Why ‘progressive’ is a dirty word

“Progressive” has become a dirty word to many Americans,
more closely associated with intolerance and double standards
than with free thought and due process.
A self-described liberal Trump hater in the Wall Street Journal.

The Squad

The abashed progressive writes:

To many ordinary Americans we [progressives] appear unhinged, haughty and out of touch. What can we do to change?

First, stop obsessing over identity. We can and should support policies that benefit disadvantaged groups, from criminal-justice reform to a higher minimum wage and affordable health care. But our tendency to insert race, sex and sexual orientation into everything gives the impression that we are more committed to narrow groups than Americans as a whole.

Comment BlackSecond, change the Manichaean outlook. … We wield political correctness like a club. … Think of the way progressives believed Jussie Smollett’s preposterous hate-crime claim …

Our fanatical embrace of the oppressor-victim narrative finds us quick to assign guilt or innocence based on narrow identity markers like race and sex, seeing women as always victims, men as always aggressors, minorities and immigrants as by definition innocent. 

No more snowflakery!

Piers Morgan (of all people) has had enough of the humorless commissars.

double-safety-pins

If you said a joke ten years ago that offended somebody, you can never host the Oscars. So now there’s no host for anything. The Emmy’s now just said they’re not gonna host either … The liberals get what they want, which is a humorless void … So what’s happening around the world? Populism is rising because people are fed up with the PC culture. They’re fed up with snow-flakery, they’re fed up with people being offended by everything. 

Texting George Orwell

DisruptionCan Madison be far behind? San Francisco is laundering the once-vigorous English language to render it safe for Progressives. Quit saying “criminals.” The word “offender” is out. Instead call them a “justice-involved person,” or a “formerly incarcerated person.”

A juvenile “delinquent” will now be called a “young person with justice system involvement,” or a “young person impacted by the juvenile justice system.” Drug addicts are “persons with a history of substance use.” Not even “abuse,” which is so … judgmental. More here.

In brief

Whatever happened to commuter rail in Dane County? Dave Zweifel asks. Answer: the people voted against it.

F is for “fake,” Fredo — CNN host Chris Cuomo says the “fake news” insult is equivalent of the N-word for journalists.”

Babylon Bee stings back! Its latest: “Survey finds too many believe Snopes is a legitimate fact-checking website.” Snopes — often accused of filling potholes for the political left — fretted that the conservative Babylon Bee humor site “is among the most shared factually inaccurate content they’d found.” Proving once again that thing about progressives having no sense of humor.

Here is what YOU need to know!

The white lab coats here at Blaska Policy Werkes see this all the time, especially from CNN and the New York Times: “Here is what you need to know.” Our measured response is this:

What you need to knowBlaska’s Bottom Line: You arrogant bastids! You have no idea what anyone needs to know much less what the Brain Trust at the Werkes needs to know. Odds are that you don’t even know what YOU need to know and wouldn’t know it if it pulled your pants down on Times Square. Now you know!

What do YOU think?

Advertisements

About David Blaska

Madison WI
This entry was posted in identity politics, Progressives and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

97 Responses to Why ‘progressive’ is a dirty word

  1. Here are two “nice” pieces Zoltar wrote about progressives;

    PROGRESSIVE’S: A VIEW FROM THE EYES OF AN INDEPENDENT

    PRINCIPLES OF PROGRESSIVE GOEBBELISM

    Progressives created the perception that they’re irrational, now they have to live with it.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Cornelius Gotchberg says:

      @Steve Witherspoon;

      My pal & compadre @Zoltar Speaks! has numerous other pearls of wisdom to share.

      To wit:

      Proglibocrats Anonymous (abridged/reprinted [with permission] @ZoltarSpeaks!)

      Proglibocrats Anonymous: A place for Lefties to go to combat the chronic condition known as Proglibocracy.

      Proglibocrats Anonymous©™® (a 501(c)(3) charity) is a national fellowsh…um…collective of Men, Women, Agender, Androgyne, Bigender, Genderqueer/non-binary, Gender bender, Hijra, Pangender, [et al]**, who share the existentially debilitating disease of Proglibocracy and are ideologically obsessed with its totalitarian philosophy. It is nonprofessional, self-supporting, multiracial, and available almost everywhere. There are no age or education requirements. Membership is open to anyone who wants to do something about his, her, it, Ze, ** ideological obsession with totalitarianism.

      At Proglibocrats Anonymous, Proglibocrats can openly discuss their addiction disease in a very familiar hive minded environment where the addict can learn from the experiences of other addicts that want to get and remain free of their all consuming obsession.

      MISSION STATEMENT

      Using the TWELVE STEPS OF PROGLIBOCRATS ANONYMOUS and the TWELVE TRADITIONS OF PROGLIBOCRATS ANONYMOUS we strive to remain free of our obsession with the scourge of Proglibocracy which causes complete ideological blindness (viewing the world ONLY through reality filtering WEAPONS-GRADE-THICKENED-INDUSTRIAL-STRENGTH-HARDENED ideological blinders, absolute rejection of accepted fact-based reality (limiting life choices ONLY to pre-approved selections from the Lefty World View Cafeteria), rampant opinion bigotry (determined by strict adherence to lock-steppin glassy-eyin’ unquestionin’ slobberingly obsequious, feebly flaccid fealty), and hopelessly entrenched Belief Superiority.

      MOTIVATION PRAYER: God (secular/non-Christian/non-Judaic) grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change; courage to change the things I can; and wisdom to know the difference.

