FRIST!!

WOOT

Hey, Mencken!!

Not getting out of the boat, short as that is.

By mere seconds!

I just have to post something, even though I have nothing to say, because this is the first time in memory I’ve visited a Sadly post where there aren’t already a couple hundred comments at least.

Not that I have anything to say in those cases, either, granted.

Thanks for putting it out there for me to read, though, y’all.

Got out of the boat. Not 100% sure on the shorter, to say the least.

I put the dirty words in his mouth, but the self-satisfied — and totally false — assumption that he is moderate because “civil” but not extreme because of his ideology is all Brooks. “Bipartisan” stuff is always wonderful to Bobo when it actually means “Republicans get their way”. Dig deep and he’s blaming the AZ shootings on the 60’s, as all wingnuts are wont to do.

Not exactly willing to go dive inside Mr Brooks’ mind, I’ll trust you on this. But this piece on itself, without prior knowledge of culprit, is not hard evidence of his douchebaggery.

Hey, it’s Mencken. Goody.

Dig deep and he’s blaming the AZ shootings on the 60?s, as all wingnuts are wont to do.

Is there anything bad that he hasn’t blamed on the 60s? Is there anything good that he hasn’t credited to Reaganism?

Alternate shorter: The black man has appeased me, a representative of his betters. For now.

Is there anything bad that he hasn’t blamed on the 60s?

It’s a very popular trend. The deacon at the church down the street made the same argument the other day, that he remembers that before the sixties values were much more important, there wasn’t this plague of moral relativism, etc.

I’m going to give him a pass on remembering his youth as better than it actually was because plenty of people do that in some way or other, but no, you’re not going to bullshit me into thinking the fifties were short on moral relativism. Why not? Because it was the last decade where there was one law for white people and another for black people. Holding people on the other side of the tracks to a different standard than you hold your own to is the fucking essence of moral relativism, and unlike free sex and gayness and multiculturalism and all that hippie stuff, this was actually written into law.

I’m a child of the eighties, and while I think there’s a lot to admire in the mid-20th century era (most of it economic), I also thank God for the sixties. The social norms from before then would’ve driven me mad.

It doesn’t help that there is a subset of baby-boomers who despite their daily crimes against humanity, being banksters, hedge-fund managers, hamburger salesmen, claim that the the 60’s were the moar importantest evarhrhrhr and that they were part of the 15million people at Woodystock and that if we kids only really knew how to protest, George W. Nixon wouldn’t have been elected to a second term, and that anyone over the age of 70 is the man, man, but Michelle Bachmann-Hal Turner-Overdrive is teh grooviest and their albums are an incredible investment as long as they are in the original plastic

heaving for breath

and fuck Bobo.

Civility is a tree with deep roots, and without the roots, it can’t last. So what are those roots? They are failure, sin, weakness and ignorance.

Wetsuit-dildo combo for sure.

It’s a pity this thread just got cock-blocked by the following thread, because this is one of Bobos’ absolute worst. My sorter would be “I did say ‘please,’ nigger. Even that’s not good enough for you?”

Shorter shorter Bobo: I am a smug-ass cracker.

It’s a pity this thread just got cock-blocked by the following thread, because this is one of Bobos’ absolute worst.

Totally. It’s easily one of the most smug, insulting pieces of writing I’ve read in a long time.

Look, I’m not going to read the linked piece of writ, so can someone who has tell me with whose blood he suggests the Tree of Failure occasionally be watered from time to time? Does it contain a firm offer from him?

Bobo fell out of the tree of failure and hit his head on every branch on the way down!

WHOOO! Sometimes they’re just too easy!

A friend of mine, who does not blog, but should, replied to me in private email about that Hannity shite, and here’s his decent two pennies:

“Of course, Hannity can’t admit that this is a demand problem.  Because that would be admitting that himself and his audience are a large part of the problem.  I’m not sure that right wingers can be properly described as thinking.  They just have a series of sometimes contradictory reflex reactions to sets of stimuli.
 
