2009’s Idiots of the Year!
by Leigh ScottThe end of the year brings us all sorts of fun “best of” lists and annual “awards”. We have “The Best Films of 2009″, “The Worst Films of 2009″, “The Most Intriguing People”, the “Sexiest” and “Worst Dressed”. Time magazine puts out their “Person of the Year” issue every December.
I propose a new one. I’ll simply call it the “Idiot of the Year.”

There were a lot of worthy candidates in 2009.
I do not bestow such honors lightly, so allow me to explain my thought process. Let’s start with another group’s award; the “Lie of the Year.” Of course, despite the fact that the current administration told the public, with a straight face, that the $800 Billion stimulus package would keep unemployment under 8%, the sages of the media bestowed this honor on Sarah Palin. Her “death panels” blog was deemed the “lie of the year” by some obscure website and then parroted by “legitimate,” “professional” and “unbiased” news sources like MSNBC and Newsweek.
I have to wonder, would mental titans like Norah O’Donnell and David Shuster refer to Irish satirist Jonathan Swift as a “cannibal advocate”? Or, do they actually comprehend the literary device known as a “metaphor”? You know, the thing we learned about in eighth grade.
No, Virginia, I am sure that there is no sub-section of the health care bill that outlines the rights and responsibilities of the “death panel.” So, in some twisted, lawyerly, anti-intellectual sense, Sarah Palin could be called a “liar” for saying that it’s actually there. I would be more comfortable in making that assessment if I could actually read the bill, or if the people voting for it could actually read it, but that’s a different story.
Sarah Palin’s real award should be the “metaphor of the year.” Like Jonathan Swift, she used a literary device to put a larger, more complex issue into perspective. She did a great service to our society by simplifying the complex notion of government controlled health care and the eventual, inescapable rationing that will come later. Her analogy helped cut through the rhetoric and let people know what is really at stake. If you are looking for a lie, how about the fallacious argument that rampant government spending on health care will lead to a lower deficit?
Huh?
So the media is my “Idiots of the Year”? Well, not exactly. See, I don’t think that they are stupid. Like the leftists in the government, they have an agenda. They have a goal. Their treatment of conservatives and level-headed ideas is all part of the plan. They’re schemers. They may or may not actually believe what they are saying, or know any better than to believe it, but they do know what they are doing.
Misguided? Nefarious? Maybe. Idiots? Not in the least.
The idiots are the people at which they aim their propaganda. Yes, I’m talking about the oft-discussed “independent” voters.
There are two kinds of “independents.” There are those who have a firm grasp of their ideology and the facts and simply choose not to align themselves with a specific party. There are conservatives who don’t call themselves Republicans. There are leftists who don’t think the Democrats have embraced Marx and Mao enough.
But these are not the people I’m talking about. I’m talking about the remaining independents. The people who voted for Bush in 04, then voted for Obama in 08. People who pride themselves on being so “smart” that they are above politics. They rely on the nation’s current moods and trends. They are heavily influenced by the media.
And, quite frankly, they are idiots.
If you don’t understand the issues, if you have no clue about American history, if you don’t understand what GDP means, why vote? Why respond to a poll? What could you possibly offer the discourse?
There simply aren’t enough leftists in our society to do any damage. Their ideology is flawed and most of their tenets fly in face of common sense and American values. They gain power when they manage to snooker the weak minded, weak willed and principle-less “independents” over to their side.
How can anyone in their right mind be “shocked” by anything that transpired in 2009? Everything Obama said in the campaign, everything he ever wrote (or supposedly wrote) in his self-aggrandizing books or op-eds, every one of his professional and personal associations leads us directly to where we are. Economic mess, international relations failure and low national morale.
I’m shocked that anyone is shocked. I’m shocked that someone could vote for Obama and the Democrats and now, now they think that the country is on the wrong track. The election of Republican governors in New Jersey and Virginia as well as countless opinion polls show that these “independents” have already lost faith in the mighty Obama and his one-two punch of Hope and Change.
Idiots.
I know, I know, these “independents” are tracking conservative now so I should be happy that they are finally going to wear the white hat and do the right thing. 2010 will be a massacre for the left, and I wouldn’t be surprised if the Republicans take control of both the House and the Senate. But, so what. These clowns will flip-flop again by 2012. They will start reciting all sorts of nonsense about Palin or Romney or whoever else runs against “The One.” We will here all sorts of B.S. about Republican obstructionism, failed compromises, how the foreign affairs stuff is “working” but just needs time, etc. Blah, blah, blah.
And the idiots will eat it up.
Everyone over the age of eighteen has the “right” to vote, but what about the responsibility that comes with that? Why does no one take this seriously? I understand not wanting to be tied to a specific or particular party, but how about being tied to some sort of educated, principled thought process? Is that too much to ask?