      The Gotch

      Liked by 2 people

  2. George's son says:

    George Orwell, 1948: “Even if we squeeze the rich out of existence, the mass of people must either consume less or produce more. Or am I exaggerating the mess we’re in? I may be, and I should be glad to find myself mistaken. The point I wish to make is that this question, among people who are faithful to the left ideology, cannot be genuinely discussed.” From the book, “Churchill & Orwell” Apparently feckless punters keep on tryin’, even after a second world war…..

    Like

  3. Gary L. Kriewald says:

    Progressives have reached the point of no return; their extremism is strangely akin to the rabid Puritanism of the late 17th century–based on a fanatical doctrine that demands complete and unquestioning obedience, that seeks to transform society in its own image, that worms its way into every aspect of one’s life, that settles for nothing less than the extermination of all heretics–and most importantly never admits error. Thankfully, most Americans do not share this dystopian vision and no political candidate who embraces it will ever win high office. No wonder Trump regularly pokes this wasps’ nest, knowing full well that the response will reveal new depths of fanaticism and intolerance.

    Fredo should know there’s no equivalent of the n-word. To say so makes you a racist faster than just about anything else.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Paula Fitz says:

      I agree that most people are not this extreme, but that doesn’t mean they should continue to be silent. Apathy and complacence are not the answer.

      The radical voices are taking over government positions in local government across the country, including here in Madison. They’re highly organized and shouldn’t be underestimated. The radical voices are winning seats in local government . . .

      Liked by 1 person

    • old baldy says:

      “a fanatical doctrine that demands complete and unquestioning obedience, that seeks to transform society in its own image, that worms its way into every aspect of one’s life, that settles for nothing less than the extermination of all heretics–and most importantly never admits error”.

      glk: Great job describing 45, and the cast of sycophantic right-wing (alleged) christian evangelicals he has licking his boots. Bravo.

      Like

      • Paula Fitz says:

        The failure to look within your own party and how its radicalization has turned off Americans, including myself, will help cement its demise.

        Christian extremism is a turnoff, but for me at least, it’s not even remotely as dangerous as what the extremist arm of the Democratic party (now in leadership roles across the country) have promoted.

        Liked by 2 people

        • Batman says:

          BAM!!

          Like

        • old baldy says:

          And what party would that be. I pride myself in voting for the best candidate, not the party. And what about the extremist wing of the R’s, now in the WH?

          Like

        • “And what about the extremist wing of the R’s, now in the WH?”

          What do you identify as extremism in the White House.

          Is trying to enforce existing United States law extremism?

          Is advocating for United States businesses across the globe over businesses elsewhere in the world extremism?

          Is trying to keep nukes out of the hands of countries like North Korea and Iran extremism?

          Personally I don’t see anything even remotely equivalent to the left’s “a fanatical doctrine that demands complete and unquestioning obedience” coming from the White House. The left is WAY out there in left field extremism; they’re anti Israel, anti United States, anti flag, anti National Anthem, anti free speech, anti innocent until proven guilty, anti facts, anti freedom, anti Constitution, anti critical thinking, anti civility, anti police, anti integrated society, anti wealth, anti logic, anti, anti, anti, heck since Trump took office they’ve become the party of anti. The left has been parroting false accusations of Russian collusion inspiring a Congressional witch hunt, they unethically and immorally spouted the word racism when racism does not apply so damned often that they’ve decreased the value of the word and turned it into nothing but an overused and ineffective trope. The truth is that if the political left doesn’t agree with the policies of the political right their go-to is to attack the person with things like racist, misogynist, or anti LGBT instead of arguing against the policy. The political left has become a obsessed group of group-think minded anti-American people completely lacking ethics and morals.

          Do tell us old baldy, what are these extremist things you see in the White house? How about you list between ten and twenty extreme things.

          Like

        • Cornelius Gotchberg says:

          ”Do tell us old baldy, what are these extremist things you see in the White house?”

          Perhaps @hankdog/old baldy should just post the convincing links to the CNN/MSLSD/NYT etc., etc., etc. articles that have helped him…um…formulate his glassy-eyin’ lock-steppin’ unquestionin’ observation?

          The Gotch

          Liked by 1 person

        • “I pride myself in voting for the best candidate, not the party.”

          How can you do that when the best candidate usually isn’t even on the ballot? Usually what you end up doing is to vote for the lesser of two evils. The politicians that both the Democrats and Republicans usually trot out to the polls are usually terrible people but popular. There are only a few rare exceptions to that “terrible people” label.

          Like

        • Sprocket says:

          I remember the Moral Majority 80s. The craziest thing the fundies ever did was picket The Last Temptation of Christ. I don’t recall mobs of them pepper spraying non-believers and cracking them in the dome with bike locks.

          Though I suppose it’s a mystery why the evangelicals would support Trump; he’s an egotistical philanderer. I guess it might have something to do with him embracing them and not displaying the sneering contempt for their beliefs the left does. But that’s just a guess.

          Liked by 1 person

        • Cornelius Gotchberg says:

          @hankdog/old baldy not only claims to be real real independent, but shows it by waxing nostalgic and clinging bitterly to the unequivocally Scandal Free Hopey Changey regime.

          The Gotch

          Liked by 1 person

        • Paula Fitz says:

          In a nation of 300 million, we should be attracting the elite – Colin Powell types. Instead we have a bully on one side of the aisle and race-bating phonies who swing whichever way will get them elected, on the other.

