1

One of the best things about the blogosphere is that it allows anyone to see the wingnut thought process in action.

The obsession with liberals is telling.

I get a clear sense that a lot of conservative wingnuts are on an urgent mission to prove to themselves that they aren't intellectually inferior to liberals. More interesting, perhaps, is how counterproductive these attempts are.

On any given day, the straight news -- Iraq's a mess, the economy's tanking, gays are good people, the climate's changing, school shootings, evolution is still science and creationism isn't -- wages an unremitting assault on the conservative agenda. Many conservatives simply take this in stride, or maybe even adjust their views slightly and go on about their business.

But the wingnut cannot.

The wingnut feels his very identity is under seige. He takes it personally. He seeks refuge in the vast right wing commentary complex. Fox chat shows, conservative columnists and talk radio soothe his deep sense of cultural and intellectual aggreivement. But, as with any drug, his dependency only grows.

The more the Sean Hannitys and Rush Limbaughs/Brit Humes/George Wills/Charles Krauthammers and on and on and on assure the conservative that his ideas are unassailable, the more assailed he feels when exposed to straight news reporting while not hooked up to the intervenous tube of right-wing bloviation.

Thus the blog. This allows virtually unlimited expression of the intellectual inferiority complex.

The blog can slag liberals 24/7, without annoying interference from fact or logic.

I do give GM credit here, because as far as I can tell, he doesn't ban liberals. Every single other conservative blog I've posted on does. Often, liberal commenters are dismissed as "trolls" and barraged with ad hominem attacks. When that doesn't drive them away, the blog master blocks their IP.

That's because what these conservative wingnuts crave is relief from the nagging sense that their ideas -- and therefore their personal worth as a human -- are inferior.

This is explains why no conservative blog I've ever read focuses on praising or discussing or developing conservative ideas. Rather, the focus is always on liberals. Liberals are crazy, liberals are dumb, liberals dominate the media, liberals are sneaky, liberals are dishonest and on and on and on...

I think the same syndrome operates in the left wingnut world as well, it's just a lot less prevalent because the straight news -- Iraq's a disaster, evolution is a scientific explanation, the globe is warming and so on -- doesn't leave them feeling that their identity is under seige.

 

2

McLovin:  I get a clear sense that a lot of conservative wingnuts are on an urgent mission to prove to themselves that they aren't intellectually inferior to liberals.

Nope.  No need for a mission on my part.  Liberals show the intelligence disparity everyday in their remarks--but, the other way.

Here's an example:  Ted Turner: Global warming could lead to cannibalism

 

 

3

McLovin, calling a conservative (and thus painting with a very wide brush) "wingnut" and expecting respect seems to be an exercise in futility.  Tell you what, why not use the lable conservative rather than wingnut.  I seldom say left-wing-nut, if ever, I call a liberal a liberal because they are.  It is the liberal that has the problem with the lable (well, many if not most do) and thus have devised the term "Progressive" or other circumlocutions to get around what they believe.

For those of us that are conservative, (and there are a few far righters that I do not agree with no how, no way) but do share other beliefs with that I don't discuss.

Only trolls are called trolls.  Typically those that come into the blog to disparage the person rather than the ideas expressed here.  For example, your post above is about the cartoon.  Please note that no where does the cartoon use the word liberal.  Yes, the Woodster did use it in the headline, but so what?  Liberal publications used the head lines "It's only about sex" vis-a-vis Clinton when you (and I) know full well it was about perjury.  A felony regardless of what the topic of questioning was about.  See what I mean?

You typically toss out some fun (if not fully understandable) arguments here and so you won't be banned, though if you kept up the "wingnut" and similar ad hominims (didn't you say that we were the ones using ad hominims?) you too would likely be banned.  You don't so far, nor do I expect you to.  I will ban a liberal (or a conservative) and yes, I've done both that consistently use foul language.  I will ban someone that consistently violates the terms of conversation including deliberate and unending flaming, but never for expressing liberal thoughts.  My beloved Uncle, James S. Melbert comes here all the time and espouses the liberal side of things, I've not banned him, and he can get pretty nasty sometimes.  I still listen to what he has to say and what he thinks and I still love him a lot.

I'll not say I love you (you do understand don't you ) but you are still welcome on these pages. 

4

Read my post again, GM.

Especially this part:

``Many conservatives simply take this in stride, or adjust their views, and go on about their business. But the wingnut cannot.''

It's telling that, rather than acknowledging that I've drawn a distinction between many conservatives and the wingnut faction, you've chosen to identify yourself as a wingnut.

Moreover, I acknowlede the rather obvious fact that there are left-wingnuts as well.

If the shoe fits, wear it.

As it happens, there a very many intelligent, rational, sincere conservatives and liberals. But we've always had access to their thinking processes and they tend to rise to the top of the media and academia.

What blogs have done is make wingnut thinking, for the first time ever, accessible to a mass audience.

Again: Please read more carefully and don't insist on cramming your feet into shoes you say don't fit.

5

I see Hussein Obambe doesn't like concealed weapons permits for the citizens. When do we light the fire so everyone can burn their copy of the constitution. If you don't do it the jack booted nazi democrats will.

Before you jump, the Nazi's were the left wing democrats or VV and the KKK was and is the democrats. History folks.

6

McLovin, you are nothing else if not amusing.  You tell me to wear the shoe if it fits, but in the missive I referred to you say:

"I get a clear sense that a lot of conservative wingnuts are on an urgent mission to prove to themselves that they aren't intellectually inferior to liberals."

Too, you were specirfically speaking to woody and no doubt about the topic from the title of the post.

Nice try amigo but no cigar!

7

I'm a little confused, GM.

Are you saying you don't fit the image of a conservative who's obsessed with trying to show he's not intellectually inferior?

Or are you saying that you do fit the image and, therefore, object to using the term "wingnut" to describe you?

Surely you agree that wingnuts exist both on the right and left, so the only question seems to be whether or not you consider yourself one.

8

Au contraire McLovin, you are no more confused than you are going to vote for McCain.   Your two questions above are akin to asking if one still beats his wife.  So, as a supporter of democrats do you still attend KKK Rallys? 

I never denied that there are wingnuts on both sides, you however in your first missive you said, and I quote, "...conservative wingnuts..." I merely object to being included in the wingnut catagory, of either stripe.

Lastly, I never have to worry about my intelligence.  Having advanced degrees in the field of psychology and human behavior and knowing that my IQ is higher than 99% of the folk that vote in this country and that is no brag, just fact! In case you are not studied in the pecentages, that means that my IQ is >135.  So, take your "less intelligent canard" and put it in your pipe.  OK?

9 "I do give GM credit here, because as far as I can tell, he doesn't ban liberals. Every single other conservative blog I've posted on does."

You haven't tried mine. Read my comment policy, then see where it gets you. C'mon, try.

"Often, liberal commenters are dismissed as "trolls" and barraged with ad hominem attacks."

Maybe they use ad hominem attacks?

10

karen millen outlet karen millen outlet chanel handbags chanel handbags

chanel outlet chanel outlet