Part of what hurts our country economically and abroad is this constant flip-flopping of political parties and agendas. Is it a mystery that our cycle of economic boom and bust is loosely tied to our election cycles? Do we ever intend to meddle in another country’s affairs with the objective of screwing it up only to leave? Or is that we start something and the “independent” geniuses in our electorate loose their convictions and start buying the hype of the opposition? With the opposition in power, they reverse the course and tick everyone off.
Taxing people and letting the government control the economy doesn’t end recessions or depressions. Never has, never will.
Mankind is far too small and insignificant to bring about the destruction of planet Earth by people having house pets and driving big cars. Yeah, pollution sucks, and we should do what we can about it, but stop with the doom and gloom nonsense. Besides, if it was that dire, do we really think that a leftist restructuring of the global economy is the way to fix it?
When government controls health care, you loose freedom and you loose access to care. That’s a fact. Just look around the world.
Treating dictators and fascists like they are your bros only empowers them to be bigger jackasses. Terrorists shouldn’t get a sympathetic ear, they should get a few rounds from an M-60.
America was built on liberty, personal responsibility, and the entrepreneurial spirit. Europe was destroyed by socialism and multi-culturalism. Any political system or tradition that comes from Europe should have a “don’t try this at home” disclaimer stamped on it before it comes to the U.S..
A plurality of our society understands these things. A small minority profits by believing the exact opposite.
And the rest don’t know what to believe.
Idiots.






Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
217 Comments
Excellent column, have a happy new year. I look forward to more from you on BH.
Norah O’Donnell and David Shuster refer to Irish satirist Jonathan Swift as a “cannibal advocate”?
You've got to be kidding me. With educations like that, I'd like to see them on Jeopardy with Wolf Blitzer and Soledad O'Brien.
Interesting article. I'd definitely call an id10t anyone who doesn't know the cost of their choices (doubly so if they don't think there is a cost).
You want a national health care? Fine. But there will be consequences and costs to getting one. Are you sure you want to deal with those? If yes, fine, I can respect you as a political opponent. But enough of these pie-in-the-sky politics where you're promised everything at no cost. You're going to have to give something up. Now decide what you can live without.
this is one of the better descriptions/explanations of the "I vote for the person, not the party" crowd and the damage they do. they constantly whine about wanting 'people of principle' at the levers of power, but their own principles, such as they are, shift with the winds.
yep- idiots.
boy, it's hard not to have the clueless, in- over-her-head Janet Napolitano as the biggest idiot of 2009.
One suspects no list would be complete without this dubious mention…
I agree utterly, but it's "tenets," not tenants. Anytime you plan to insult someone else's intelligence, for heaven's sake, don't do it with bad language skills.
But Bush did it! That is still the idiotic refrain from Obama's useful idiots. Every time I hear that idiotic refrain for another 'independent' I add another idiot to my list. I live in CA so my idiot list is at least as large as the Democrat's Latest Healthcare bill..
If you don’t understand the issues, if you have no clue about American history, if you don’t understand what GDP means, why vote? Why respond to a poll? What could you possibly offer the discourse?
Thank you for making the distinction between unaligned and the brain donors that are above politics.
Oh f**k yes! Finally somebody has the stones to say it. The independent (sometimes moderate) voters are idiots and have condemned this country to veer hard left.
Sadly the effects of the present administration won't only last for 4 years. If the corporatists and leftists in charge have their way we could be saddled with another massive entitlement program that will never die. Social Security (initially designed to be a temporary program), Medicare, Medicaid….all massive and bankrupt programs that will never die.
Great column, and so true Leigh. If someone for some ethereal concept of independence can’t see the destruction of America by statist right (RINOs) or left, please be certain to wear a helmet when you leave your house – - or better yet don’t wear a helmet and let Darwin take over. Barry and his leftist minions are out to destroy the country they hate the USA, wake up …idiots!
I think he was attacking their laziness, so maybe you should go after him for failing to proof read and finding that mistake?
And 'loosing' freedom or 'loosing' access to care is saying that you are deliberately letting your control of those things slip away from you.
Losing them is the probably what you meant, when full and unbridled usage or commerce with those ideas or rights has been denied you, against your will.
I see one single correct point in that whole diatribe of ridiculous criss crossing. People who voted for Bush in 2004 are most worthy of the "idiot" moniker. Don't fret lemmings, you can be forgiven if you recant. But the shame will taint you forever, just can't get past that. Some mistakes burn.
My Idiots of The Year: People that voted for Obama and actually think things are going great.
The thing is, words are his tools, his hammer and nails. An inadvertent misspelling, like maybe tennents, or tennets might be understandable, but as I noted below, if he uses the wrong word or form of a word, he's doing himself and any of his readers a disservice.