          It’s a sad time in history for this nation; perhaps even more tragic than in other points in history because of our current divisions, apathy, and sheer ignorance.

          And as I sit here looking at pictures of the Amazon ablaze, I’m reminded that our planet is not in such great shape, either.

          Liked by 1 person

        • Paula Fitz says:

          Sprocket, very true.

          Like

        • Paula Fitz says:

          Steve, so true! The probing question to ask is: WHY?

          “How can you do that when the best candidate usually isn’t even on the ballot? Usually what you end up doing is to vote for the lesser of two evils. The politicians that both the Democrats and Republicans usually trot out to the polls are usually terrible people but popular. There are only a few rare exceptions to that “terrible people” label.”

          Like

        • I wrote…

          “How can you do that when the best candidate usually isn’t even on the ballot? Usually what you end up doing is to vote for the lesser of two evils. The politicians that both the Democrats and Republicans usually trot out to the polls are usually terrible people but popular. There are only a few rare exceptions to that “terrible people” label.”

          Paula asked…

          “Steve, so true! The probing question to ask is: WHY?”

          My answer is this…

          What I’ve seen over the years is that more often than not the candidates for President that are left on the ballot by the time the election comes around have bent their ethics so far for so many years in their quest for the Presidency that by the time they get to an actual Presidential election they’re so ethically compromised that they’re only mouthing the words “serve the people” because it’s all become a quest for power forcing them to make choices that eat their morals for breakfast. Once an elected official ethically crosses the line from serving the people to a quest for more power there is likely no turning back, this will ultimately result in a terrible person.

          We can see examples of this quest for power compromising ethics in local politics too; for instance, I believe that David Blaska was not willing to compromise his ethics in his recent run for school board but I can’t say the same thing about those that opposed him.

          The old saying “power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely” has some real truth in it. People with weak moral and ethical character will inevitably be corrupted by any power that’s given them. Strong moral and ethical character is by far the most important thing we can instil in our children, this is where many parents have failed miserably over the last 80 years. Corrupted ethics and morals is now an epidemic in our society.

          Like

      • old baldy says:

        Dear Readers (and please have someone read this to gootchie):

        If you all are too blind and deaf to notice the dishonest, narcissistic, juvenile playground bully now occupying the WH I can’t help you. If that is the type of candidate you want to vote for and as president continue to support, fine. History won’t be kind to you. It wasn’t to the guy I voted for in 72. While I would have preferred different candidates on both tickets, I voted for the best person (in my opinion) that could become president. And my candidate lost. That happened in 1976, 1992, and 2000 as well, so it goes. But that is the way our system works and I can live with it. But I fear the current occupant is leading us down a path of no return with his continued aversion to the truth or any semblance of reality, his race/religion baiting nonsense, his juvenile and unintelligible rants, and his mockery of diplomacy on the world stage.

        So if you all want to call me names, make fun of my deceased mother, or tell me how stupid I am, bring it on. None of you would ever do it to my face. Carry on.

        Like

        • You previously stated…

          “And what about the extremist wing of the R’s, now in the WH?”

          Now you say…

          “If you all are too blind and deaf to notice the dishonest, narcissistic, juvenile playground bully now occupying the WH I can’t help you.”

          Are you so damned ignorant that you truly cannot tell the difference between “extremist wing of the R’s, now in the WH” and “dishonest, narcissistic, juvenile playground bully now occupying the WH”?

          This statement of yours, “extremist wing of the R’s, now in the WH”, is false and this statement of yours, “dishonest, narcissistic, juvenile playground bully now occupying the WH” is true; HOWEVER, your true statement does not make your false statement true.

          “But I fear the current occupant is leading us down a path of no return with his continued aversion to the truth or any semblance of reality, his race/religion baiting nonsense, his juvenile and unintelligible rants, and his mockery of diplomacy on the world stage.”

          That’s what you’re worried about? You poor, poor hive-minded snowflake. The serious problem is the irrational aversion to the truth and hate coming from the political left; Donald Trump didn’t create the left’s irrational aversion to the truth and hate, he revealed it!

          Liked by 1 person

        • Cornelius Gotchberg says:

          @hankdog/old baldy;

          “If you all are too blind and deaf to notice the dishonest, narcissistic, juvenile playground bully now occupying the WH I can’t help you.”

          The Gotch could have posted the exact same thing (with more than a few pointed additions) every day from 01/20/2009 through 01/20/2017, a time frame that ironically mirrors the ONLY two POTUS terms with uninterrupted WAR…and by a Nobel Peace Prize laureate, no less.

          Sheesh! Small wonder Lefties (most, not all) avoid trafficking in the fact-based reality, am I right?

          ”None of you would ever do it to my face”

          Sure…sure we wouldn’t. And what is it with old EVIL White Y-Chromosomal Unit career Lefties and their inexplicable need to appear to be real real tough on the internet?

          Looking back on lifetime of poor choices, the stark realization that their ideology’s failed everywhere it’s been tried, and the horror that the current crop of Clown Car Caravan Cavalcade Presidential hopefuls couldn’t generate a synapse between them?

          Whatever it is, it’s freakin’ cringe-inducing!

          The Gotch

          Liked by 1 person

        • Admit it old baldy, you made a claim that there are extremists in the White House and now you can’t support your claim. Based on other thing’s you’ve written in the past this comes as absolutely no surprise.

          “None of you would ever do it to my face.”

          Now you’re making another claim that’s not supportable.