I betchya when gas does reach $4 a gallon again and some liberal politicians as per usual start making noises about investigating oil companies for price fixing that Hannity will go into knee jerk corporate defense mode and start screaming about how this is simply how a free market works when there is not enough supply to go round.  Increased demand leads to increased prices.  And if you don’t like it, start riding the bus and biking.”

HappyCamper, we all have prior knowledge of the culprit. He has been an object of scrutiny for many years.

Does it contain a firm offer from him?

Ewwww.

HTML Mencken! Good to see you here again.

And yeah, they are still blaming the dirty hippies for everything bad.

Bobo sure wasn’t being very “moderate” when he was implying that anyone who opposed Operation: Enduring Kickbacks was a deranged moron who hates freedom. Nor is it very “moderate” of him to constantly equate soccer moms & hippies penned in “Free Speech Zones” chanting “no blood for oil” with Bircher fucksticks rallying with highly visible firepower to cheer & froth over their bloodlust to “water the tree of liberty” with the vascular contents of everyone who disagrees with them.

*jumps out of boat, gags, gets back in boat, removes nose-plugs*

Oh my fucking fuck. He’s still quoting Niebuhr? For Bog’s sake, Bobo, step away from the dead guy & keep both hands where we can see them.

Pretty good bet that if Niebuhr was alive (or a zombie) he’d forget his theological detachment, moderation & civility just long enough to kick Brooks in the nads.

Tree of Failure?
Tree of Comprehensive Tax Reform (i.e., moar regressive taxes)?

One paragraph praising what, by most accounts, was a pretty good eulogy, followed by loads of high-minded concern-trolling.

Tree of Concern Trolling!

No, wait. I got it now.

The Tree of Failure must be frequently watered with the blood of libellers!

Civility is a tree with deep roots

So is a strangler fig.

Tangentially related to Niebuhr, we got a bunch of books dumped here that included Dan Brown’s Angels and Demons. Anyway, I looked in it a little and there’s a bit where I think a bishop is asking a priest if he recalls the prayer of St Francis, to which the priest responds not by saying “which one?” but by paraphrasing Niebuhr’s serenity prayer.

There’s lots of great stuff like that, like protons being the antiparticles of electrons, or yoga being a Buddhist practice. Fun stuff.

I was really disappointed to see that the latest New Yorker wasted several pages on Brooks. It was his typical breezy, facile stereotyping, about how you can tell these people because they listen to NPR and blah blah. They have some of the greatest staff writers and contributing editors in the country over there. Couldn’t they find anything better for those pages than Brooks’ bellywash?

DFB:

Civility is a tree with deep roots, and without the roots, it can’t last. So what are those roots? They are failure, sin, weakness and ignorance.

What the fuck does that even mean?

There are always arguments you should have made better, implications you should have anticipated, other points of view you should have taken on board.

OK, after reading the sentence above, I refuse to read another word of David Fucking Brooks. I simply cannot waste anymore time on a guy who preaches and preaches that “everyone” should do ____ but never does it himself. This man is a fucking moron.

Shorter shorter Bobo: I am a smug-ass cracker.

That too.

President Obama’s speech in Tucson was a good step, but there will have to be a bipartisan project like comprehensive tax reform to get people conversing again.

Yeah, ’cause we’ve all seen how there’s nothing like debating on tax reform to get members of congress to lock arms and sing kumbaya….(groan) I’d have more respect for Brooks’ conservatism if it wasn’t so passive/aggressive

and the next time my Cialis® is kicking in at an inopportune time, I’ll just remember to think of one of him columns.

“Civility is a tree with deep roots, and without the roots, it can’t last.”

OMG! He’s Chance the Gardner! It’s all making sense now!

Somebody ask him if he’d like a car!

I already know the shape of the boat.

1). initial reasonable-sounding statement.

2-n). series of successive paragraphs. Each of which are reasonable enough individually, but which together build towads a completely irrational conclusion.

n+1). irrational conclusion, in which Republicans/conservatives just happen to be the true moderates, and Democrats/liberals are bad and wrong if they are “immoderate” enough to be factually correct and morally consistent.