Way to bring about civil discourse! People like you, Mr. Scott, are a bane to constructive, rational debate. Your answer to every debate is to just yell as loudly as you can that the person you disagree with is stupid and an idiot. There is no room for courtesy, well reasoned arguments, patience, or rationalizing. The rhetoric you and your ilk spew is poison and the way you spew it is poisonous to society.
I hope you come to your sense in 2010 and, instead of calling people "idiots", you begin open, honest, and, most importantly, CIVIL debate.
BTW – Politifact.com is not an obscure website, and you know this. Your feigned ignorance in regards to that site is sad and disingenuous. While it doesn't surprise me that yet another Big Hollywood columnist is making things up/playing loose with the facts, it's quite disconcerting that your readers believe the nonsense coming out of here.
People always forget:
Fast, cheap, good. Pick two.
It has to be the dolts that voted for Obama regardless of the fact that he's supremely unqualified to lead a cub scout troop, much less the USA. These are the same dolts that still blame Bush for everything.
The term idiot is too mild….
There are so many idiots in the basket, I'll nominate myself for being unable to identify the top 10. Sadly, in the annuls of human history, 2009, will be duly noted as the year of the moron!
Excellent commentary! While reading your post, a thought for a change in definition might be in order… For your consideration… "GDP" = G-D Progressives!
Yeah, I agree that it would be better to have the misused words corrected, I was simply making the argument that he wasn't attacking their intelligence, he was attacking their lack of effort in understanding history and our nation, thus, if he's not a smart person, he still has room to call out lazy people. If he was calling them out as people who just weren't intelligent, then perhaps, the attack would have strong legs to stand on.
I'm unaffiliated, but hopefully I fall into the former category you listed and not the latter. I'm conservative in my beliefs, but I often find myself liking people from the Constitution or Libertarian parties nearly as often as Republicans, and none of these parties entirely reflect my beliefs, so I choose not to align myself with any particular party. I study the issues and the candidates. I check out their background, their previous voting record (if they have one), their stances on the various issues, whatever I can find on them, and then I vote for the person who most closely matches my own beliefs. So yes, I do "vote for the person and not the party," but I certainly hope I don't come across like those who tend to shift with the wind. I know my positions, and they don't usually change once I read up on a topic and make up my mind.
The picture of the Donkey on it's back, legs in the air with it's eyes rolling in the back of it's head. Warms the cockles of my heart. Let's hope it's a harbinger of what's to come.
I see I didn't have to wait too long for a "But Bush Did it', idiot to post. Don't worry. I added you to my idiot list. Wow, my list sure is getting quite long!
Five years after the fact and that's all you can come up with in response? You should see if there are any specialists to take care of your Bush Derangment Syndrome.
See, I don’t think that they are stupid. Like the leftists in the government, they have an agenda. They have a goal. Their treatment of conservatives and level-headed ideas is all part of the plan. They’re schemers. They may or may not actually believe what they are saying, or know any better than to believe it, but they do know what they are doing.
You got that right. These people are despicable, but idiots they are not.
Sun Tze once wrote to win at battle you must know three things. Know all three and you will win. Do not know all three and you will lose.
Know yourself, know your enemy and know your battle.
When the left appears to be idiots, it's the right not understanding their opponent.
Agreed. Those are the people that get their marching orders from celebrities.
I wouldn't call her an idiot – other than for accepting a job with this administration.
She was just regurgitating what the White House ordered her to say. Unfortunately for them, the MSM wasn't buying it.
Which on the upside proves there are some stories they will cover even if they must make the administration look like the incompetents they are.
Good catch. I would have probably made the same mistake. I used to do it with weather and whether all the time. If the spell check likes it, it's fine by me.
I once printed up 40 resumes proudly pointing to my degree from the local community collage.
The left's playbook isn't that big.
I'm interested in your opinion of Kerry's main platform for the 2004 campaign where he clearly stated he would have done every thing Bush did, only nicer, and people would like America better if he was doing it.
The only difference I saw between Bush and Kerry by the end of October was that Bush actually did something, where as Kerry promised he would do the same.
Ditto.
Idiots indeed. While following a guy I know into the parking lot of our local supermarket, I couldn't help but notice the shiney "Obama '08" sticker on his bumper. We both got out of our vehicles and began making small talk, at which point I asked him if he regretted voting for such a miserable loser. His response?
"No, of course not. It's gonna take quite a while to straighten out the mess he inherited from Bush. He still has 7 years to go."
