A. K. A. Loose Canon
Is anyone at MSNBC (besides Scarborough and Mika) not constantly frothing at the mouth? I mean, look, I've seen all sorts of lefties in my life, all the way from standard liberal to hard-core commies. But rarely have I seen such a collection of unhinged people like the "journalists" at that cable channel. Must be something in the water.
Rush froths and you like him. You just rathith.
He froths sometimes, that's right. But (1) he's a singular guy, not a whole goddam TV channel, and (2) most of the time, he uses Cartesian logic to make his case, yet most of the time, those guys and gals at MSNBC just have a verbal diarrhea, with no rhyme and reason.
Canonical implications in Pepean Logick: Well, turns out the GOP’s got a master plan to convince you that he’s not that guy at all but rather some sort of sex-crazed wildman, per archaic racial stereotypes. And the way they’re going to do this is to compare him to Tiger Woods. But rather than directly compare him to Woods, they’re simply to going to mention that he golfs a lot and let you draw the necessary connecting lines. Obama –> golf –> Tiger –> lots of sex –> racism.
Roger Simon picks up on the theme:The left/liberal need to think Republicans and conservatives racists is more than just projection. At this point, it is nothing short of a mental illness. It is so far divorced from reality, it has to be pathological. No longer are these people able to observe reality with anything close to impartiality. We are not in the world of politics, ladies and gentlemen. We are in the world of Freud, Jung, Adler, and people bouncing off walls.The meds, Pepe, the meds!
Conrad Black ponders the mind of another pinko basket case: The fierce cuckoo bird that quite often debouches from her forehead on Catholic issues hurtled out, shrieking and snapping, three times in one week. [..] Indeed, if it were not the case that what is needed is a deescalation of these wild accusations and smears, I would describe it as insane. It has been a notorious fact for many years that Maureen Dowd was irrationally partisan, and that somewhere in her feminism there was a revulsion against traditional Catholicism that was very searing. Further speculation in such matters would be inappropriate, and anything so heartfelt must be respected, at least in its privacy, if not necessarily in where it ramifies in public-policy advocacy.
Stalin also would urge psychological evaluation and "treatment" for political opponents. Hardly good company to keep, I think.
A fallacious moral equivalence, Mr Rot. First of all, Stalin would do no such thing. He would simply send his political opponents to rot in the Gulag, or even more expeditiously, have his henchmen put a bullet in the nape of the neck of said opponent in the basement of the Lubyanka, and send the bill for the bullet to the relatives. Methinks you mistake Stalin for Brezhnev, who indeed would have dissidents diagnosed as "sluggish paranoiacs" or something, and forcibly sent to a psychiatric ward. Two different times (say, 1937 vs 1967), somewhat different methods. Unless you believe all Rooskies are the same, and that Minsk=Pinsk. Now, what on earth does it have to do with frothing-at-the-mouth pinkos such as Chris Matthews? First of all, these guys are by no means "dissidents" -- they are The Man in the MSM. Second of all, as Allapundit, Roger Simon, and Conrad Black argue, it is demonstrably clear these guys either have a loose brick, or act like they do. And thirdly, who the fuck urge[s] psychological evaluation and "treatment" for political opponents? You falling in the same Pepean Logick trap that I was highlighting?
As if on cue, Chris Matthews now says the word "Chicago" is racist. Pointing that out is Stalinist, says Rot. Of course, real Stalinists, such as Fidel Castro, are not Stalinists, also says Rot. Whatever, man, whatever.
VCPAs early as 1948, the Soviet secret service took an interest in this area of medicine. "Ah," says Tecs, "by 1948, Stalin was planted like a cherry tree."Whatever, man, whatever.
Reading is essential, Mr Rot. Just continue the paragraph:However, according to Alexander Etkind, punitive psychiatry was not simply an inheritance from the Stalinist era as the GULAG was an effective instrument of political repression, and there was no compelling requirement to develop an alternative and expensive psychiatric substitute. The abuse of psychiatry was a natural product of the later Soviet era.Capisce? A bullet in the nape of the neck in the NKVD dungeons was much cheaper and less cumbersome: Stalin was a master at mass murder, he didn't have to play with such niceties, though perhaps in his later years (1948-1953) he started to toy with alternatives, such as psycho hospitals, and the "doctor's plot". But, once again, the mass abuse onset of the practice started in the early 1960s, in the late Khrushchev-early Brezhnev era. History is like math: you either have a proof, or you don't. If you don't, you can keep diggin', but it still ain't a proof.
CDers split hairs? This is reminiscent of Liver's backpedaling and qualifying the definition of barbarity as it's applied to muslims in India.I.e. it's only really abuse if it's mass abuse. You both need a good dose of PDE and something physicsy.
Getting back to my main point (which, in typical MSNBC fashion, you tried to distract from by some "Stalinist" hocus-pocus), here's more on the three-card-monte game pinkos love to play (what else would they do? produce something? hah!):Chris Matthews, Lawrence O'Donnell, and the whole brain trust at MSNBC seem to be playing some warped version of Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon called Six Degrees of Racial Dog Whistle. Give them any word a Republican says, and they will free associated it with other words to get to the "racist" claim they want to make.Genau.
Genau is racist.
Post a Comment