David Brooks is the smarmiest propagandist I have ever had the misfortune to read. What’s worse to me is that some people actually think he says rational things. That says far more about those people – in my opinion, it means they want to be fooled.

I had a great analysis of David Brooks’ latest wordfart without even getting out of the boat. But WordPress ated it.

Still not getting out of the boat.

Here’s said analysis again. I’m sure the article will be:

1) seemingly rational and reasonable statement.

2-n). series of paragraphs which are each seemingly reasonable in themselves, but taken together combine in emotionally smooth, build towards an irrational conclusion.

n+1) irrational conclusion, in which Republicans and conservatives are the true moderates. And Democrats/liberals who dare point out logical or moral inconsistencies are radical extremist non-working class fake Americans.

Chris said,
January 15, 2011 at 15:48

and a hearty werd up there Chris

Awesome, glad to see HTML posting.

Also glad to hear from you HTML!

Also:

The Tree of Failure must be frequently watered with the blood of libellers!

Berry, berry nith!

“Civility is a tree with deep roots, and without the roots, it can’t last. So what are those roots? They are failure, sin, weakness and ignorance.

What the fuck does that even mean?”

I think he was trying to say, “You are all flawed imperfect human beings who should try to be more humble and civil. Like me. It’s too bad that your damned hippie parents never taught you that.”

On a side note, that whole Tree of Failure stuff, kind of reminded me of “Climbing the mountain of conflict” from “In the Loop”.

Look, all sorts of things,
that are actually very likely are also unforeseeable.
For the plane in the fog,
the mountain is un… unforeseeable,
but then it is suddenly
very real and inevitable.

Is this your opinion or is this
the government position?

The mountain in the metaphor is
a completely hypothetical mountain
that could represent anything.

So, who is the plane,
and who is the mountain?

Is the government lost in the fog?

What I’m saying is…
that to walk the road of peace…
sometimes we need to be ready
to climb… the mountain of conflict.

1

2-n

n+1

Ah, proof by induction.

Ah, proof by induction.

Oh, yes, please let Brooks be inducted. If he was drafted and sent straight to the front lines, that would be proof for me there is a God.

Q: What do you call a dead 9-year-old??

A: Collateral Damage.

But WordPress ated it.
WP can eat a hedge of dicks.

@Jamey:

Like a fascist Julie Andrews…

I absolutely love “In The loop” and “The Thick Of It!”

OK, yes, the main point of the editorial (which the shorter touches on not at all) could have been stated in a sentence or two, and without the godawful metaphor, and it’s entirely unoriginal, but the notion that we ought to keep our own fuckups in mind during debate is hardly the worst thing Bobo has ever suggested.

Of course, if you’ve never been wrong about anything, ever, then I can see how his diabolical insinuation there could be totally infuriating.

and poor David Brooks….his column induced such widespread somnambulism that it’s reflected even in the dearth of commentary here.

Maybe you get the idea that my point was “we ought to keep our own fuckups in mind” but it’s actually that you, meaning everyone other than me, should keep your own fuckups in mind. As a centrist, I don’t fuck up.

God, I hate Brooksie. By the time he gets to a fucking point you’ve already stopped reading three paragraphs back due to a severe shortage of giveashit.

…the notion that we ought to keep our own fuckups in mind during debate…

This is only a fair synopsis of his piece if you define “fuckups” to mean any and all deviations from the will of the magical idealized ghost of Reagan that lives in Bobo’s head and tells him what to write.

For the n00bs, I should explain that robotslave is also known as Grampaw, an old troll and lolcow around these parts. A squishy neoliberal, he, like Brooks, has been explosively wrong about a bazillion things, hence his butthurt camaraderie with Bobo.

As ever, we bow to HTMLM’s calm, trenchant, and incisive responses to each and every one of the actual points we have raised in the present debate.

Your “actual points” were taken care of by the fake David Brooks and others. That you missed their point is typical — and, um, central to *my* point.