          Like

        • AnonyBob says:

          Give it up, OB. Making rational, common sense and all-too-obvious observations about Trump is pointless with this zealous band of jackels blinded to any reality but their own. They’re a cult. All Hail Trump.

          Like

        • “Making rational, common sense and all-too-obvious observations about Trump”

          It’s interesting to read the repetitive signature significant statements that people like AnonyBob write, this one is particularly interesting. AnonyBob is now claiming that making factually unsupportable accusations that an extremist wing of the Republican Party is now occupying the White House is somehow rational, common sense, and obvious and when in fact it is the exact opposite – irrational false claims, far from common sense, and not obvious in any way.

          Like

        • madisonexpat says:

          That’s because we aren’t Antifa. We wouldn’t hit you with a bike lock either.

          Like

      • Batman says:

        baldy wrote: “Great job describing 45, and the cast of sycophantic right-wing (alleged) christian evangelicals he has licking his boots. Bravo.”

        Here is one very considered explanation —- Why a Bible-Believing Christian Supports Trump
        Hope this helps.

        Rod Thomson (Intro. para.)
        People frequently ask me how, as a committed, Bible-believing Christian, I can support President Trump. This often comes from my liberal Democrat friends — who have suddenly located a puritanical moral streak for this president after misplacing it for others — and who are just looking for a “gotcha!”
        But sometimes it comes from conservative Christian friends. One whom I respect, recently asked this: Considering my Christian faith and mission commitment to Haiti, how can I reconcile supporting Trump and what he (allegedly) said about Haiti?
        So I’ve decided it’s time to simply explain to the world exactly how it reconciles for me. It’s not easy or comfortable. I wish it wasn’t necessary. But it is.

        https://therevolutionaryact.com/support-trump-christian/

        Like

  4. Paula Fitz says:

    Great post!

    What Mr. Gastiounis wrote is incredibly insightful, but sadly, voices like his are in short supply. Or at least it seems like that to me. Maybe they’re still around but are being drowned out by the lunatic fringe and / or are just too timid to speak out.

    I’ve been sounding the alarms to the Democratic party for several years when I started to see their migration to the far left, but my pleas mainly fell on deaf ears. Their apathy, arrogance, inability to listen, or whatever you want to call it has caused me to move away from the party and to be mistrustful of anything they now have to say, even if it does make sense.

    We inhabit a nation that has become broken and severely damaged. If those moderate voices want to speak out, I’d say now is the time.

    WHAT ARE PEOPLE SO AFRAID OF? Of being called names? I get that it’s hard to stand in front of a group of people who hate what you stand for (I can attest to it, as can Blaska). But only until more people start doing it, will we see meaningful change.

    Those of you with more at stake (have offspring) have a helluva’ lot more to lose than the rest of us do. Be silent at your peril. San Francisco, NYC, Portland. And yes, it’s spreading! You’re not safe in your little enclaves. Sorry this is not what you want to hear, but it’s the truth.

    And yes, this is the type of shit that turns people off:

    “A juvenile “delinquent” will now be called a “young person with justice system involvement,”

    PLEASE! You’ll never get me to talk like this.

    Like

    • Gary L. Kriewald says:

      “You’ll never get me to talk like this.” Don’t be so sure. Do find yourself using words like “woke” (to describe someone who claims to be more politically/socially enlightened than you) or “migrants” (to describe illegal aliens) or “self-identify” (to describe the embrace of some made-up sexual category) or “patriarchy” (to describe anything possessing or associated with a penis) or “Dreamers” (see “migrants”)? The term “progressive” belongs at the top of the list: it’s a euphemism the left invented when they realized “liberal” had become a (deservedly) toxic brand. The far left invents these self-congratulatory terms and their lapdogs in the media do their best to propagate them. Before long, they’ve become part of ordinary discourse and insidiously influence the mindset of ordinary Americans.

      Like

      • Paula Fitz says:

        Gary, nope, no chance of that. I have my self-respect. Plus I’m very much an independent thinker, something that sadly, turns many people off.

        Like

      • Batman says:

        The lexicon of the radical intolerant Left is best used disparagingly, sarcastically, and/or with slight alterations, (regressive not progressive) for example.
        It is always proper to make fun of or otherwise belittle the ignorant dangerous radical Left considering their endgame and intended means of achievement.
        H E double hockey sticks, too many dems will not even denounce Antifa and when asked the response is a pathetic deflection which is really a wink and a nod.

        Proper use of the word lexicon?

        Liked by 1 person

  5. madisonexpat says:

    The Left has become a hideous caricature of Liberalism. As a Liberal a la Voltaire we accepted no dogma from any church, we needed no king or royalty to tell us our place. We cherished critical thinking, liberty, self knowledge and logic. We debated theory and relished a well constructed argument. Classic Liberals assumed good intentions on all sides and saw the value in E Pluribus Unum.
    Boy, do I miss it.
    Then Progressivism in Wisconsin called us to clean government “from the courthouse to the White House.” Civil rights and individual liberty were championed and each state was considered a “laboratory of Democracy.” Patriotism was not assumed by any party (with some exceptions).
    Now ask yourself what the Far Left, shorn of liberalism and Progressive anything believes in.
    No love of God, country, American history or our traditions. No patriotism, no family, no faith, no hope.
    What can they call themselves next? Anarchists? Nihilists? Alinskyites?
    No that’d be honest and overt.
    They call themselves Democrats.

    Like

  6. madisonexpat says:

    OB @4:27. Ditto and that is why we have President Trump and I couldn’t be happier unless we completed the wall and rolled out the IG Horowitz Report.

