Past his naptime

So I recently got a rather hilarious comment that I felt compelled to share with my handful of readers, as it is a great example of why policy revolutions are so dangerous.

Lets just take it from the top:

Millicent...Walking Shark!!! Fucking morons...both!!! Pull your heads out of each others assholes, shut the fuck up for just a few minutes, put your bongs down and pay attention for those few minutes. You might be amazed at what you might learn, the clarity, the light, when ones head is extracted from his lovers ass!!!

Ah, so I'm foolish, ignorant, blinded, and drug addled. This attack, especially the references to pot smoking, is fresh, original, and brings a sense of enlightened discourse to the argument. This person is obviously someone we should all stop and pay attention to, as he is about to bring some serious, wise, and reasoned discourse to our previously childish and simplistic rantings.

Fucking communists.

Wait... when have I ever advocated for (as wikipedia puts it) "a socioeconomic structure and political ideology that promotes the establishment of an egalitarian, classless, stateless society based on common ownership and control of the means of production and property in general?"

Hmm. Maybe our friendly commentor meant to type a different word, and he was just thinking about communism, so it slipped out. Or maybe he doesn't know what the word means. Nah, there's no way someone this eloquent would use a word that he doesn't understand.

Serve our great republic and move to France or Venezuela, Spain or Denmark where bong toting pinheads are welcomed and admired! Oh yeah, not all socialists countries are open to fags, so you and Sean Penn might want to avoid Venezuela. But please get the fuck out fast nonethess!!!

Again, some strong semantic confusion here. Am I supposed to be a communist or a socialist? Additionally, I never knew I owned a bong, so if I've been toting one it must be invisible. This is actually pretty amazing, if I can discover the secret to this invisible bong technology I could manufacture and sell them and become rich.

Oh shit, I think I just broke my communosocialismonik vows. Now they're going to revoke my gay sex card for sure.

That reminds me, this colorful character seems to imply a sexual relationship between Millicent and myself (rightfully so), but then he implies we're both gay. Its important to note the amount of cognitive dissonance one of these cretins can sustain even over the course of a few sentences.

Ultimately, though, why would I want to leave the United States? My communosocialismonik brother Barack Obama has seized control of the executive branch through that ultimate anti-democratic, anti-constitutional, anti-moral trick of winning more electoral votes than the other guy.

Why would I leave when my guy is running the show?

Sorry friend, you and your ilk are well deserved losers. You had a chance to run the country and you did... right into the ground (or maybe off a cliff). It is people like you who make a moral revolution impossible at this point in history, you are simply incapable of true argument in the manner needed to operate a citizen government as envisioned by the founders of this country. If you ever hope to be worthy of the mantle you so greedily covet, you need to do a lot more reading and watch a lot less cable news. Stop listening to AM radio and learn to think for yourself. If your brain is even structured in such a way that you can, which I doubt.

Sincerely,

Patriots United

Really? You're calling yourselves P.U.?

You people are so far over the top, its no wonder you ended up on bottom.

Note

I just realized that I was getting comments, but they were being sent to an old and now defunct email address. I've updated it and should see when people comment from now on.

I appreciate the comments, its always nice to know that I'm not just shouting into the void here.

I'm currently trying to sort out my thoughts on the recent spate of right wing "we're out of power so lets have a revolution" writings. I can see how some people would draw a direct paralell between those and my writings here, but what I hope to address directly is the fact that they ask the same questions that I do, but come up with totally different answers using totally different lines of reasoning.

My central value has always been the preservation of civilization (and yes, I am motivated in this by selfish as well as altrusitic reasons: I like toilet paper, indoor plumbing, and video games). My conclusions when pondering the use of force as a political tool is that it is incredibly dangerous and has in almost all cases backfired. The trick, as always, is trying to sort out why it worked in the American and French revolutions, and failed in so many others.

I suspect it has a lot to do with the enlightenment.

I know this is, in retrospect, a rather content free post, so here's an archive link to an old article I wrote for the student paper at my University, Give the French a Break.

Amazon is down with the sickness

So apparently Amazon.com has decided that GLBT books are "adult" and has removed them from their rankings. Except, not all books having to deal with homosexuality. You can still see books about how horrible homosexuality is and books about what the bible says about the gays (spoiler alert: teh gay is teh bad acording to the sycophants of Jesus), but Heather Has Two Mommies is verbotten.

This is an easy one folks: Discrimination based on self selected traits (like, say, being a Nazi or a Catholic or a Bucks fan (sing along: one-of-these-things-is-not-like-the-other)) is generally ok, and even a good idea. If someone tells you they believe something, its usually best to believe them and make judgements based on their statements.

Discrimination based on born traits, like homosexuality or skin color or even, to an extent, nationality (in so much as nationality is a choice for the individual in question) is not ok.

Was that hard?

Here's an example sure to singe the eyebrows of most people:

If someone is a zionist radical, its ok to discriminate based on that information.
If someone is a Jew, its not ok to discriminate based on that information.

See the difference? One is an ideology, the other is just some category assigned by a third person (and often these categories we use, like skin color or whatever, have very loose boundaries).

To sum up: Fuck you Amazon.com, unless you recant your homophobia I'm done with you.