Why I Hate Liberals, Part 9,943………

From Andrew Sullivan, he put up a story from a woman about how her father was a lousy bum and a pothead. Then he puts up this response-

“It really aggravates me when people who are obviously mentally/psychologically disabled become “pot-heads” instead of what they are: mentally/psychologically disabled and also doing that thing you don’t like and you must now blame. My father has smoked weed for as long as I can remember, and he’s your typical pot-head in my experience: president of a small business (25 employees); former president of our youth sports park; coach of every sons’ (four of us) baseball and football team; named our community’s ‘citizen of the year’; an avid swimmer and runner; and his mind is sharp and quick. I struggle everyday to be as good a father and citizen and businessman as he is. He is always there emotionally or financially for anybody and everybody.

“We never smoked together until I was well into my 30s, and even then, he had to be coerced. But I am also a typical pothead: a successful attorney, father of three, community volunteer, and pretty good at all of it. (Wish I could come out of the cannabis closet.)

“In conclusion, to Leah Allen: I am truly sorry that your dad is so obviously mentally disabled (abandoning your children is not something I have ever known anyone do, much less a paranoid pothead) but you’re looking in the wrong place for the answers.”

You’re a “successful attorney”! Your father is a “successful businessman”! Whoop-de-f***ing do! That gives you the right to slag on a poor, unfortunate woman who’s dysfunctional family and childhood was made worse by her father’s irresponsible drug use!

Dude, you may be a successful attorney, whatever exactly that means, but you’re an asshole. Assholes are never successful, no matter how much money and social status they may have, or how much love and respect they get from the kind of people who love and respect assholes.

But he’s a very typical liberal. No conservative, as lame as those people are, would use their social status to justify attacking someone far lower on the social scale. Liberals on the other hand, while claiming to be egalitarian, use their social status all the time to justify their right to look down on and humiliate people. It’s a Puritan thing- because I have money and power, derived from my role in the system, I must be a good person.


About thrasymachus33308

I like fast cars, fast women and southern-fried rock. I have an ongoing beef with George Orwell. I take my name from a character in Plato's "Republic" who was exasperated with the kind of turgid BS that passed for deep thought and political discourse in that time and place, just as I am today. The character, whose name means "fierce fighter" was based on a real person but nobody knows for sure what his actual political beliefs were. I take my pseudonym from a character in an Adam Sandler song who was a obnoxious jerk who pissed off everybody.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Why I Hate Liberals, Part 9,943………

  1. What Sullivan puts in his mouth disturbs me less than what he so often puts up his ass.
    He got HIV that way.

  2. AG says:

    Go get ’em Thrasy! As if the woman’s misery is discounted by some smug asshole’s ridiculous experience!

  3. Hizzle says:

    Bingo. If you go to Huffington Post (or the New York Times) you will find people there are very compassionate and wonderful, provided you agree with them one-hundred percent of the time. If you do not agree with them one-hundred percent of the time, you will discover quickly that you are a “double-wide dwelling” “red state redneck” who loves “your shootin’ irons and Jesus.”

    I remember a “micro-bio” on a Huffington Post commentor’s account that asked, “Why are the Red States the poorest?” (Probably because they’re the blackest, but don’t tell her that). Even the Messiah’s comment about “clinging to guns and religion” is dripping with this condescension.

  4. Senator Big Bird says:

    Sorry have to agree with the “assh0le”.
    There is no proof that his cannabis use caused the dad’s poor behaviour. By offering his counter example the lawyer shows that pot use itself is indicative of nothing. Lawer is not claiming all dopers are super people. He is showing that people are good or bad and either could be rolling a blunt.
    Imagine she completed her
    description of bum/dad finished with “chinaman” instead of pothead. Does this imply all chinaman are bad dads? Would a chinese man be an “asshole” for pointing that by most metrics he is a good person and a good dad despite his chineseness?

    Regardless how shitty this woman’s life has been and what a bum her dad was she (and you) have conflated 2 issues.

    PS I am not a pothead and don’t have a dog in the fight. I just don’t like fallacy in arguement.

  5. senator big bird says:

    Ooh witty rejoinder. Speaking of fallacy…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s