    Like

  7. Cornelius Gotchberg says:

    Heck, The Gotch doesn’t dismiss all Lefties out of hand, just nearly all of them.

    I be diggin’ Classic Liberalism ala the inimitable Claude Frédéric Bastiat.

    But Post-Modern Neo-Leftyism is so freakin’ far removed from that, and everything else tangentially tethered to any semblance of sanity, that I’m left to, to paraphrase H. L. Mencken, be tempted, at times, to spit on my hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats.’

    Arrrrgh!!!

    The Gotch

    Like

  8. Tom Paine says:

    Hoka Hey………..more hu-more Lots of arrogant, elitist and statist, Nazis at the UW. At least, they live up to their own lofty self-assessment.

    Me? just trailer trash…. So I was told today.

    Like

  9. Batman says:

    antifalovinbob at 1:27; now channeling lesiak with another vapid drive by hit.

    Unsatisfactory.

    Like

    • AnonyBob says:

      Drive by hit? Just counseling my old comrade, old baldy.
      And I may oppose fascism, unlike many here, but I don’t believe in masking one’s face to do it. Does that make me love antifa…or not? You make a lot of assumptions, Batputz, and you know what they say about people who assume. You prove it regularly.

      Like

      • old baldy says:

        Abob:

        You are right, but the usual suspects here are such low-hanging fruit that it is hard to resist taking a swat at them from time to time. And they are so predictable. You only have to drag the bait by them once.

        Like

        • AnonyBob says:

          Truth. I need to play more to the better angels of our nature.

          Like

        • Cornelius Gotchberg says:

          Awwwww, isn’t THAT cute; the clueless in pursuit of buffoonery.

          Just like a coupla steers (in more ways than the one) thinking they’re going for a fun ride as they’re loaded onto the stock car.

          Priceless!

          The Gotch

          Liked by 1 person

        • “You are right, but the usual suspects here are such low-hanging fruit that it is hard to resist taking a swat at them from time to time. And they are so predictable. You only have to drag the bait by them once.”

          Isn’t that exactly what an internet troll does?

          Like

        • old baldy says:

          withered:

          No, that is what someone with an opinion that differs from yours does. I hate to upset your apple cart, but there are folks out there that don’t agree with you and yours. It is still a free country and free speech is still in vogue, but I’m sure you are working hard to change that. Amiright?

          Like

        • Old Baldy wrote…

          “You are right, but the usual suspects here are such low-hanging fruit that it is hard to resist taking a swat at them from time to time. And they are so predictable. You only have to drag the bait by them once.”

          I replied…

          “Isn’t that exactly what an internet troll does?”

          Now old baldy replied…

          “No, that is what someone with an opinion that differs from yours does. I hate to upset your apple cart, but there are folks out there that don’t agree with you and yours. It is still a free country and free speech is still in vogue, but I’m sure you are working hard to change that.

          You can exercise your free speech rights all you want to write the things you do but the action/behavior you described in your comment that I questioned is in fact what a troll does. Just because you have the right to write such things does not mean that the things you write are right. Your free speech argument in response to my question is false and definitively so. Your logic is a complete failure.

          “In Internet slang, a troll is a person who starts quarrels or upsets people on the Internet to distract and sow discord by posting inflammatory and digressive, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the intent of provoking readers into displaying emotional responses and normalizing tangential discussion, whether for the troll’s amusement or a specific gain.” Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll

          Like

        • old baldy says:

          withered:

          And you are certainly entitled to your own opinion, however misguided and fact averse it may be. But the hubris attached to your, “Your logic is a complete failure”, says it all. You just don’t like others disagreeing with you. And I do. So go whine to your litter mates.

          Like

      • “I may oppose fascism

        This is a signature significant* statement on AnaonyBob’s part. AnonyBob can only say that he “may oppose fascism” where I’d be willing to say that absolutely every Conservative here, including myself, can say without any moral ambiguity whatsoever that we in fact do oppose fascism. This shows us that AnonyBob’s weak moral character has been easily corrupted.

        Of course AnonyBob will likely try to attack me for pointing out this glaringly obvious moral problem and say that he never meant that; sorry AnonyBob what’s said is said, you cannot backtrack this one.

        As I wrote above; strong moral and ethical character is by far the most important thing we can instil in our children, this is where many parents have failed miserably over the last 80 years. Corrupted ethics and morals is now an epidemic in our society.

        *Signature Significance: Signature significance posits that a single act can be so remarkable that it has predictive and analytical value, and should not be dismissed as statistically insignificant.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Cornelius Gotchberg says:

          @Steve Witherspoon;

          Heh! TKO in the first!

          I can just see @AnonyBob with that goofy Crazy Guggenheim grin stretched across his puss while he observes the Clueless Clown Car Caravan Cavalcade being asked to disavow the terminally gutless Domestic Terrorist Group Antifa.

          The Gotch

          Liked by 1 person

        • AnonyBob says:

          Witherbaffoon: that was not “I might, I might not” oppose fascism. Read the complete sentence and don’t quote me out of context. And no, I don’t share your certainty that all conservatives here oppose fascism. Your boot-licking of the authoritarian Trump is a bad indicator. Same goes for your lamentable sidekick Gootch.

          Like

        • “Of course AnonyBob will likely try to attack me for pointing out this glaringly obvious moral problem and say that he never meant that”

          I predicted that correctly.

