So I was watching the O'Reilly Factor last night, and the pugnacious pundit had as a guest the always entertaining Ann Coulter. Now, Coulter is usually a bit more on the mark than O'Reilly, who often doesn't perceive the Truth until a building falls on him (several years ago, when he was already in his 50s, he finally acknowledge that, golly gee, there is a liberal bias in the lamestream media). Yet last night it seemed they both had their heads firmly planted in the sand.
Everyone has seen the video of Kanye West running up onto the stage and snatching the microphone away from 19-year-old country music star Taylor Swift at Sunday's MTV video music awards. West wasn't happy with the choice of Swift as winner and went into a rant about how Beyoncé should have won. Now, just for the record, I've heard neither Swift nor Beyoncé sing and thus can't render any definitive judgments on this subject. What I do know, however, is that I wouldn't consider it positive if an over-rated oaf like West was lobbying for me.
So I see that the deep thinkers over at Sadly, No! picked up on my piece "All the President's Bigoted Men" and have much to say about me. That's right, not the piece — me. Their comments are an interesting read if you'd like some insight into liberal "intellectualism" (yikes, even with the quotation marks it's strikingly oxymoronic). Among the gems you'll be treated to are posts peppered with profanity and one in which the writer wishes there were a Hell so that conservative commentator Robert Novak, who just passed away today, could go there. Very, very classy, guys. I should also point out that such wishing of damnation on political opponents isn't even original, as it echoes the snooty, woefully overestimated anti-theist Christopher Hitchens' remark after Jerry Falwell's death. To wit, "I wish there was a Hell for Falwell."
Wow, being atheistic and liberal just seems so . . . so attractive. They just may win me over.
The little blurb about my article at Sadly, No! was written by someone who didn't want to attach his real name to his musings. Instead, he used the handle "Tintin." Hmm, I didn't think dogs could write.
Oh, yeah, I remember now. They can write.
They just can't reason.
However, I will take the inability to address substantively even one point in a 2500-word piece as an admission of defeat. In debate, I guess you could say that avoidance is the sincerest form of flattery.
Do liberals operate based on emotion? Are their offerings thus without merit and completely visceral? Are they the ones ridden with vice who poison public discourse with mindless ad hominem attacks and ugliness of the tongue?
(Note: some readers have mentioned that the name of the dog I was alluding to in this piece is "Rin-Tin-Tin." I was aware of this, but the handle in question was close enough so that I decided to indulge some artistic license. However, I will admit that I didn't know of the European comic strip character "Tintin," who certain readers assumed I had confused with the dog. I suppose you learn something new every day.)
Since the modern world began in the sixteenth century, nobody’s system of philosophy has really corresponded to everybody’s sense of reality; to what, if left to themselves, common men would call common sense. Each started with a paradox; a peculiar point of view demanding the sacrifice of what they would call a sane point of view. That is the one thing common to Hobbes and Hegel, to Kant and Bergson, to Berkeley and William James. A man had to believe something that no normal man would believe, if it were suddenly propounded to his simplicity; as that law is above right, or right is outside reason, or things are only as we think them, or everything is relative to a reality that is not there. The modern philosopher claims, like a sort of confidence man, that if once we will grant him this, the rest will be easy; he will straighten out the world, if once he is allowed to give this one twist to the mind.
Using a phrase right out of Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger's book, Justice Ruth Bader-Ginsburg recently said in an interview, "I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don't want to have too many of [emphasis mine]." Well, well, would you please elaborate, Madame Justice?
In fairness, Ginsburg didn't say that she endorsed such a policy. However, let's note that she did use the word "we." Second, let's also note that the poster boy for abortion, Planned Parenthood — an organization of which Ginsburg is an ally — was founded by those who wanted to eliminate black babies. Given these two facts, I'd like some elaboration. To whom are you referring exactly, Justice Ginsburg?
If a conservative had made such a statement, how do you think the media would be reporting it? Don't you think they'd want the individual to explain himself? Hey, what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
Many opponents of hate-crime laws have long pointed out that they will never be applied equitably. The laws exist solely to punish members of politically-incorrect groups who commit politically-incorrect crimes. That is to say, they're not about eliminating hate — they're about targeting those the left hates.
If ever there was a case that vindicated this thesis, it's a recent unprovoked attack on a white Ohio family by a mob of black teens. Phil Trexler at Ohio.com reports:
Congressman John Conyers' Wife Pleads Guilty to Accepting Bribes Monica Conyers, wife of Rep. John Conyers and Detroit City Council member, has just pled guilty to awarding a sludge contract to a Houston company in exchange for cash bribes. It is an offense punishable with up to five years in prison.
In reality, this video has nothing to do with her malfeasance; it does, however, perfectly illustrate the kind of person she is. In it she attacks a fellow council member, calling him "Shrek." She also complains about how he was "disrespectin'" her. Well, although I wouldn't be surprised if she wriggles out of prison time, I'd like to see how much she be respected in the big house.
If you're wondering why I've covered this, it's just because I want to return the favor. After all, during the immigration debate in 2007, Rep. Conyers cited me on the House floor, saying:
In the current debate on immigration, for example, conservative commentator
Selwyn Duke just yesterday inveighed against any immigration (legal or not). He warned, ‘‘[R]eplace our population with a Mexican or Moslem one and you no longer have a western civilization, you no longer have America. You have Mexico North
or Iran West.’’
As we have heard in other hearings before this Subcommittee, however, nothing can be further from the truth.
So now I want to give him some exposure as well. And since he was kind in his rejection of my incisive commentary, I'll return that favor also. Rep. Conyers, there are no hard feelings whatsoever. If you have to be married to the harridan in the above video, you have my sympathy, buddy. You have my sympathy.
You know, given that Rep. Conyers will actually have some peace if his better half does a stretch, I can just see him lobbying on her behalf: "Listen, if you give her more than five years, I'm reeeeeally going to be upset! Really, really upset. I dare you!"
Today I'm going to respond to a reader who had a question relating to my last article, "Which Side Really Inspires Violence, the Right or Left?" Here is the email the reader, LR, sent:
O'Reilly and Coulter Take a Stupid Pill
By Selwyn Duke
So I was watching the O'Reilly Factor last night, and the pugnacious pundit had as a guest the always entertaining Ann Coulter. Now, Coulter is usually a bit more on the mark than O'Reilly, who often doesn't perceive the Truth until a building falls on him (several years ago, when he was already in his 50s, he finally acknowledge that, golly gee, there is a liberal bias in the lamestream media). Yet last night it seemed they both had their heads firmly planted in the sand.
Continue reading "O'Reilly and Coulter Take a Stupid Pill" »
Posted at 03:54 PM in Media, Politics, Snap Commentary | Permalink | Comments (9) | TrackBack (0)
Tags: Anita, Ann, Bill, communism, Coulter, Dunn, Factor, House, Mao, news, O'Reilly, Obama, philosopher, politics, quote, show, stupid, Tse-tung, White