Archive for January 18, 2011

The reality of the 60’s

Posted: January 18, 2011 by datechguy in culture, opinion/news
Tags: , , , ,

There is a lot of talk about how the 60’s was the summer of love and all the great stuff that came from it. Virginia Ironside had a different memory:

To be honest, I mainly remember the 60s as an endless round of miserable promiscuity, a time when often it seemed easier and, believe it or not, more polite, to sleep with a man than to chuck him out of your flat. I recall a complete stranger once slipping into bed beside me when I was staying in an all-male household in Oxford, and feeling so baffled about what the right thing was to do that I let him have sex with me; I remember being got drunk by a grossly fat tabloid newspaper journalist and taken back to a flat belonging to a friend of his to which he had a key, being subjected to what would now be described as rape, and still thinking it was my fault for accepting so much wine. I remember going out to dinner with a young lawyer who inveigled me back to his flat saying he’d got to pick something up before he could take me home, and then suggested we have sex. ‘Oh no,’ I said feebly. ‘I’m too tired.’ ‘Oh, go on,’ he replied. ‘It’ll only take a couple of minutes.’ So I did.

You mean to say that all of that bit about fornication in Christianity and waiting till marriage although religious might have a non religious benefit? Who woulda thunk it. And who would have ever thought that if you give men, who naturally want sex, particular young men no reason for restraint they will show none. Her conclusion:

After a decade of sleeping around pretty indiscriminately, girls of the 60s eventually became fairly jaded about sex. It took me years to discover that continual sex with different partners is, with very few exceptions, joyless, uncomfortable and humiliating, and it’s only now I’m older that I’ve discovered that one of the ingredients of a good sex life is, at the very least, a grain of affection between the two partners involved.

In the rush to reject traditional Christianity a lot of people did a lot of damage to themselves. My advice, find a nice young man who goes to Church and warn your daughters of making it too easy. People tend to rise to the level of expectations that you set for them so let’s make the exceptions high.

The Tea Party Commercial

Posted: January 18, 2011 by datechguy in culture, oddities, tea parties
Tags: , , ,

There are some commercials that just rub you the wrong way, (I hate the e-trade baby commercials) but I never get sick of this one:

Why, because it is all about a guy who wants something, wants it bad and what does he do? Does he max out his credit? Does he beg for it as a gift? Nope, he works and works at job after job, most of which are not enjoyable, and keeps his eye on the prize. And when he can afford the car he wants, only then does he get it.

This simply screams Tea Party values, hard work, perseverance, spending responsibility. In fact I would dare to say it screams American Values.

And look at the license plate on the two cars he buys. It says “The fly over state”. That says Red State all over it. How fitting.

Stacy was second but had the most

Posted: January 18, 2011 by datechguy in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , ,

A week or so ago I wrote this concerning Stacy McCain’s Zeigest posts:

While the rest of us have been talking about the media Stacy McCain has been doing something interesting. Actually covering a possible motive and inspiration for the shooting in Arizona:

Today I’m looking at Bryon’s York’s latest and lo and behold guess what the topic is?

At a time when Loughner was increasingly unable to control his own mind, he apparently welcomed “Zeitgeist’s” message that there were sinister forces out there trying to control it for him. The meaning of “Zeitgeist’s” role in the Tucson violence is not that Loughner’s motive was political. It’s that the movie’s insane incoherence proved to be an awful stimulant for one dangerously incoherent mind.

When this eventually becomes the story of the shooting, lets not forget who was there before Byron, Before Rush and who kept on this story after ABC dropped it.

This is called “reporting”.

The Reclusive Leftist weighs in

Posted: January 18, 2011 by datechguy in blogs, internet/free speech
Tags: , , , , , , ,

One of days I must have the Reclusive Leftist on my show on the subject of Sarah Palin and the left. We disagree on almost everything else but she has been willing from day one to call out her fellow leftists on Palin Derangement syndrome.

I finally had a chance to take a peek at her blog to see what she had to say about the last week and she wrote a series of post that confirmed her dislike of the right but were as honest as the day was long.