          “that was not “I might, I might not” oppose fascism”

          I can see you have yet to master the use of the English language. It implied exactly what I wrote it did.

          “Read the complete sentence and don’t quote me out of context.”

          I quoted you verbatim and not out of context, you fool! There was nothing in your sentence, stated or implied, to contradicts what I wrote.

          What you wrote is the perfect example of a Freudian slip and there’s nothing you can do or say that will change that fact.

          Like

        • Batman says:

          Mr. Witherspoon,
          At least antifalovinbob is willing to go on record as opposed to face scarves so there’s that, but assault and battery from behind on virtually anyone dressed differently, not so much.

          Like

        • AnonyBob says:

          I guess that should have been spelled Witherbuffoon! My bad!

          Like

        • AnonyBob says:

          Buffoon: read the complete sentence. Again. Slowly, if it helps your comprehension. Taking a single phrase out of context of the entire sentence is lazy and dishonest. (See: pretty much any insult Gootch writes. Don’t be like Gootch.)

          Like

  10. AnonyBob,
    You have my opinion based on the facts. If you want to challenge those facts then present the actual facts that you think contradict what I wrote but you must also explain how those facts contradict what I wrote. Write an extended essay if you like but if you don’t have the intellectual fortitude to do what’s necessary to prove your point then accept your character fate and stop your trolling.

    Like

    • AnonyBob says:

      I am not writing YOU any freaking essays. That’s your tedious specialty. The meaning of my entire sentence about fascists was clear. If you choose to dishonestly twist it into a lazy and inaccurate “gotcha” (or are just incapable of understanding the written word), that is on you. It doesn’t say much for your character and integrity.

      Like

      • old baldy says:

        Abob:

        Be strong. These guys are no more familiar with the facts than 45. They are just wanna-be tin-pot dictators.

        Like

      • “I am not writing YOU any freaking essays. That’s your tedious specialty. The meaning of my entire sentence about fascists was clear. If you choose to dishonestly twist it into a lazy and inaccurate “gotcha” (or are just incapable of understanding the written word), that is on you. It doesn’t say much for your character and integrity.”

        AnonyBob,
        Can’t prove your claim with facts and an intellectual retort so this is the nonsense you come up with? You truly are a feckless snowflake.

        Like

        • AnonyBob says:

          Sigh.
          WitherBuffoon, try to follow along:
          “And I may oppose fascism, unlike many here, but I don’t believe in masking one’s face to do it.”
          The subject of the sentence is about opposing masking one’s face, It’s not about opposing fascism. “I may” as in “I do.” Did I write “I may or may not”? No. Do you see how this works yet? “You may be acting like a blowhard dolt, but I don’t believe you’re pretending” means I don’t think you’re pretending and you ARE acting like a blowhard dolt. Finally, I’ll accept no lectures on moral and ethical character from any follower of Trump. The irony is staggering.

          Like

        • “The subject of the sentence is about opposing masking one’s face, It’s not about opposing fascism.”

          False. You don’t understand the English language as well as you think you do or your doing exactly what I said above that you would do, “AnonyBob will likely try to attack me for pointing out this glaringly obvious moral problem and say that he never meant that…”.

          The subject of the sentence as written is most definitely “fascism”, without that subject matter the sentence becomes meaningless.

          Here are two very simple ways your sentence could have been written that would not have been the moral character revealing signature significant Freudian slip that it was.

          “I oppose fascism but I don’t believe in masking one’s face to do it.”

          “I don’t believe in masking one’s face when opposing fascism.”

          Either of those sentences would have been a direct statement revealing a different kind of moral character and neither would have been framed in a way to falsely attack others participating on this blog.

          Words have meaning AnonyBob, both by definition and implication. As usual, you did not chose your words wisely and in the process you created a moral character revealing signature significant Freudian slip.

          Like

        • Cornelius Gotchberg says:

          Finally, I’ll accept no lectures on moral and ethical character from any follower of Trump

          READ: After scrupulously avoiding a fact-based reality while investing HEAVILY in emotional truth (Hillarity won the popular vote, am I right?), I suspend indefinitely any expectation whatsoever of being taken seriously.

          “The irony is staggering.”

          That it is!

          The Gotch

          Like

        • AnonyBob says:

          Gootch, thanks for the injection of gibberish, said no one ever.

          Like

        • AnonyBob says:

          Withergoon, you’re spewing nonsense about the English language like a bully with an 8th grade education. Have you noticed anyone taking your side on this? (Gootch doesn’t count. Gootch never counts.)
          Now, please provide yet another overly long, harrumphing, bull-headed rebuttal. It’s a good thing InBusiness edits your pieces.

          Like

        • Is ad hominem attacks and rationalizations all you can come up with?

          Pitiful.

          P.S. Look up how to identify the subject in a sentence and sentence diagram g the old fashioned way on google and learn something productive.

          Like

  11. Here is how the mind of a “progressive” works…

    Like

  12. madisonexpat says:

    ABob, the “better angels of your nature” believe 63 million of your fellow citizens are racist. That is a foul and perverse calumny. Your “angels” believe the president to be a white supremacist though neither Rosa Parks nor Muhammed Ali did. Your angels believe Justice Kavanaugh to be a serial gang rapist.
    Dude.Those ain’t angels.