Idiot.
i've read a lot of your posts on various topics and no, you don't seem to be one of the people i described above. i don't have a philosophical problem with those who 'vote for the person, not the party'- if they're ideologically consistent, but in a 2 party system it often has practical, negative consequences. as much as i would often prefer to vote for someone more conservative than whoever the Repubs happen to be running, even if there is such a candidate on the slate, i'm ever conscious of the possibility of the race going to my last choice because of a split vote (NY23 comes to mind- tho imho, that was a thoroughly justifiable case for voting 3rd party, if there ever was one).
there's a difference between having a consistent political ideology and voting for the candidate who best meshes with that, and being one of the mushy heads in the middle who is constantly being swayed by whoever whispers the latest sweet nothings in your ear. Limited Government? Yeah! Oh wait, you say healthcare will be free? Well, that sounds pretty good, too. and so on and so forth…
Leigh Scott. A solid Happy New Year to you and yours truly. We have some serious a**-kicking to do in 2010. (At least the Bush04-Obama08 crowd has been deflated)
Rather than repeat what Sir Leigh perfectly explains allow me to speed over to the other side of the spectrum. The Un-idiots. The Non-idiots. The British Times.
The Times in the U.K. gets it. Person Of The Year. The British newspaper the Times has named Neda Agha-Soltan. That girl has more leadership skill in her Muslim wrap than this entire Administration.
Neda. YOU are an inspiration. God willing we will look back at your sacrifice not in vain. You took a bullet for all of us. America. She only sought what this Administration is trying to TAKE AWAY and GIVE AWAY.
I didn't mention anything "Bush did", its your fault for the second term, not Chimpy's.
sorry Ed- the moniker fits…
a mediocre governor at best, she has no aptitude for the job she shouldn't have taken. And her predilection to blame shift is a liberal staple.
DHS is a tough spot; we still don't like the agency much. But she makes her predecessors look simply stellar by comparison.
Their playbook is one side of a 3×5 index card.
To counter arguments: "Racist!" "Homophobe!" "Nazi!"
If target is a political leader: "[diammetrically opposed political leader] is a Nazi/homophobe/moron/racist!"
Oldie but goodie from Phil Ochs:
I cried when they shot Medgar Evers
Tears ran down my spine
I cried when they shot Mr. Kennedy
As though I'd lost a father of mine
But Malcolm X got what was coming
He got what he asked for this time
So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal
I go to civil rights rallies
And I put down the old D.A.R.
I love Harry and Sidney and Sammy
I hope every colored boy becomes a star
But don't talk about revolution
That's going a little bit too far
So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal
I cheered when Humphrey was chosen
My faith in the system restored
I'm glad the commies were thrown out
of the A.F.L. C.I.O. board
I love Puerto Ricans and Negros
as long as they don't move next door
So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal
The people of old Mississippi
Should all hang their heads in shame
I can't understand how their minds work
What's the matter don't they watch Les Crain?
But if you ask me to bus my children
I hope the cops take down your name
So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal
I read New republic and Nation
I've learned to take every view
You know, I've memorized Lerner and Golden
I feel like I'm almost a Jew
But when it comes to times like Korea
There's no one more red, white and blue
So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal
I vote for the democratic party
They want the U.N. to be strong
I go to all the Pete Seeger concerts
He sure gets me singing those songs
I'll send all the money you ask for
But don't ask me to come on along
So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal
Once I was young and impulsive
I wore every conceivable pin
Even went to the socialist meetings
Learned all the old union hymns
But I've grown older and wiser
And that's why I'm turning you in
So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal
I've said this before in response to one of your columns, Mr. Scott, but it bears repeating… A vote is like a loaded weapon. If you don't know what you're doing, you could end up hurting yourself or someone else.
you are correct that one must know one's opponent…
Von Clausewitz spoke of this as well. The left bases their arguments on strictly emotional terms. A right hemisphere thing, y'know. Conservatives, being ABC 123 types (left hemisphere) rely on logic. Seems a mismatch, yes?
Not really. We need to view things from a complete perspective, and ignoring emotional pleas because the are illogical is a mistake the right continually makes, thereby empowering their opponents and making their
views seem more credible.
So, dismissing 'idiocy' without counterpoint/context makes the struggle so much harder.
Make sense?
now that's a very good analysis, MovieBob…
But do not overestimate the so-called power of the elite. Some times simple, practical- and spiritual- issues rule the day.
And cause the 'elite' to re-think their strategies. Often…
Obama , Reid, Pelosi, top three idiots of 2009.
http://noliberalspin.blogtownhall.com/2009/12/30/...
The Anti Liberal Zone
I think you're right EdSki. I don't think Kerry would have been much different than Bush overall, except the veto pen and the general philosophy and direction. We probably would've stopped torturing people much sooner, stuff like that. Kerry was a dud, but at that point I would've voted for a pencil over Bush. To do nothing at all was better than Bush- furthering his (Cheney's) "unitary Executive" philosophy, the politicization of every atom of government, secrecy, lying, reduction of liberty, deficit spending, economic system rigged to benefit the super-wealthy… Imagine, if Kerry beat Bush in 2004, we quite likely would have President McCain right now. Add to that, Palin likely would not be VP because McCain wouldn't have been desperate to spark momentum in the campaign, and with that he probably would have beat Kerry's re-election attempt. And Dems wouldn't control all 3 branches. Tell me that wouldn't be better than what we have now. I think I just tripled the strength of my argument that 2004 Bush voters were "idiots". Hindsight is 2020.
