Pejmanesque

What's the matter with liberals? Why can't they just shut up and go away? Why do we have to keep listening to their endless whining? Why must we continue to respond as if their discredited worldview were worth debating?

What I want to know is, why can't they admit it, throw a big blow-out party where everybody gets naked, and instruct the last person to leave to be sure and turn out the lights?

She's 100% right. We should find a way to accommodate her.

The only thing she wants which we will deny her, is that we're not going to relax.

As Winston Churchill said: "This is not the end, nay, not even the beginning of the end, but it may be the end of the beginning." (Thanks to Amazon for its awesome new text search feature)

Put that in your pipe, Katha, and smoke it!

"the next big right-wing shindig..."

That would be this Saturday night in New York (not counting the groom or his or my realtives). :-)

Brian – I think you hit on another difference between liberals and conservatives. Liberals throw a big blow-out party where everybody gets naked, and the last person to leave turns out the lights.
When conservatives throw a big blow-out party where everybody gets naked, the first person to arrive turns out the lights. That’s why nobody knows about the conservative blow-out parties, not even the conservatives.

Republicans don't have enough of the Senate to break those damn roadblocks to getting judicial nominations up for vote.

I would think, that at least in the case of persons like Susan Sarandon spouting off, that the reason this does not make conservatives happy is because no intelligent person likes to see someone display their stupidity in public. It tends to undercut the happiness of "being on top." (Well, not for me; I think it's hilarious. But I'm heartless.)

"Republicans don't have enough of the Senate to break those damn roadblocks to getting judicial nominations up for vote."

What concerns me is that I may not enjoy all of the spinoffs that would come from changing that. If the Democrats run their party into the ground (something that I have not upgraded from 'worrying about' to 'glumly expecting' quite yet) enough to get filibuster-proof majorities, do we really want the Republicans (asks the Republican) to get out their shopping list? I mean, all of it, including the stuff that the moderates said "Sure, whatever you say, dude", serene in the knowledge that it'd never really be an issue?

Yes, there's a bit of the almond flavor of cynicism in this post - but does that make the question invalid?

I'm suppressing the obvious reply to the "happiness of "being on top"" bit. Isn't this a family blog?

Ms. Pollitt misses two obvious points:

Resting on your laurels is the easiest way to ensure that you have no more laurels to rest on.

That's true for everybody, the just and the unjust, conservatives and liberals alike. (I admit it, I cribbed that, kinda, from JFK.)

But more importantly, this line from Ms Pollitt is why conservatives should not rest: "Never mind whether conservatives deserve to run the country and dominate the discourse...."

Because the fact of the matter is that, to a certain type of liberal (what I call the Left), there is no question in their minds as to that observation. Conservatives ARE illegitimate. Or, as Krauthammer suggested, conservatives are EEEVVVVILLLLL, and therefore, whatever they do, wherever they are in the public discourse, is by definition not just wrong, but illegitimate. Undeserving, so to speak.

Eternal vigilance, therefore, would remain the watchword.

Just a thought....

Someone needs to let Ms. Pollitt know that we will stop bringing up Alger Hiss as soon as they stop bringing up Joe McCarthy.

Nine of the fourteen most widely syndicated columnists are conservative, Pollitt reminds us. Why did she come up with fourteen, an unusual number to pick, rather than a nice round ten or twenty? Is it because that is the number which fits her agenda most closely? Further, one must remember that columnists are (usually) open in their biases, whereas the "liberal media" charge is levelled against editorial staffs, or more damning, against the NEWS bureaus of the media conglomerates. Pollitt is comparing apples and oranges, and hoping that people will buy into the "well, they're both fruit" argument she is peddling.

As for the rest of her tirade, what Dean said. (grin)

It apparently never occurs to Pollitt that the conservatives might have some goal other than seizing and hanging onto political power. Like, say, defending Western civilization from a horde of bloodthirsty murdering savages who want to destroy it. That is, apparently, a matter of no concern to her.

But then, Pollitt believes that the American flag "stands for jingoism and vengeance and war." So perhaps she views the prospect of this nation's destruction as something to look forward to.

Hordes of bloodthirsty murdering savages like Tiger Force for example?

I have no problem celebrating as often as enthusiastically as possible. The problem with trying to follow Ms. Pollitt's advice is that celebrating is all she wants us to do. Sorry Katha, until the abuses the liberals have imposed on America are corrected, partying will remain a secondary objective. Since the Left has lost all responsibility for governing America, why don't they have a big party and relax for a while?

She misses the point entirely on the "liberal media". Nobody's whinging about columnists being liberal, it's biased reporting, i.e. the supposed presentation of fact that upsets conservatives. We wouldn't mind our professors being liberal, either, if they could manage to put their ideologies aside and teach instead of indoctrinate. If she can't understand that, then she's dumber than I would expect from a Nation columnist. And my expectations are very, very low on that count.

"What's the matter with conservatives? Why can't they relax and be happy? They have the White House, both houses of Congress, the majority of governorships and more money than God. They rule talk-radio and the TV political chat shows, and they get plenty of space in the papers; for all the talk about the liberal media, nine out of the fourteen most widely syndicated columnists are conservatives. Even the National Endowment for the Arts, that direct-mail bonanza of yore, is headed by a Republican now. Never mind whether conservatives deserve to run the country and dominate the discourse; the fact is, for the moment, they do.
What I want to know is, Why can't they just admit it, throw a big party and dance on the table with lampshades on their heads? "

Because our "conservative" President is backing an expansion of Medicare! Our "conservative" Congress blocked drilling for oil in favor of protecting a frozen wasteland! Our "conservative" Supreme Court hasn't overturned any of the anti-Constitutional crap that's been accumulating since at least the 1930's.

When we get real change, rather than just a few new faces, then we'll celebrate.

Hey, let's all compromise.

We conservatives can relax, be happy, throw a big party, AND still kick the 'liberal' commie-symps while they're down.

DELENDAM ESSE SAUDI ARABIA!