    Liked by 1 person

    • AnonyBob says:

      I was only answering to the better angels of MY nature, Splat, but yes, a good chunk of this country IS racist, history shows. Tolerating and encouraging a racist like Trump does tag one with some guilt by association. Sorry that makes y’all so uncomfortable; maybe you should give it some thought. His receiving an award at the same time as Rosa Parks says nothing about his well documented and rich history of crude racism (check your DOJ files). I can’t accuse Kavanaugh of being a serial rapist; I’m aware of only one incident.
      Trump, Trump’s racist followers and Kavanaugh: no angels there.

      Like

      • “yes, a good chunk of this country IS racist, history shows.”

        This is a false statement. The statement is falsely basing what the country “IS”, as in present tense, on what “history shows”, as in past tense. You cannot do that, it immediately creates a false and non-logical correlation.

        Try recording that.

        “Tolerating and encouraging a racist like Trump does tag one with some guilt by association. Sorry that makes y’all so uncomfortable; maybe you should give it some thought. His receiving an award at the same time as Rosa Parks says nothing about his well documented and rich history of crude racism (check your DOJ files).”

        A racist cannot hide their pattern of racism, there is no pattern of evidence that shows that Trump is a racist. The claim is at best simply false, at worst it is a politically concocted false smear – libelous and slanderous.

        “I can’t accuse Kavanaugh of being a serial rapist; I’m aware of only one incident.”

        There is absolutely no proof that the incident, as accused, ever took place.

        “Trump’s racist followers…”

        Here how the political left racist smear works, Trump is falsely accused as a racist so the political left can accuse anyone that supports him as a racist; these propaganda claims and implications are false.

        What’s actually true is that every politician and all political parties have racists that support them and that support does not make the politician themself or the party as a whole racist.

        Like

        • AnonyBob says:

          Ah, you’re right, let me correct my statement. “A good chunk of this country is racist (I know racists, don’t you?) and our history shows a long pattern of racism. Your quibble is that you don’t think Trump and his reactionary right followers are racist. You’re wrong. He says plenty of disparaging things about people based on race. That’s racism. The racist white supremacists love Trump because they consider him one of their own. Just ask David Duke or Richard Spencer. They sing his praises.”
          Trump’s documented racism goes back to the 70’s when he and his father were sanctioned by the DOJ for discriminatory rental practices. It continues to this day, evidenced by his very own words. His. Own. Words. That’s not a smear, that’s reality. Your refusal to see or acknowledge any of the evidence does not make it go away. It just compromise your credibility.

          Like

        • AnonyBob,
          I think saying that a good chunk of the country is racist is a gross exaggeration of epic proportion unless you are actually considering the rapid increase over the last 10 years of black racists in that group of a “good chunk”. Black racists have been making themselves known since just before President Obama was elected.

          Actually President Trump has said a lot of things that are NOT racist but the political left falsely attribute it to racism. Just saying he’s racist is NOT good enough; PROVE it!

          Calling President Trump a racist because there are some racists within his supporters is like calling President Obama an imbecile because some of his supporters were dumb as a box of rocks or calling President Obama a racist because the Black Panthers supported him. Your argument is false innuendo.

          What are these “his own words” that President Trump has stated you attribute to racism?

          Like

        • Cornelius Gotchberg says:

          ”He says plenty of disparaging things about people based on race. That’s racism.”

          SAYING disparaging things about people based on race is racism?

          Good to know, because that saddles all the Lefty slobberer’s slobberings about White Supremacy, ad nauseum, with being racists!

          One question: Hasn’t the Lefty standard for racism ALWAYS been it being about Power. With LaLaLoopyLoonyLeftyLanders feebly futile flailing, you’d think a little consistency would stave off at least a little of the heartily well deserved ridicule, am I right?

          Anywho, an eminently ButtHurt @AnonyBob has been deftly bait-n-switched (glassy-eyin’ lock-steppin’ & unquestionin’) by the NYT’s hilariously candid pivot from Ruskkie Intervention to Racism/Everywhere All The Time.

          On that subject, wasn’t @AnonyBob All In on Russkie Intervention, with a brief, cringe-inducing Lefty freak-show with the Justice Kavanaugh confirmation hearings?

          Why yes, yes, I believe @AnonyBob WAS All In on Russkie Intervention, with a brief, cringe-inducing Lefty freak-show with the Justice Kavanaugh confirmation hearings!

          Observing @AnonyBob being obsequiously LED by the nostrils by his handlers is almost too much to bear.

          Almost…

          Don’t be like @AnonyBob!

          The Gotch

          Like

        • Cornelius Gotchberg says:

          @Steve Witherspoon;

          “you are actually considering the rapid increase over the last 10 years of black racists in that group of a ‘good chunk’.”

          Good point; according to the official arbiter of hate, the SPLC, the greatest increase in “hate group” numbers is (drum roll) Black Nationalists.

          Despite the existential angst a fact-based reality provides for @AnonyBob, the Inconvenient Truth was posted by The Gotch in January 2018.

          The Gotch

          Like

        • AnonyBob says:

          “What are these “his own words” that President Trump has stated you attribute to racism?”
          All you need do is google “Trump racist quotes.” Plenty of articles there from all kinds of publications. Do some reading and learn something for a change. Think they’re all lying? “Prove it!” and write me an essay.

          Like

        • Cornelius Gotchberg says:

          “All you need do is google ‘Trump racist quotes.’ ”

          Do that, and you’ll be treated to a veritable treasure trove of links to the handler’s responsible for keeping @AnonyBob, et al, on message.

          It gets worse.

          The worm is TURNING!

