FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR
A Wingnut Praises Salon Magazine
I am Wingnut. Hear (or read) my roar! I hate taxes, internationalism at the expense of patriotism, educational bureaucracies, e-ville, creepy furriners who take Americans hostage, environmental activism as a Trojan Horse for economic collectivism, and on and on and on until I’ve pretty much done hated all the stuff you’ll typically find in the online edition of Salon Magazine.
I read these Che-latte’-sipping creep-wads for two reasons. One is to gain intel on the Creeping Red Menace, the other is because I blog at my best (and sometimes at my deracinated worst!) when under the influence of 180-proof, Everclear Anger. Ah, but now these crafty, pink-dog bastiches have flipped the script.
They’ve written two; TWO I’m tellin’ ya, intelligent articles in ONE recent edition of their website. Their intellectual force grows strong, and the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy should grow worried. With the sarcasm-lock now disabled on my keyboard, I actually have a confession to make. These two authors, Michael Lind and Camille Paglia, have both done patriotic, outstanding and courageous work.
Neither has gone Zell Miller, both still support most of the leftist agenda. However, each, in their own way, has issued a clarion call to the conscience of their political masters. They have pleased the case of sanity, to the stampeding, radical rabble that is threatening to make American politics explode into incendiary and violent conflict not seen in America since anti-war demonstrators took gun fire from the National Guard at Kent State.
I particularly commend to your consideration an article written by Michael Lind entitled “Are liberals seceding from sanity?” Lind tees off on the fashionable, anti-Southern bigotry that the Democrats are desperately attempting to use as filler for the lack of intellectual rigor that would justify passing their policy agenda. He begins by quoting the hate-mongering Kevin Drum from the bigotry font known as Mother Jones Magazine. Warning – Drum’s industrial-strength hate speech follows below.
“There are, needless to say, plenty of individual Southern whites who are wholly admirable. But taken as a whole, Southern white culture is [redacted]. Jim Webb can pretty it up all he wants, but it’s a [redacted].”
Lind uses the old algebraic expedient of substitution to demonstrate to his predominantly left-wing audience why what Mr. Drum had to say comes from a long-gone, bigoted dark age of American culture.
Drum’s creepy bigotry becomes clear when other groups are substituted: “There are, needless to say, plenty of individual blacks who are wholly admirable. But taken as a whole, black culture is [redacted]. Barack Obama can pretty it up all he wants, but it’s a [redacted].” Or maybe this: “There are, needless to say, plenty of individual Jews who are wholly admirable. But taken as a whole, Jewish culture is [redacted]. The late Irving Howe can pretty it up all he wants, but it’s a [redacted].”
And Michael Lind also shows commendable intellect by not prettying anything up by referring to the ignorant, back-woods Kathleen Parker as The Washington Post’s “Konservative Kolumnist.™” His examples of Parker’s phlegm and bile follow below.
In her Washington Post essay, Kathleen Parker writes: “Hefty majorities in the Northeast, the Midwest and the West believe Obama was born in the United States. But in the land of cotton, where old times are not by God forgotten” — evidently this is intended to be a strained joke — “only 47 percent believe Obama was born in America and 30 percent aren’t sure. Southern Republicans, it seems, have seceded from sanity.”
In response to the bilious Parker, he counters stupid-hackneyed attempts at bigot humor with solid and commendable wisdom. Lind offers the following measure of equipoise and decency at the expense of the partisan cheap shots.
Indeed, socially conservative white voters helped to create and to maintain the new Democratic majority in Congress. But many liberals, it would appear, would rather have a smaller Democratic Party than one that includes more white Southerners with typically “black” or “Latino” views about sex and reproduction. Here’s how I see it. Liberals should respect and promote the interests of working Americans of all races and regions, including those who despise liberals. They are erring neighbors to be won over, not cretins to be mocked.
Lind and I obviously disagree about many issues on a profound and philosophical level. But, despite my well-honed and better instincts, I find it really hard to read that article and hate the guy the way a good Right Wing blogger properly should. He’s done something that harder-edged warriors on both sides of the Red State/ Blue State social and philosophical divide should learn from and emulate.
By reversing the old strategy of dehumanizing the enemy, he forces a discussion with people who would genuinely not give him or his views the time of day. By looking past his side’s hackneyed stereotypes of who and what Conservatives are as people, he enlightens while he attempts to persuade.
This probably won’t change my mind on the practical realities of what he may offer up as environmental legislation or foreign policy prescriptions, but it will force me to admit that not all liberals hate America. This could accomplish something far bigger than putting one side of the debate one-up on the other. It could prevent the nation from slipping further towards violent, suicidal chaos.
That would put Mr. Lind above being either a Wingnut or a Moonbat. That would make Michael Lind a legitimate patriot. I commend Salon Magazine and everyone else attempting to win the big debate, to hire more journalists like Mr. Lind. As much as I hate to admit it, the guy is both liberal and good for America. (Or maybe this is my sneaky, VRWC way of getting him fired before he helps the dastardly liberals win any more elections!)