December 01, 2009
You'readouch you'readouche Can You Do the Fandango [Updated by Rusty]
1. Support for fascists, both in America (see: Pat Buchanan, Robert Stacy McCain, etc.) and in Europe (see: Vlaams Belang, BNP, SIOE, Pat Buchanan, etc.)
Oh, okay. Well, when you remove your face from Barack Obama's crotch, take two Penicillin and call us in the morning.
Rusty's 2cents: Wow, such broad strokes we paint Charles?
This is the typical guilt-by-association type of argument that we've come to expect from Charles. Remember his biggest objection to Barrack Obama? He once was associated with a known terrorist named Bill Ayers.
It's an argument I've never been comfortable with because I know the fallacies of this kind of thinking. I haven't been overly critical of it because you have to pick your battles and I've allowed my co authors at this blog to engage in it from time to time and I myself have probably been guilty of it.
I don't believe that Robert Stacey McCain is a racist and I think Charles has done his best to ignore Stacey's replies and rejections of the accusation. But let us assume that he is correct and that Stacey is a racist. I hung out with him for a few days a couple of years ago (no, nary a racist word from his mouth). Had dinner and lunch with him. I guess I'm associated with him.
As for the others, well, you can take the BNP, Vlams Belaang, and Buchanan with you.
As for the SIOE if I'm not mistaken their biggest crime is that some of their members have at one time or another been associated with members of the Vlams Belaang party?
I think we've addressed that issue already.
But in Charles' "throw them all together" world guilt by association works even once removed. Because if you link to a post by a blog associated with the SIOE then you too are guilty by association!
So, you're a bigot if you share some views with someone who shares some views with some one who is a bigot!
2. Support for bigotry, hatred, and white supremacism (see: Pat Buchanan, Ann Coulter, Robert Stacy McCain, Lew Rockwell, etc.)
Like nobody on the right has criticized these people. Dude, the internet is forever.
Rusty's 2cents: Throw them altogether, yet again. Pat Buchanan and Ann Coulter have exactly what in common? And Lew Rockewell is thrown in their with Ann Coulter why?
3. Support for throwing women back into the Dark Ages, and general religious fanaticism (see: Operation Rescue, anti-abortion groups, James Dobson, Pat Robertson, Tony Perkins, the entire religious right, etc.)
Charles Johnson has just gone on record as supporting infanticide and the killing of innocent children. Tell, me, Charles, what is the difference between you and Osama Bin Laden? Who, by the way, wants to KEEP women back in the Dark Ages.
Rusty's 2cents: First, when did they stop putting the little cents sign thingy on the keyboard!?!?
Second, wow, that kind of rhetoric is just, well, stupid. I mean that. It makes no sense.
At best it is an accusation based on a tautology. But that's being generous.
4. Support for anti-science bad craziness (see: creationism, climate change denialism, Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann, James Inhofe, etc.)
Uh, your little Global Warming Religion of Hysteria got pwned. Thought you might like to know.
Rusty's 2 cents: Okay, this is too much. Not every one on the right rejects global warming. I don't. Hell, I've spent much of my adult life studying the policy implications of it. Something I never write about here because I believe in strict separation of my blog life and my academic life.
I believe that guy that Charles voted for last year in the Presidential election also believed in global warming.
So, again, we have a broad stroke of "the right" and then guilt by association leveled at every one on the right.
But there is a second problem here, and that is that Charles doesn't seem to understand science. Much of the criticisms of global warming are not in fact criticisms of global warming. Instead, they are criticisms of models of global warming.
Models are not facts and facts are not models.
Since most models of global warming have been way off, with the best of them being off by a factor of 2x, then, um, why can't we criticize these models?
Which is why the recent global warming scandal has been a real scandal. Because when you fudge the data to match the model you are saying something about the model -- it's crap.
And if a model of the real world can't match up with historical data, then what does that say about it's predictive value?
Sure, some corporations have a stake in the outcome of these debates. That is a fact. But it is also a fact that governments also have a stake in the outcome of these debates.
That is, governments face many of the same incentives to grow that corporations do. As such, they are not neutral actors in the game.
But I digress. In sum, I believe in global warming. I believe in science. Science must always question orthodoxy. And today orthodoxy is based on models with little predictive value.
5. Support for homophobic bigotry (see: Sarah Palin, Dobson, the entire religious right, etc.)
Please cite. If you think you're so important that you don't need to prove your claims, the internet may have to smack you upside your pussy pony tailed head.
