No wonder rightwing extremist Andrew Breitbart is so angry about the outrageous insult to his fellow clansmen. Can’t imagine where that “racist” NAACP came up with the crazy idea that there are “elements of racism” in the Tea Party. [Hat-tip Maddow Blog.]…
And while we’re on the topic, kudos, at least, to former National Review editor David Klinghoffer for correctly identifying in an LA Times opinion piece over the weekend, the hateful disaster that has become the once-legitimate, now insane-beyond-repair conservative movement in this nation. The item is headlined “From neocons to crazy-cons” and is aptly sub-titled: “Once the conservative movement was about finding meaning in private life and public service. But it has undergone a shift toward demagoguery and hucksterism.”
Here’s a few more grafs worth reading. Breitbart might be heart-broken, if he had one. [Hat-tip Eric Boehlert.]…
What has become of conservatism?
…
With its descent to baiting blacks, Mexicans and Muslims, its accommodation of conspiracy theories and an increasing nastiness and vulgarity, the conservative movement has undergone a shift toward demagoguery and hucksterism. Once the talk was of “neocons” versus “paleocons.” Now we observe the rule of the crazy-cons.
If you take a peek at the comments, the right wing readers have rushed to support the substance of the LATimes article, immediately comparing Klinghoffer to Josef Goebbels.
They Goebbel it up
like the turkeys that they are.
Birds of a feather…
I know we have to be vigilant over the inanities and insanities of the Tea Party groups, but who outside the groups takes them serously? It is so easy to rip these people, but they are impervious to the criticisms like the one Stephen Colbert gave to Laura Ingraham last night. We have to get our legislators to ignore these people like I do to the farting students in the back of the room when I teach.
Tomazulob asked:
Um, the entirety of the mainstream corporate media?
Neocons already were Crazy-cons. I don’t see that any evolution was necessary.
What is crazier than the PNAC policy of preemptive (and incessant) war?
What is whackier than supply side economics?
What is more treasonous than allowing 9-11 to take place, outing your own intelligence agents, yukking it up while a major city drowns, shredding the Constitution, bankrupting the country, impoverishing the working class, etc, etc?
The Tea Partiers are so obviously racist that it is beyond any reasonable doubt. A question I’ve never heard answered by any Tea Partier is this: Though you guys claim to not be against having a black president simply because he’s black and instead it’s “really” all about your concern and outrage about runaway government spending then where in the hell were all of you when Bush was taking a huge budget surplus and replacing it with a mountain of government debt? Funny, but I never heard of any Tea Party back in 2001 or 2002 or 2003 or any of the years of the Bush (Cheney) administration. Only do they oppose government debt when it is being built by an African American president. My crystal ball tells me that had McShame won in 2008 and done precisely what Obama’s done we would hear crickets chirping instead of Tea Parties ranting.
“What is more treasonous than allowing 9-11 to take place…”
MAKING it happen (i.e. a false flag operation) rather than letting it happen, though admittedly only slightly worse. Believing it was allowed to happen involves swallowing with no problem at all the rest of the numerous “coincidences” and impossibilities of the official 9/11 myth aside from the Air Force being hamstrung and only taking issue with it being “allowed” to happen rather than being a surprise. Even a cursory inspection of 9/11’s details reveals that every facet of the official mythology has more holes than Swiss cheese.
Those fucking Swiss.