I once thought the Obama Cloward-Piven Strategy was just another conspiracy theory. Now, I'm not so sure.
Republicans from 2000-2006: "Nobody votes for Democrats because they treat the American people like they're stupid."
Republicans from 2006-2010: "The American people are stupid."
Can't say that I disagree with much in this article. Well done, Sir. Let me say that one of my biggest complaints about our system is that we allow…no, ENCOURAGE…everyone to vote, regardless of their cognitive ability. We have 'way too many people who vote for the guy or gal who photographs best or who is recommended by their local media/entertainment outlet.
"A TINY minority of smart, visionary, ambitious people do 99% of the work in dragging the rest of humanity across the goal-lines of evolution . . ."
And they provide the jobs and pay most of the taxes, too.
I just realized that my use of "you" is unclear in this post. To clarify, I am using "you" in the editorial sense, not to mean you personally, LS.
Thanks, I appreciate that. I've been impressed by several of your comments as well. And I agree, there are a lot of independents out there who run around like chickens with their heads cut off. I think that anybody who puts much stock in the opinions of grown men and women who put on makeup and play dress up for a living needs to sit down and do some serious soul-searching. I love this site, and I think that some of the columnists who post here are amazing, but I'm not about to let them tell me what to believe, either. I have no problem arguing with any of them if I disagree.
You know, Bob, I don't often agree with you (in fact, this may be a first), but these comments are spot on.
In essence, I agree with what you said. However, this brings up a thorny issue, which I promise I'm raising in good faith, and in the belief that there is a way out.
You say that the best society is one run by a small number of educated elites, and that most people lack the ability to lead the country effectively. Agreed. But these are things many of us (myself included) have criticized leftists for saying in the past. In fact, one could argue that the Obama administration has put that principle into practice by appointing to high authority a number of "czars," who cannot easily be removed from office by popular will, and by passing legislation such as the awful health care bill without regard for public opinion. So the question is, is it just a matter of arguing that our conservative elites are better than our liberal elites? And if so, how do we make that argument? I'm not trying to play any "gotcha" games here; I've been wrestling with this issue for a while and wondering if anyone else has some ideas.
Nice article. I especially with the "responsibility" that comes with voting. People need to be individually informed about the issues and political contenders and not swayed by the populist opinions that only listen to surface level discussions and opinions. People need to think more, speak less, and quit being idiots.
I believe Confusious once said: Better to be quiet and thought to be an idiot, than to speak and prove it."
The problem becomes less people being idiots, than their being mis-informed. That is Mr. Brietbart has been succeeding so well with his web enterprises.
When the entire popular culture has been co-opted by leftists: media, arts, education, news, entertainment how can we expect independent people to not vote for leftists? The paradigms are set: Global Warming is real. George Bush created the deficits. America is hated because of George Bush. If you make a joke about Obama you are a racist.
The average person, occupied with non-political day-to-day living, is breathing in liberal air. This why the cultural fight that Brietbart is undertaking is so important.
I don't know if this will answer your question, but I'll do my best: I don't want any so-called ELITES running anything. I don't think conservative "elites" are any better than liberal "elites". Once someone thinks they know better than you about everything, they will RULE over you, not govern, as they are supposed to. I want someone who talks "small government" and "competitive economy" as MovieBob spoke about above. I don't want to here trite words about "values" and such because I believe in the end, none of that means much to even the least educated of our society. I think people are waking up and realizing that we've given ourselves over far too often to the "values" or whatever other simple-minded rhetoric both sides are touting and it has gotten on into trouble.
Cont'd
What I see now are people that want to get back to basics – back to the Constitution, back to the limits it places on the gov't. I see it resonating with more and more people in my personal sphere. I think that is why many liked Sarah Palin – because she didn't talk "values" – she talked like Reagan – small gov't, strong competitive economy, etc. That is why people voted Reagan in and that is why, hopefully, we will turn around and start voting conservatives in again – ones that really believe those things and will act accordingly.
But no more "elites" please – we have been done in by elites from both sides long enough. I just want someone who holds the Constitution dear and holds it strictly, as it was meant to be. That is the only "value" I care about.
Let me edit: I don't just want the "talk" of conservatism – I want to see them WALK THE WALK as well.
And I think Reagan and Palin have done the best in showing that the walk the walk. At least as good as you can do in the real world where you are not Emperor and cannot make decisions without checks and balances around you.
Hope that helps.
Ahh, you must be one of those people who think it's ok for our elected officials to lie, cheat on taxes, commit adultry, appoint deviants, and generally laugh in the face of the American people, like they know best. Ok, you can have your opinion. This is America after all. We'll just add your name to the list.
That last line reminds me of a saying I heard, "If you are under 30 and not a liberal, you have no heart. If you are over 30 and not a conservative, you have no brain."
