Tuesday, August 28, 2007

Say, Larry Craig, What Is Conservatism?

Apropos nearly nothing I worked this little piece up the other day, but imagine my surprise and delight to see it so aptly confirmed today by the long suppressed news of Larry Craig's arrest (and guilty plea) for cruising an airport tea room. What a surprise, a Bible-beating right-winger turns out to be aggressively but hypocritically gay! How could this happen?

It's only ironic if you have an adolescent notion of human nature, an ignorance of history that eclipses the existence of witch-hunting closet cases like Roy Cohn, and have never had concepts like "projection" explained to you. Well, I'm here to clear all that up for you. My only quandary is, whose picture do I use for the poster boy?

“What is conservatism?” the “Maverick Philosopher” asks. And of course, like so many sophists of the movement he answers his own question with all sorts of high-toned crap that nowhere touches upon what a self-described American conservative is like today, if ever they were. It’s not what he thinks it is anymore.

It’s more:

Conservatism: 1. a neurosis characterized by hypercompensating preoccupation with the trappings, postures and measures of masculinity, manliness or machismo and strongly linked with projective transference, fervid adulation of (“strong man”) figures irrationally or delusionally invested with the “masculine” qualities seized upon in the preoccupation; marked strongly with tendencies to confuse: aggression with effectiveness; cruelty with toughness; fixation with resolve or perseverance; contrarianism with originality or independence; and, above all, punitive zeal with rectitude; marked also by distrust of or hostility towards ambivalence, ambiguity, and qualities associated with the feminine such as: subtlety, sensitivity, empathy, refinement, self-consciousness, circumspection, forbearance, tolerance and forgiveness. The neurosis seems often to be based in gender-insecurity and/or failure to fully individuate as adults, resulting in a tacit, perhaps subconscious self-condemnation for lack of the very qualities, accomplishments and experiences valorized by the overarching code of “manliness.”

The conservative is strongly (if inauthentically) drawn to the role of “protector” of others from enemies or corruptive influences, for this places premium value on the martial qualities he espouses. But the strongest appeal of this role probably lies in the moral immunity if affords; defense of the (usually abstract and ill-defined) Good, or the defenseless, necessitates whatever evil the protector employs. This rationalizes, pardons, retroactively legitimizes the conservative’s arrested ethical development – always evidenced by a pronounced, even self-congratulatory lack of empathy, and the correlative predisposition towards self-pity, or feelings of persecution. Other indicators of this stunting are failure to embrace an ethic of reciprocity (usually substituting an atavistic sin-based code), and the utter devaluation of consistency and moral authority (that is, leadership by example) as components of ethical deportment. Indeed, with respect to moral authority the ethical debility is often strongly associated with pronounced self-blindness, leading often to floridly self-disclosing projections: condemnations, preoccupations, excoriations and paranoias about putative threats, ills or failings, which are rooted in the neurotic’s guilty or devalued sense of self since he or she craves, embodies or enacts that which is condemned.

2. a mutual reassurance society of said neurotics.

Monday, August 27, 2007

If-There-Were-Any-Justice Department

So, Alberto Suckbutt, Ano Gonzales, has decided to quit before he's impeached, and he too will be taking the Rovetrain back to Texas.

But according to the Post before he left he needed to stink the place up a little more. Showing here that he now has his head so far up his own ass that he's no longer sure which orifice is licking which (or whose):

Gonzales took no questions from the press as he announced his plans, but he
said that even his "worst days" as attorney general were "better than my
father's best days" as a migrant worker in Texas.
"I have lived the
American dream," said Gonzales, 52.

I'm sure he's inadevertently telling the truth, and of course bespeaking the attitude of virtually the entire administration. Getting over by lying, sucking up, covering up, fostering cronyism wherever and however possible, with no regard at all for the feelings or welfare of others, decency, ethics, the law, or the interest of the nation, is preferable to any form of honest work -- that is, the earning of pay by actually doing something for someone else. I'm sure in the sense of being cushy and ego-stroked Abu's jobs with the Bush Junta have been light-years from anything his father ever knew. Karmically I'll bet Abu's in an altogther lower universe. It kinda reminds me of Clarence Thomas' slander of his hardworking sister. I'd bet a months pay that Abu's not fit to shine his father's shoes.

Hunter Thompson had it right 35 years ago in Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. These people think that the American dream is being licensed to steal.

Thursday, August 16, 2007

Genius My Ass

Karl Rove is to political strategizing what Rose Ruiz is to marathoning. His career merely attests to the fact that GOP now has a single guiding principle: "'Win' by whatever means necessary."

Honesty, decency, ethics and even legality don't even figure into it, except as ploys to be exploited against the suckers who still belive in that nonsense. That's Karl Rove's Party.

Monday, August 13, 2007

Why do you hate America?

To the extent that, following the exemplum of their putative leaders, Americans have become sanctimonious hypocrites, bullying cowards, cowering peasants, and candyassed busybodies, they are despicable, and rightly despised by freedom-loving, self-respecting people all over the world. This is not the same thing as hating America -- though the aforementioned despicables cannot see that.

So long Karl Rove! Sleep well. Quite a feat, generalizing your loathsomeness so effectively that we are now so much more universally loathed.

Friday, August 10, 2007

GOP: The Moral Equivalent of Nazism

Okay, so thusfar they've only rounded up relatively few people into crude barbed-wire-enclosed camps and tortured them to death largely on the basis of their ethnicity, but then again, it ain't over yet, The ForeverWar.

But also, it seems quite probable that in addition to the hundreds of thousands already killed in Iraq, for no good reason, millions more will soon perish in the blowback and chaos we have sown. So Bush, et alia, could very easily see some Hitlerian numbers of deaths directly resulting from their criminally cruel, callous and stupid actions. Not that our "free press" will lay any blame there.

And still, regardless of what happens in the future, to be a Republican now means that you are pro-war, pro-torture, pro-warrantless wiretapping, pro-perjury and pro-pardon, while being steadfastly against any honest accounting. Truth is not one of your "values" -- it's irrelvant to you as dog-whistling is to a sidewinder. Freedom is equally meaningless to a Republican because he supports Presidential and police prerogatives to suspend the citizen's freedom at will. Officials need only be elected, as far as Republicans are concerned (by whatever dubious and even illegal means necessary), and they have then been granted dictatorial war powers by the people.

The Democrats are little better, but we're at the point now where if one is a Republican one is either morally depraved or criminally ignorant. It's not some morally neutral parlor sport, like Yankees fandom vs Red Socks. It's a real indication of moral development, ethical and empathetic capacities, and lack thereof. Look around you, re-evalute your friends and loved ones in this light. Ask yourself, have they always been so vaguely... despicable?