Replies

i thought that was a trademark of the left but after a few years at fr i've found i was very mistaken

You're so right.

I too used to think that vicious ridicule and ad hominem, in the place of rational argument, were hallmarks exclusively of the rabid Left. But we find plenty of that going on here too.

"Idiot" "moron" "stupid" "holier-than-thou" "bible-thumping" "Taliban-wing" "prude" "prig" "dirty-minded" "gutter guy" (LOL, I'm not sure how to reconcile the last few) --all those terms were hurled at those of us who dared to voice criticism of the First Lady's act.

Now that Wlady Pleszczynski and Michelle Malkin, two obviously intelligent, sane, and non-fanatically Christian commentators have come out and said the same things we were saying, some of these invective-throwers are in full panic.

They never did have any good arguments, so all they could do was get nasty and personal --without any basis.

And yeah. I do feel vindicated.

The main purpose of Laura Bush's bawdy remarks was to lessen the hostility between the Administration and the "permanent government" of the "prestige" media, the entertainment community, lobbyists, and Democrat and RINO politicians. No doubt the Administration's advisers knew that the tenor of her remarks would displease many social conservatives. However, the hard fact is that, lacking a solid conservative majority in Congress, the President must turn to the "Inside the Beltway" crowd to try to accomplish his goals for the second term.

Additionally, Bush does not need the Christian Right or other social conservatives since his reelection. Pat Robertson has been silent on the matter and nothing has been posted on the Focus on the Family or the American Family Association Web sites. World Net Daily was quiet as well. The only commentator who reacted negatively to the First Lady's speech with social conservative ties was Bill Bennett. The Christian Right groups may realize that open hostility would result in high visibility ridicule from the MSM and even the Administration reneging on their promises for conservative judges. In effect, they have been neutralized in this matter.

Wlady Pleszczynski and Michelle Malkin are courageous for not toeing the line, but it appears that the Bush Administration is playing Realpolitik. For the price of a few off-color jokes, the President has received praise from many MSM sources for the first time in several years. It also encourages those people in Republican ranks who wish to silence the voices of conservative Christians in the party. They are the heirs of the Rockefeller or "Me Too" Republicans of a generation ago (albeit more pro-free market than were the 1960s era moderate Republicans).

Harry Truman was correct when he said that if you want a friend in Washington, you should buy a dog.

They'll actually try and justify making the remarks too. I had this happen before with a certain individual who apparently took offense at someone being called a "bastard". Sure enough, a few posts up the same poster was calling people "hothead rednecks". Hypocrisy? What hypocrisy? If I do it, it's my right, but when you do it, you're being a holier-than-thou, Taliban-wing, prudish nutcase who is giving the entire GOP, the Conservative Movement, the world, and my mother a bad name. Oh, and naturally, today isn't nearly as good as the good old days were.

Glad to see I'm not the only one who doesn't think the sky is falling. Do you think I can corner the market on buquas before the Taliban takes this place over, by the way?