There is absolutely nothing redeeming about Behar. A face like a mackeral, a voice like a cat getting electrocuted, the mentality of an angry little child, and the talent of a seat cushion.
She's stealing money from the network dumb enough to air her thoughtless, witless venom…….
"the politicization of every atom of government, secrecy, lying, reduction of liberty, deficit spending, economic system rigged to benefit the super-wealthy…"
That line sounds vaguely familiar, where have I seen all of those examples… oh yeah, Obama is doing the same damn thing. Also, lest we forget when all of that unbridled spending started, say around 2006 when the Dems took control. Bush was a puss with the veto pen, but those ideas were all Democrat.
If any attempt at researching a candidate is done, then idiot does not describe a person. Its the fools who step into a booth and vote for the crook they saw on the news the most, that is the idiot.
Get used to that. It ain't gonna change till the left picks a new dead horse to beat.
You would not believe how many times I've heard over the last year or so all the economic problems were a result of some voodoo economic policy conjured up by Reagan. I've been told (well, actually screamed at) that capitalism does not work and we should go back to what ever economic system we had before.
I tried to point out that would be servitude to the King of England, but I don't think they quite grasped it.
Not only is it illogical to ignore said emotional pleas, the Left can spin it to make the Right look like heartless monsters, which the idiots take at face value without ever using one shred of common sense. I remember the SCHIP debacle. The Right said it was way too expensive, ignored the Lefts arguments of "but what about the children" and so it was spun by the whores in the MSM to look like the Right wanted to kill babies or some such thing. Anyone looking at the numbers for 2 seconds would have said "SCHIP is stupid!", but that was never mentioned, all that was said was the Right is evil. Now under Obama, SCHIP is already law. GO LEFTARDS!!!
Its a good analogy. Except thisloaded gun has the capacity to bring down countries.
I feel bad I had to look it up. Here's for anyone else who doesn't remember the name,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neda_Agha-Soltan#Bio...
Amen to all of that!
Ladies and gentlemen, being an incredibly resourceful person I was able to dig up Hussein's birth certificate…………….
http://i48.tinypic.com/140i6v9.jpg
I was also able to get a copy of the democrats poster celebrating nationalized healthcare………..
http://i48.tinypic.com/20fanbt.jpg
Turns out the islamic terrorist on the Christmas flight was a campaigner, much like ACORN, for Hussein…………
http://i49.tinypic.com/20sstol.jpg
Excellent piece. Good point, very well said.
The narcissism of Barack Obama doesn´t do nearly as much damage as the narcisissm of voters. Make no mistake – they have voted for Obama for the exact same reason people buy underwear in tin cans.
Disguising lies, propaganda, and historical ignorance as "debate" doesn't help anybody.
Why should we "debate" the merits of government spending like the $787 Billion stimulus? It didn't work. Period. That is a fact.
The president has gone out of his way to play "nice nice" with all sorts of unsavory international types and to what end? An increase in attempted terror attacks? Chavez calling him the devil? Iran continuing their nuclear ambitions? Russia being more aggressive towards its neighbors and the world community? It doesn't work.
Your call for a "civil" debate is exactly what I am talking about. You are disingenuously trying to get people who are not that educated and don't understand the issues to consider issues that are not comparable. You are creating false choices in the pursuit of a specific agenda.
A "civil" debate would be between people considering the merits of a flat tax vs. a lowering of the overall progressive tax system. A "civil" debate would be between people debating a military action against Al-Qaeda in Yemen, increased covert ops, or economic sanctions against Yemen until they clean up their own backyard.
But, to have a debate between tax cuts and increased government spending as a way to stimulate the economy is simply not appropriate. We have the empirical evidence that increased, poorly targeted, pork spending actually HURST the economy. So why should we even consider it, let alone debate it "civilly"?
Same for foreign policy. We can debate how to pursue our nation's interests, but to assume that we should consider or prioritize the interests and opinions of other nations above our own is futile. No one wins. History tells us this. So why should we "debate" it.
The true poison for our nation is the elevation of ideas that will not work and haven't worked to the same playing field as real solutions to better our society and the world.
And yes, politifact.com is obscure compared to sites like the huffingtonpost and hotair. It runs neck and neck with my favorite horror movie sites. And since I don't see articles from dreadcentral.com echoed on MSNBC, I call foul.
Fantastic column – I absolutely agree %110. I've been saying the same thing for a while – it's nice to hear someone else say it, too.
But please please please fix your spelling. It's "hear", not "here" and it's "lose", not "loose." It just makes someone snicker to see that in a column pointing the finger at others for being idiots.
I won't disagree with you, but I would clarify (in my opinion), being extra smart, or ambitious, or knowledgeable doesn't make one an elitist.
