. But the white male progressives who first ran [[Tom Hayden]] against him and then either voted for Hayakawa in the final race or didn’t vote at all saw the health care move as unforgivable. An example had to be set so that future Democrats would understand that you don’t do this kind of thing. So Tunney went down and California was stuck with a conservative who spent his six years sleeping in the Senate chamber, earning him the sobriquet “The [[Sominex]] Kid”.
They did it again, with Carter and Anderson, then again with [[Al Gore]] in 2000. You can thank them for ensuring that [[George W. Bush]] became our president. You can also thank them, in part, for the results of the year 2010 election when many worthy Democrats went down to defeat at the hands of the Tea Party. And some are talking about doing it all over again even though Social Security and Medicare are both on the block.
The style of white male progressive of whom I speak is to throw tantrums — perhaps we should refer to them as Tantrumists — and not brook any discussion.
Perhaps because of their affluent backgrounds, Tantrumists don’t worry about economic matters such as these. They can ride out the major disasters in a way that the rest of us can’t. They keep hoping that one day society will shut down and they will will rise to power, worshiped as all-saving and sanctifying deities. Do one thing wrong, make one compromise and they feel that you have betrayed them.
But there’s another angle: does this make Democrats listen to them more? I think Leftist Democrats do, but they peeve Centrists off because of the no-compromise matters. It must all be done now whether or not you have the votes. If it is not done now, they will work towards your political doom. Who wants to listen to someone who will not hear a word you say or engage in discussion that is not entirely accusatory?
Let’s also not forget their tendency to abuse or to limit their political activity to flaming people on billboards. They claim not to be racist, but they attack other whites as inbred and stupid. And they are not there when minorities and women truly need them such as is the case now. The higher the price that will be paid by Republican victory, the more strident the Tantrumists are.
I am white, male, and a progressive. I do not understand the testosterone poisoning that impels Tantrumists to fling the whole Center and Left onto the sword that Right wing extremists gleefully hold out for them. In these times what we need is unity so that the Tea Party may be defeated. But the Tantrumists would rather that the Tea Party triumph again and destroy everything than acknowledge one good, make one tentative compromise to save citizen rights and security from the plutocrats.
We can’t afford this kind of narcissism in 2012. That is why I am calling them out.
Posted on March 20, 2011 in Hypocrites Morals & Ethics
Forms of American Christianity prove endlessly creative when it comes to combining affirmations of faith with worldly life. Consider, for example, the new fad of “pole dancing for Jesus“. The thing that makes this possible isn’t a biblical text (and never let it be [[The Letter of James]] which says that you shall be judged by your works!), but a variety of existentialism that has been attached to it.
[[Frederich Nietzsche]] wrote of two kinds of morality. One of them he called Slave morality. The statement which exemplifies this is “I did it because it was right.” The other he called the Master morality: “It was right because I did it.”
Christians who practice what [[Dietrich Bonhoeffer]] called “cheap grace” hold, in part, that all you need to do to be held as a Christian is to say that you are one or that you accepted Jesus into your life and that’s that. It doesn’t matter what you do, just that you do it. It is these so-called Christians who have so neatly combined Nietzsche with Christ (and in the end denying Christ) by introducing a new morality: “It is right because I am saved.” There’s no costly grace involved, no Christ of the Gospels who calls for more than mere declaration that the light bulb of salvation has lit up in your soul and moved you to put a bumper sticker on your car. You don’t have to help the poor through your vote or your words. You can be just as mean and obstinate as you were before because one thing has “changed”: how you describe yourself spiritually.
Is it implausible that these have set their moral compass to the Tea Party? Should it surprise us that they have gone directly against the Bible and declared that their wealth and prosperity makes them paragons of Christian virtue? Speak of community to these and they accuse you of communism. Speak of hope and they rage against you. Give them the Beatitudes to sign and they accuse you of being subversive. Respect a Muslim and they wail about your undermining religious freedom. They have abandoned Christianity for modern megachurchs that thrive on their donations and the publicity they earn through the awe of the numbers they attract rather than genuine acts of charity.
They are the eternal opposites of Christ because they read the Bible for loopholes past its jeremiads against greed and contempt for the weak. It is easier to stick a rope through the eye of a needle than for these to do real good. God calls on them to be servants, but they want to be the overlords.
Posted on July 28, 2009 in Agnosticism Hypocrites
The argument went like this: as an agnostic, I am “without belief in a God”. Therefore, I am an atheist. The trouble is that I am also without a disbelief in God. Those who know me observe that I will happily quote sacred texts as well as nonsacred texts when they have pragmatic application. But even this is missing the real point.
A [[Sufi]] holy woman named [[Rabia al-Adawiyya]] made it her habit to pray thusly: Dear God, if I love you because I don’t want to burn in hell, then I should burn in hell for all eternity. If I love you because I want to get into heaven, then I should be denied heaven.
For me, the whole question of whether there is a God or not interferes in my relationship with the Universe and my quest to be a good person. Both atheists and believers can get caught up in myth-wars with one another, the one claiming that the other is hypocritical or evil or just unable to do good, the other returning the favor. They often feel it highly necessary to engage in argument with those who do not see the world as they do. They call agnostics cowards for not taking a position.
I assure you that to publically refuse to answer the Big Question invites all kinds of abuse as it did last night ((After refusing to be defined into atheism, I was told that I was trying to tell atheists what atheism was all about! When I laughed this off, I was called a grumpy old man and a paranoid. Believers are no strangers to this, but they usually leave us agnostics alone.)) . I know that and I still preserve my focus on being a good person. I know both atheists and believers who are good people despite the protestations of the others. I have friends in both camps. My relationship with the Universe (the existence of which I am certain) and other people can be distorted by capitulating to camp cries for a decision on an issue which is unimportant. Identifying with either bivouac denies me the prize of serenity.
Posted on November 15, 2006 in Celebrity Hypocrites
So why the f*ck did you write the book if you cared about your kids?
Posted on August 1, 2006 in Hypocrites Myths & Mysticism War
We do not need Gibson’s blue-eyed voice at a time like this.
Posted on March 27, 2006 in Hypocrites Morals & Ethics
It annoys me to hear people throwing themselves at the feet of gurus who practice a religion which co-exists with and supports the caste system.
Posted on March 17, 2006 in Hypocrites Psycho-bunk
Holy fuck and stick it with a fork!
Posted on January 7, 2006 in Hypocrites
I think there are plenty of things which God could have smitten Sharon over, but pulling out of Gaza isn’t one of them.
Posted on September 23, 2005 in Hypocrites Morals & Ethics Sexuality
The legacy of the hateful Jerome bred what we see today.
Posted on September 4, 2005 in Accountability Disasters Hypocrites Journalists & Pundits
A woeful depravity governed the launch of rescue efforts, the like of which has not been seen since the Irish Potato Famine.
Posted on August 11, 2005 in Hypocrites Psycho-bunk Stigma Violence
When Jesus was crucified for being Jesus it was His fault and not the fault of the Roman soldiers and those quislings among the Jews who called for it?