Rusty's 2cents: Again, a tautology. Define any one against gay marriage as a "homophobe". Name people who don't support gay marriage. Voila, you have yourselves some homophobes by definition.
It's sophomoric, yes, but it's largely what passes for intellectual debate on the Left these days.
How about some real debate? Based on, say, evolution?
No, that might hurt some feelings.
6. Support for anti-government lunacy (see: tea parties, militias, Fox News, Glenn Beck, etc.)
So, the colonists who threw tea into Boston Harbor were anti-government lunatics? The militiamen who fought at Lexington and Bunker Hill were lunatics? Fox News is lunacy? Why? Because they report, and you decide? Glenn Beck is a lunatic because he has a different opinion of you?
You're the lunatic, Chuckles. Glenn Beck lets people of opposing viewpoints on his show. You ban them and scrub them from your blogroll.
Rusty's 2cents: Again, guilt by association. There are some lunatics in the Tea Party movement. There are lunatics in all political movements. That's what makes a movement a movement. You don't have to pass an orthodoxy test to be in a movement. You just sort of show up.
I'm not a huge Glenn Beck fan, but, hey, to each his own.
Also, I denounce Vinnie for not sticking to orthodoxy!
7. Support for conspiracy theories and hate speech (see: Alex Jones, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Birthers, creationists, climate deniers, etc.)
More cites needed. Typical leftard denial and generalization.
Rusty: Um, he throws in 'creationists' and 'climate deniers' with birthers?
Since the vast majority of people in American are creationists it must be difficult living amongst we crazy people. I believe Obama calls himself a Christian. I assume this means he believes the world was 'created' by God for some purpose and that we are not a cosmic accident.
Also, Vinnie is banned.
8. A right-wing blogosphere that is almost universally dominated by raging hate speech (see: Hot Air, Free Republic, Ace of Spades, etc.)
Translation: Anyone that criticizes Charles Johnson.
UPDATE by Rusty: Hot Air and Ace are "raging hate speech? Dude, AllahP has been your biggest defender. At least, he chose to sit this little blog war out. Now you bring he and Ed into this because some of their commenters cross some imaginary line you've drawn up? Dude!
Also, Vinnie has crossed a line! Any one who links to anything written by Vinnie is a bigot!
9. Anti-Islamic bigotry that goes far beyond simply criticizing radical Islam, into support for fascism, violence, and genocide (see: Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer, etc.)
You left out "Little Green Football Archives."
Rusty's 2cents: Ha! If the tautology works on every one else, why not for you?
Also, it's pretty much fact that Vinnie is a homophobe, creationists, and a bigot. I know this because one time he called me a fag, he goes to church on Easter and Xmas, and he used to watch the Chappelle show.
I. Will. Not. Tolerate. You. Any. Longer. Vinnie!
Vinnie is double banned.
10. Hatred for President Obama that goes far beyond simply criticizing his policies, into racism, hate speech, and bizarre conspiracy theories (see: witch doctor pictures, tea parties, Birthers, Michelle Malkin, Fox News, World Net Daily, Newsmax, and every other right wing source)
My, how we paint with a broad brush. Okay, well, you're no different than Markos "Screw them" Moulitsas Zuniga. You're just another American hating, self loathing, worthless piece of shit leftist asshole.
And much, much more. The American right wing has gone off the rails, into the bushes, and off the cliff.
I won’t be going over the cliff with them.
Sorry, pal, but that light you see at the end of the tunnel? That's the freight train coming your way.
UPDATE by Rusty: Jules Crittendon has more here.
I have the flu, so I might not be blogging much today. But you'll be happy to know that my wife's check up came out clean yesterday.
Also, any one ever associated with "Vinnie" is banned. And by "associate" I mean if you've ever linked any of his posts. We wouldn't want to send the wrong impression and follow him off the cliff with the rest of the crazies.
For that, Vinnie is on super secret double probation.
NO ONE SUSPECTS THE SPANISH INQUISITION!
Essential update by Rusty: Best comment so far by Adirondack Patriot:
Let me get this straight: Charles Johnson abandons his right wing positions because he finds OTHER PEOPLE'S right wing positions indefensible?Heh.
UPDATE: Ace has some more here.
Also, Ace is banned.
And LauraW and DrewM.
Uncle Jimbo better watch it, too. We've got our eye on you Jimbo..