Asserting that you are extra smart etc., whether you actually are or not, and assuming that makes you superior to the unwashed masses makes one an elitist.
The Presidents initial reaction to the Professor Gates incident last summer is an excellent example. After admitting he did not have all the details, he went on to pass judgment, assuming his mental superiority was sufficient to make up for any lack of information.
And we just saw another stellar example with the administration's handling of the Flight 253. The assumption that We The People weren't intelligent enough to analyze the situation for ourselves and see what a government screw up it was.
I was going to end by saying I can't wait till these people start running our health care system, when it occurred to me, there's only a couple* of representatives in Washington who know anything about our health care system, other than where they need to go to obtain the best care possible, pretty much free. And so yet another example of elitism – they haven't a clue what their doing, but they're going to do it anyway, because they're just so, gosh darn smart.
* I know Ron Paul is an MD, my assumption is there's probably a couple more.
I think you illustrate beautifully what this article is about.
"And Dems wouldn't control all 3 branches. Tell me that wouldn't be better than what we have now."
So you voted against Obama, for McCain?
So the question is, is it just a matter of arguing that our conservative elites are better than our liberal elites? And if so, how do we make that argument?
I would answer that question by not accepting the premise in the first place. I'm not interested in any elitist on either the right or the left. I'm not going to vote for any one who says 'elect me, I smarter than the other guy, so I can use government to more efficiently rule your life.'
I would rather vote for a candidate who says 'I don't have all the answers, I can't run your life for you, so I'm not even going to try. The only person who's in any position to know what's best for you voters are yourselves. So what I will do is promise to have government run as efficiently as possible at what its supposed to do, and keep it the hell out of your way everywhere else.'
And that's exactly why I support Ron Paul. That's his message, and it scares the hell out of every one in both parties, as well as the MSM, because that's exactly where the fictitious power comes from. Convincing us we need them.
How are you not attacking someone's intelligence when you're calling them "idiots"?
And, Leigh, it's "lose", not "loose". I love the ideas in the article, but it could definitely use a fine toothed proofread. Particularly considering the subject matter. JMO.
Give it time, Obama & Co. are just getting started.
My father in law votes for who's ever campaign ad he sees last.
I was sitting in my living room with him just before an election, and the commercials were coming hot and heavy. One for the GOP and he nodded in agreement muttering 'yep, they're right.' followed by a dem running for the same office and he nodded his head and muttered 'yep, they're right.'
Like the Twilight Zone.
I nominate the American people as a whole for their continuing blind devotion to the idea that a government with the "right people" in charge will fix everything. This award unfortunately includes folks from across the political spectrum.
There are idiots aplenty in Washington, but most of them have been there for years because Americans stupidly keep voting them into office in the hopes that things will change. Is it really that shocking that our country continues to get flushed down the toilet?
It's time to drain the damn swamp, folks. You can't spell S-C-R-E-W-E-D without an 'R' and a 'D.'
While I agree with the column, it's kinda hard to take the author seriously when he can't spell a simple word like "lose."
Why everyone in recent years has suddenly grown stupid over the words "lose" and "loose" baffles me. I guess I should not loose sleep over it…..aw hell, now ya got ME doin it.
Fault for what? Deficits were coming down after 2004. Iraq was turned around. Secrecy, lying, reduction of liberty – that´s what you have been told, not what happened by normal standards. If he had been able to get his "ownership society" policies implemented, we would all be better off.
Bush was the better choice in 2004. You can speculate all day long but what I knew in 2004 was that Kerry is less intelligent, less gutsy, less honest and, as a lifelong Senator, less experienced. He has done nothing since to change that assessment.
"You say that the best society is one run by a small number of educated elites"
"Best" isn't really an issue… it's how it works out, no matter what, unless the society in question is in the midst of collapse. "Elite" is a morally-neutral term, simply meaning the "best" among peers. The American Colonies had disgruntled revolutionary fervor for centuries, but it took guys like Adams, Franklin and Jefferson signing on to focus it. Even the great "people's" socialist-revolutions eventually needed (or got) charismatic singular leaders. Cream rises to the top.
"So the question is, is it just a matter of arguing that our conservative elites are better than our liberal elites?"
I wouldn't know. Many around here would call (have called, really) me a "liberal elitist." Generally, save in what I'd see as EXTREME circumstances I WILL vote for whoever seems smarter or at least capable regardless of party. Since we do business by checks and balances here, intellect matters much more to me than stated policy-goals.
Keep living in your Fantasy land. Kerry is an Idiot. The only thing Kerry is good at is being wrong. The only other Democrat to be wrong more times is Joe Biden. Remember Kerry said the war was lost in Iraq, great call there. Kerry described actins in Vietnam he never saw but took the word of other idiots. If you actually believe what you say then you are a real Idiot. I blame Bush for excess spending. I blame Bush for going along with recommendations of the 9/11 Commision which was a political hack job. However name one politician who actually takes his job as Commander in Chief more seriously. Now we have an idiot in the White House who cannot make up his mind and that is a deadly trait for any Commander to have.
