aiwiretap.com/2009/09/19/the-hilarious-video-that-is-making-the-right-furious/#commentsTue, 20 Sep 2011 21:42:56 +0000http://redstatewetumpire.com/?p=3998As I’ve commented before, no one is more outraged over the video of a couple kissing at an airport in Arizona than the people who are screaming that they are “tolerant” and “fair-minded”. I would like to have a talk with any woman who gets a jolt of electricity running through her when she finds out that she was kissed in public by a guy who is not her husband. This video has nothing to do with political correctness, but everything to do with getting the old dog in me from barking and slobbering all over everyone who sees it.
Watching the video was like watching an outtake from some bad sitcom from 30 years ago: A little kid walking in to see his mother and father kissing each other in a loving and intimate manner. The little kid is in a state of shock and awe. The mother’s response: “What do you want, sonny? We’re just being a little naughty here. What do you think this is, your mother’s first roll in the hay? Get over it.” Yes, this video is as funny as it is horrifying. Watch and laugh, even if you’re not a parent. It’s the best thing on the web right now, and is as close as we are likely to get to a “Where’s Waldo” video.
It’s great that the right-wingers are offended by the video of the Arizona couple being interrupted by the cop, but a similar video that you can find by looking up “Layla-gate” or “Cathy-gate” on youtube will show you that even the women they claim are so “independent” will freak out if they are caught making out in public. It was a different time, when the woman had to pretend to be all stoic and aloof, so she didn’t reveal anything about what she really thought. Now, people are not supposed to give a shit if you kiss a man in a public place, whether it’s a police officer in your face or your husband. How come conservatives can’t tell the difference?
]]>http://www.redstatewetumpire.com/2009/09/19/the-hilarious-video-that-is-making-the-right-furious/feed/5Is This an Exclusive “Liberals Are Bigots, Period” Article?http://www.redstatewetumpire.com/2009/05/30/is-this-an-exclusive-liberals-are-bigots-period-article/
http://www.redstatewetumpire.com/2009/05/30/is-this-an-exclusive-liberals-are-bigots-period-article/#commentsFri, 30 May 2009 16:42:52 +0000http://redstatewetumpire.com/?p=8147We had a bad couple of weeks on the Web due to a big misunderstanding on our part. We got caught up in the moment after reading a piece about how a professor at the University of Missouri told his students that if they didn’t vote for Obama in the upcoming election they should change their registration to “Democrat” so he could collect their voter registration forms. He got a lot of flak for that, and decided to make amends by writing an apology piece titled “Dear Conservative: If you can’t make fun of me, who can you make fun of?,” which was published by TruthDig.
Being honest, there wasn’t that much in the article that we agreed with. We got the feeling that the professor is a little to the left of where we are, but then again, so are most of the folks on the left. It was his tone that bothered us. To say that if you don’t vote for Obama you “stand against America” smacked of some kind of right-wing “Us-Against-Them” mentality that isn’t necessary in our system. Even though we might agree with some of the professor’s complaints, it felt like that professor was not being fair to the professor, because of his tone. We were also put off by the fact that he got a little bit too smug in the final paragraph. Like a lot of leftists these days, he’s convinced he’s the smartest man in the room.
That bothered us enough that we made a mistake. We wrote our original article, which was published as a commentary, a rebuttal to the professor’s article. What we failed to do was include the whole point of the article in the title. We wrote about a left-wing professor at a major university and what we see as his arrogance, that he can’t imagine that anyone would be dumb enough to support President Bush. That’s not the most scintillating article, but it shows his lack of humor, which is not nearly as funny as one would like it to be.
If you read our article, you may be asking yourself how this one got published at all. The answer is that there is an enormous difference between the professor’s arrogance and the conservative’s attitude towards liberals, conservatives, the poor, the young, the old and just about anyone else who disagrees with us on most issues. We understand that everyone is entitled to their opinions, and there is a reason why they’re entitled to their opinions. It just so happens that we disagree with this professor on most issues, and as is our custom, we’re not afraid to say so. As long as the tone is right, we’re okay with saying what we think in an article. Liberals who don’t believe that conservatives are intolerant bigots should be able to do the same, and I’m willing to go as far as to say that if liberals aren’t afraid to say that conservatives are bigots, we’re not going to be afraid of them. We certainly haven’t been.
I was listening to a caller the other day on the radio who was objecting to our use of the term “bigots” when we refer to conservatives. He was afraid that the conservatives who read our column would think that we were calling them bigots. When I explained that that was what we were saying, he said, “Well, I don’t consider myself a bigot, I consider myself a liberal, but I don’t like it when conservatives call me a bigot.” That would be an interesting debate, to find out where he stands with the rest of us bigots.
]]>http://www.redstatewetumpire.com/2009/05/30/is-this-an-exclusive-liberals-are-bigots-period-article/feed/1Rumors of Right Wing Tantrumhttp://www.redstatewetumpire.com/2009/02/26/rumors-of-right-wing-tantrum/
http://www.redstatewetumpire.com/2009/02/26/rumors-of-right-wing-tantrum/#commentsThu, 26 Feb 2009 23:05:42 +0000http://redstatewetumpire.com/?p=2730Ever since the election of Barack Obama, the right-wing has been in a state of complete outrage that an uppity black man who barely resembles the way we perceive an all-American Christian man as being successful, will be the 44th President of the United States of America. And no, he’s not the one who had his birth certificate issues. That’s just a political tactic used by people who don’t have the facts on their side. But now that the elections are over, it looks like that his presidency is all but ensured. And that’s simply unacceptable.
If you’re a man who still thinks it’s okay to call people who have sex with their dogs “faggots” and to accuse John McCain of being an agent of the North Koreans, you should be able to cope with the idea of Obama winning the election. There was a lot of evidence floating around this election that Obama was going to beat McCain, and a lot of that evidence had nothing to do with anything that Obama did to warrant such speculation. On the other hand, some of it was based on Obama’s track record of being a fairly successful legislator in the Illinois state legislature. But that’s a whole other can of worms. The fact of the matter is that in an election where there are a lot of good choices, we’re expected to accept an outcome based on something as irrational as race. Who really cares if he’s black or white or green or blue, just so long as he’s competent? It’s really too bad