She started on the 9th:

As soon as I heard the news Saturday and read an online article (forget where) with the gleanings from the guy’s various communiques, that was my impression. Mind control, grammar, the possible constitutional ramifications and/or mind control of said grammar, strange obsessions with the currency and its frightening message to trust in God, nonsensical ramblings: it could be a page out of Vaslav Nijinksy’s diary. It’s not just the content, but the style. Classic paranoid schizophrenia.

So imagine my surprise when I checked in on the news later last night and saw that Sarah Palin had been blamed for the shooting.

In the post she insults the tea party but that doesn’t stop her from seeing nonsense for what it is.

Later that same day she reminds us of some of the non violent memes of the lefts opposition to Sarah Palin and says:

That’s right. He was busy calling for Hillary Clinton’s death and then, when Clinton was over, foaming at the mouth about

Palin hunt image via the reclusive leftist

Sarah Palin. Lots of people were foaming at the mouth about Sarah Palin. There was the “art” exhibit in New York inviting people to play at shooting her with a rifle. She was hung in effigy in Los Angeles. Sandra Bernhardt said she should be raped, and not a few other people gleefully called for her death.

Was there any outrage about this at the time? Only from people like me, who were running around with our hair on fire, screaming to our allegedly “progressive” brethren and sistren “UR DOIN IT WRONG!!!!!” Everybody else seemed to think it was just fine. After all, Sarah Palin really did deserve to be raped and murdered and shot and lynched because she’s a foul c*** who needs to die, so what was wrong with saying so? Lighten up, bitch. What are you, a secret Republican?

And again she is the reclusive leftist so she makes it clear what she thinks of Sarah Palin’s political positions:

Sarah Palin is a Republican. That’s all. She’s just a silly rightwing Republican. The country’s crawling with them. Look, they’re all around you! They’re your county supervisors, state senators, congresspeople, governors, and former presidents. Remember Bush? Remember Reagan? Sarah Palin didn’t invent any of this stuff. She didn’t invent any of the ideas or any of the rhetoric. She certainly didn’t invent extremist violence, nor does she seem to be in any way connected with that kind of thing. She’s just an ordinary idiot Republican who believes ordinary idiot Republican things, like the millions of other ordinary idiot Republicans in this country.

What is it about her that’s so special? What could it possibly be that makes this utterly ordinary idiot Republican somehow a billion times worse than all the rest?

…and she gives her explanation but go to the link and read it, she deserves the hits.

Finally on the 16th she hits it out of the park on RFK Jr’s essay:

He just wanted to talk about the dangers of right-wing hate. Okay, fine. That’s cool. Let’s talk about it. But still: how do you leave out the sentence about Oswald? As a writer, how do you do that? I couldn’t. It feels obligatory. You write this highly-charged essay, you make a big deal about how ugly the right-wing stuff was in Dallas, you evoke the horror of the president’s death; even if you want your takeaway message to be about the dangers of superheated rhetoric, how do you leave out the undeniable historical reality that Oswald was cut from an entirely different bolt of cloth? Even if you tuck it in as a parenthetical throwaway (”of course, ironically…”), you still have to acknowledge it. Don’t you?

I had just about persuaded myself to forget about it—chalk it up to a single editorial decision not to muddy the main point—when I learned today that Eric Boehlert wrote an extremely similar essay in 2009: A President was killed the last time right-wing hatred ran wild like this. It’s exactly the same argument RFK Jr. makes, and with exactly the same stunning omission. No Oswald! Oswald has simply disappeared. He’s gone. And everything that motivated the man is gone. No Cuba, no Fidel, no Soviet Union, no Marxism, no Communism, no nothing. There’s not even a nod to Oswald’s real motive, which was the inchoate longing to be somebody, to be a great man, to be important.

Read this whole essay, yeah it’s hard on the right, but it’s honest and fair and from the left.

I will never agree with the Reclusive Leftist on religion, abortion, George Bush and a million other issues, but boy do I respect her.

Update: Thanks for the lanche Glenn but thanks even more for linking to Violet, honest leftists should be celebrated. BTW Insty readers make sure you read all three of her posts on the subject.

Update 2: A lot of readers think that I’m giving Violet too much credit. Remember a lot of us on the right were once on the left, it took a while for us to get it, its not a switch. If you want to let people find their way to truth the best way is to encourage them along the way.

Older Entries