Jeez, did something go wildly wrong during toilet training? I think the independents were quite correct to ignore the Republican party in droves, and I'm still not sure the Republicans have much to offer but the coutry was sick of the divisive wedge issue politics that Rove practiced. The socialists of the Democratic party are currenty doing their own hari kari bit and the pedulum will again swing back to the center. I don't think dumping on people who wanted a "change" should bear the brunt of Holier Than Thou Conservatives. You who will ultimately become a smallish though snarky minority content to gnash it's teeth and scaring children.
"I won't disagree with you, but I would clarify (in my opinion), being extra smart, or ambitious, or knowledgeable doesn't make one an elitist.
Asserting that you are extra smart etc., whether you actually are or not, and assuming that makes you superior to the unwashed masses makes one an elitist."
That is exactly the difference I see as well. Our founding fathers were more of the former than the latter. They didn't think themselves superior, they were just pointing out that we are all created equal and that we are endowed by Our Creator with certain unalienable rights. They didn't need to say they were BETTER than anyone else in order to point that out. They were, from what I can tell, pretty humble compared to what we have today – on both sides of the aisle.
like EdSki said- they're still blaming Reagan for some stuff. Liberal means never having to admit you're wrong.
"Spellcheck doth make fools of us all."
he's the proverbial stopped clock, or in his case, a calendar…
Hey, spell checker saved my life. I freely admit it, I can't spell worth crap. Never could, never will. I failed high school English because of spelling*.
If I had been born before spell checker, instead of being an engineer, I'd be flipping burgers at McD's.
* On a NY State English regents exam, they have like 50 spelling questions. They list four words, I have to figure out which one is spelled wrong and spell it correctly.
Sadistic bastards.
I believe that quote is Winston Churchill. He's got hundreds of them.
'Sir if I were you're wife I'd poison you.'
'Madam, if you were my wife I'd surely drink it.'
'Sir, you are drunk!'
'Yes, and you are ugly. Tomorrow I shall be sober.'
I wonder, have you ever said the same thing about the people who were told to "yell loudly as you can" and to "chant slogans to drown out debate" at town hall meetings and other political rallies? You know all those wonderful liberal persons who were taught by SEIU and ACORN to disrupt debate?
Considering who his pick is for Education Czar, I am not too sure about him being ALLOWED near cub scouts…. Just sayin'…..
Last year for Christmas my wife got a few books, one of them was simply outstanding:
<A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_1_13?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=american+creation+joseph+ellis&x=0&y=0&sprefix=american+crea">American Creation.
Interesting trivia, Washington never even campaigned for the presidency. In those days, any one who campaigned for an office – essentially saying they were the best person for the job – was considered unworthy of any post.
The electoral college simply got together, held their vote, and then respectfully asked if Washington would consider the position.
Classy all the way.
I heartily agree Lady! I wish we would go back to the ORIGINAL way of governing at the federal level… Go meet for a month or two at the most, the rest of the time you are at HOME WORKING FOR YOUR PAY. Not feeding off the taxpayers. Do that and only serve for one or at the most two terms. Think of how much money would NOT be spent……
Maybe you should send your reply to someone who cares more. Many of us libertarians were against the war or were only for a "hit them then leave" strategy.
Good luck on your Turing Test.
Not long ago, you would have had a point. But today, even setting aside that the viciousness of contemporary politics was created by the unhinged, slavering Bush-hating Left), the fact is that it is too late to feign manners or courtesy towards Leftists. They must be treated with appropriate scorn, contempt, and slight regard. They must be vilified and upbraided at every turn. Ideally, they should be made to wear a scarlet "O" to mark their shame for life.
There can be no forgiveness for what the Left is attempting to do to us, and no hypocritical pretence of civility. We are too close to the edge of the abyss to refrain daintily from calling scum scum.
Thanks for the input. Much of that reflects what I've been thinking about myself. In terms of policy, we probably ought to be tackling small-government issues first and values second, since those who want to maintain traditional morals will find it much easier with no politically correct federal agencies breathing down their necks. I don't claim to have this problem all thought out, much less an answer to it. I'm mainly just worried that we don't have a certain philosophical position worked out on this question of elitism. No one, of course, wants to have other people make all their decisions for them, but we also don't want to see total idiots elected to power. I wasn't expecting to get a new political philosophy laid out; just thought I'd throw that problem out and see what people thought, so thanks for the considered response.
spot on…
until the Conservative movement learns how to frame logical issues in emotional terms (compassionate conservatism, despite the outcome, was a brilliant- and winning-concept) and/or the body politic becomes tired of being played, as it were, they, with the willing help of their minions at the MSM will be able to frame the arguments while we play catch up…
You must be logged in to post a comment.