September 28, 2004

Pick A Defense Mechanism And Stick With It

I do have a political rant in mind, but first, a little more film theory commentary:

Vsevolod Pudovkin + Sergei Eisenstein = Pounding headache

There. Now, with that out of the way, I want to talk about the Democrats and their reactions to various stages of the campaign. I've noticed a certain amount of hypocrisy coming from the left. Obviously, these aren't direct quotes or anything (feel free to use Google if something looks wrong), but all of the following sentiments have been expressed by the Dems since the presidential race began:

- Questioning Kerry's patriotism is un-American and, in fact, unpatriotic.

- It's wrong to question Kerry's Vietnam War record, especially since there are still lingering questions about Bush's Vietnam War record.

- It's wrong to say that Kerry would make us more vulnerable to terrorism, especially since Bush has made us more vulnerable to terrorism.

- We should be looking toward the future, not dwelling on the past. When John Kerry was in Vietnam, he never worried about the past.

- It's wrong to politicize the War on Terror, and to prove it, we're running an ad that politicizes the War on Terror.

- It's wrong for Republicans to insert religion into their messages, especially since Jesus was a liberal.

- You shouldn't call Kerry's constant indecision "flip-flopping," especially since Bush has changed his mind on a couple issues since he was elected.

- It's wrong to criticize CBS for relying on forged documents, especially since Bush may have relied on forged documents.

- It's wrong to campaign with scare tactics. By the way, if you re-elect Bush, he'll draft your children.

...Are you seeing a trend here? They're relying on both the "you can't do that, it's unfair" technique and the "I know you are, but what am I?" technique. I'd expect to see both of those coming from the Party of Immaturity from time to time, but using both of them at once should really create some sort of cognitive dissonance singularity. It's amazing that they can pull it off, but they have.

Over and over again, we see a tendency for those on the left to define something as taboo or off-limits, and then immediately do the thing they just spoke out against. For example, it's "despicable" for an independent group to run an ad asking if John Kerry can fight terrorism effectively, but there's nothing wrong with Ted Kennedy saying that Bush has made us more vulnerable to a nuclear attack. It's "un-American" to question Kerry's actions during and after Vietnam, but Bush should really prove that he wasn't AWOL. Does any of this make sense? I guess it does for neolibs.

Once again, they just need to pick one. Either stick with the "you can't do that" defense, or switch over to full-time use of the "no, you are" defense. When you use both at once, it destroys what little credibility you had to begin with.

Oh, and remember this one:

It's wrong for Arnold Schwarzenegger to call people "girlie-men," and to prove it, we're making an "Arnold is a Girlie-Man" doll.

See what I mean?

Posted by CD on September 28, 2004 03:50 PM
Category: Liberal Stupidity
Semi-Intelligent Comments

Can we just say that i agree with you without another "reductio ad absurdam" talking point argument like that last one? Because those relly hurt my brain.

Posted by: tommy at September 28, 2004 05:39 PM

Some politicians are girlie-men, and Arnold is hilarious. People need to stop being uptight.

Posted by: Al at September 28, 2004 09:19 PM

Incidentally, i just had a conversation with one of my friends who is about as liberal as they come, just this side of communist. I must just like hanging out with people of a totally different idealogue in real life or something.

Anyway, somehow we got talking about politics (something i try to avoid because alienation may have been a good show, but is bad among friends) and he said "Come on, that argument is ridiculous (the "Bush wants to put lasers on the moon" thing i commented on in February or thereabouts). I mean, this is Bush we're talking about here, either he is an idiot or an evil genius, you people cannot just go back and forth as it suits. The monkey man cannot ALSO control the people with space lasers, Geez, just pick one and stick to it."

That about sums up my argument as well, and i thought that it fit in here too.

Posted by: tommy at September 28, 2004 11:57 PM

I'm still awestruck by that whole "lasers on the Moon" thing. Are you sure your friend was serious about that?

Posted by: CD at September 29, 2004 12:07 AM

Unfortunately i am. Sweet girl, but entirely too smart and imaginative for her own good she is. Not to mention Frick'n insane, but then that's hardly noteworthy, after all, we are in college.

Posted by: tommy at September 29, 2004 02:08 PM
< MTCloseComments old="10" >