          Conservative Group Has Started Making Journalists Play By The New Rules And The Journalists Are Terrified of What’s Coming

          GAME ON Lefties; you asked for it, now you’re going to get it…Good-n-Hard!

          The Gotch

          Like

      • AnonyBob says:

        Shorter Gootch: “Yay, sleaze! Sleaze! Sleaze! Sleaze! Yay!”
        There’s something wrong with you.

        Like

        • Cornelius Gotchberg says:

          @AnonyBob;

          “There’s something wrong with you.”

          Could be, I haven’t been quite the same** since finding out that Google manipulated Hillarity’s vote total, which means, (and this is where it gets real real GOOD), The Donald won the popular vote, too.

          **I find myself laughing WAY more often, and in a deep, personally gratifying manner ala: BBBBWAWAWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

          The Gotch

          Like

        • AnonyBob says:

          Have a citation for that nugget that’s not a complete conspiracist crank site? Didn’t think so.
          There’s something wrong with you.

          Like

        • Cornelius Gotchberg says:

          Poor @AnonyBob, sad @AnonyBob, eminently Butt Hurt @AnonyBob; his widdle world was turned upside down late 11/08/2016/early the next morning and he’s having a real real hard time coping.

          Heck, he’s now hit a new low by hilariously defending the moral compass of Big Tech.

          What will you inexplicably defend next, Hillarity REALLY didn’t screw the other Lefty candidates in the nomination process or get the debate questions passed to her ahead of time?

          The hits (Kavanaugh/Russkies/PeePee Tape/25th Amendment/Clown Car Caravan Cavalcade/Soccer Moms/Comey/Mueller Report/record employment. etc., etc., etc.!) just keep a comin’ & battering @AnonyBob unmercifully, and then he finds something parked in his Safe Space, something known as the fact-based reality.

          Not only that, but real real mean Inconvenient Truth keeps whizzing on his Wheaties.

          Choice, Not Chance, Determines Destiny; choose wisely!

          Don’t be like @AnonyBob!

          The Gotch

          Like

        • AnonyBob says:

          No citation. I knew you couldn’t back up your fantasy world gibberish. Like Trump! Poor butt hurt Gootch; epic fail. Pathetic.

          Like

        • Cornelius Gotchberg says:

          @AnonyBob;

          “No citation.”

          All The Gotch can do is lead a jack@$$ to a CLEARLY designated hyperlink, he can’t make him click on.

          Glass half full?

          The vacant position of Blog Idiot has been filled.

          The Gotch

          Like

        • AnonyBob says:

          Gootch, your LA Times story says nothing about manipulating Hillary’s vote totals, thus you have no citation; just your fevered, conspiracist imagination. You flake.

          Like

        • Cornelius Gotchberg says:

          @AnonyBob;

          “your LA Times story says nothing about manipulating Hillary’s vote totals, thus you have no citation”

          Do tell!

          “Epstein, a former Psychology Today editor in chief who runs a nonprofit institute in California, calls the phenomenon he has explored the Search Engine Manipulation Effect.” (bolds mine)

          Anyone with synaptic capability would why the lyin’ thievin’ deceivin’ Hillarity singled out her Long time SUPPORTER, which would explain why you haven’t/won’t.

          And heck, that’s by far the least of it; don’t attempt anything more, which will only result in your usual cringe-inducing ignominy. Plus, as a career blithering imbecile, it’s FAR outside your lack-of-skill set.

          The Gotch

          Like

    • David Blaska says:

      Expat, we live in an age where the accusation suffices.

      Like

  13. madisonexpat says:

    It seems to come down to calumny and credibility. Any stupid assertion repeated in a media echo chamber passes as “well documented” if it attacks a Lefty’s enemy.
    Example: ABob asserts he is aware of one instance of Justice Kavanaugh being a rapist. Based on a delusional woman who could remember nothing and corroborate even less. You could Google it we’re told. President Trump’s racism is “well documented” since its on the internet and nothing on the internet is wrong. Look at the documentation on the Russian Collusion Delusion. 17 Intel agencies all agree buy no one can find a vote that was changed.
    The Left is stuck in the Mad Hatter’s Tea Party. Yet it is their goal to persuade others to do, believe and act as they do.
    I am not worried. Got to cut back on the pop corn though.

    Like

  14. madisonexpat says:

    Oh, the reality of hacked vote counts, Macedonian server farms, 200,000 votes supressed in Wisconsin, the Electoral College, Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi are racists, the Steele Dossier, Hillary’s victory is a 94% lock. Benghazi killings were roving Youtube film critics, Justice Kavanaugh is a rapist, Trump obstructed Bob Muellar…….
    THAT reality?

    Like

  15. Cornelius Gotchberg says:

    MUST SEE! Do yourself a favor and take 18 minutes (doesn’t have to be all at once) and give a listen to this Larry Elder Show segment.

    The EXTREMELYtalented Mr. Elder is someone to who @AnonyBob, et al, would refer to as a “Fingers in ears, eyes clamped shut…Trump supporter (who is) purposefully deaf and blind to reality.”

    In more private (READ: COWARDLY!) moments, @AnonyBob, et al, would call him House N****r, (even leave off the “House”), Uncle Tom, sell-out, race traitor, and much MUCH worse.

    Why in “more private moments?” Lefties are sneaky WOKE racists, juuuuust like their heroes Bill “OmniBus Crime Act” Clinton and his “Bring ’em…Super-Predators…To Heel” Hillarity.

    Ah Lefty; so MUCH hypocrisy, so little time!

    The Gotch

    Like

What do you think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s