I interrupt my hiatus to show you site a Dean supporter could love. I don’t necessarily think he is a douchebag, but that’s got to be the best URL ever.
(Via Matt Yglesias.)
19 thoughts on “Long live the popular front”
Comments are closed.
"This was the voice of moderation until 13 Sept, 2025"
I laughed out loud. Thanks for posting this.
Gromit
“I interrupt my hiatus to show you site a Dean supporter could love.”
But he’s not bitter.
Moe “Interrupting my extremely shorter hiatus” Lane
I was treated to a segment from the Tonight Show with Jay Leno, during which John Kerry, clad in leather and denim, rode a Harley Davidson motorcycle onto the set and parked it right in the middle of the stage, in lieu of the traditional “enter stage left”. My initial reaction, as should be the reaction of any card-carrying member of the Common Sense Club, was “Oh my God. What an ass.”
Spot on. I’m looking forward to reading the future installments.
I’m obviously no fan of Kerry, but even my worst expose of him (like revealing he is bald as a billiard ball under that rug) seems positively prudish next to the way the left cannibalizes its own.
What happened to civility? What happened to good taste?
Oh, that’s right…those things require some sort of a moral framework to have any value or use. The left side never met a moral they liked enough to embrace – and it shows.
SDAI-Tech1: Whenever I read sweeping criticisms like “the left side never met a moral they liked enough to embrace” I just want to say: “Oh, come off it.”
Blind loyalty to the leader selected may be useful in achieving power, but it has nothing to do with morality.
That’s a great site. Not that I have the vote anyway, being British, but I have to concur. I wouldn’t really want Kerry in charge, but I know I want Bush & Co. less. Shame it has to come to that, but then you don’t always get great people to vote for. You’ve got to do the best you can with what you have.
I don’t actually think he’s that bad. His campaign isn’t making me cringe or making me cheer; he’s mainly going under the radar right now.
I do harbor some bitterness about the Massachusetts constitutional amendment, which Kerry could probably stopped singlehanded. But he’s mainly just frustrating, and letting his better instincts get consulted away. I’d like to tell myself that this would stop with the election–in terms of foreign policy, I think it will; I don’t think he’ll be half as politics driven as Bush is abroad, or even as Clinton was. Domestically, though…
And the motorcycle thing. Sheesh.
What happened to civility? What happened to good taste?
Oh, that’s right…those things require some sort of a moral framework to have any value or use. The left side never met a moral they liked enough to embrace – and it shows.
So thinking critically about the guy you are supporting for president represents a lack of a moral framework? Or do you just object to terms like “douchebag” and “ass?”
Gromit
Generalizations about the left are a pet peeve of mine, even when they’re less sweeping than “you lot have no morals and no shame.” But this topic is too silly for me to even get worked up about it.
That said:
1. The key words are not “John Kerry is a douchebag” but “I’m voting for him anyway”–and the purpose of the first part of the sentence is to highlight the second part.
2. It’s obviously partly, or mostly, a joke.
3. if the main thing you get from that site is “the left has no morals”–then you decided that a long time ago that the left has no morals, and are just looking for excuses to repeat it.
And what’s so bad about douche bags, anyway?
The word “douche” is just French for “shower,” after all. Maybe the author of the site is simply comparing the Good Senator to a toiletry kit of some kind.
Let’s not always assume the worst, folks.
Let’s see with links like “f-dnow”, “f-dlater” and “f-nader” I am supposed to suspend suspicion of moral laxity, so I can praise his assessment that Kerry is an a-s? All this while at the same time not see how transparent his tactics are – Replace one hate and reach towards and even greater hate? (Kerry for Bush)
Yes, in my opinion, the left hasn’t found too many morals to embrace and the right has forgotten and ignored many as well. I’m one of the folks who finds resorting to profanity either the worst form of pandering to the declining masses or a sign of inability to make powerful points due to a weak command of the English language. Yes, I know…I was able to use Katherine’s post as a quick and easy political attack – but my observations are based in truth. How many left sites are filled with profanity and filthy language versus the right? What does this say about the left?
Yes, I do have a problem with “douchebag”. When used as a disparaging term – it disparages all women at the same time. I don’t like that and behind such usage I suspect someone who has a problem with women.
“Oh ignore Kerrry’s comments – he’s acting like he’s having one of his ‘heaviest’ days.”
“Kerry’s just at that time of the month.”
“Kerry needs an extra-absorbency pad for his mouth today.”
Those comments would be in the same class – the no class, anti-women zone. I’m old fashioned in those things and I lament the public acceptance of trash talk, because I see how it is slowly robbing people of their ability to converse intelligently.*
Sue me.
😉
SDAI-Tech1
*And, in this instance, it screams out the level of intellect and maturity the author suspects his target audience possesses. Not really a compliment for the anti-Bush left.
What does this say about the left?
Dunno what it says about the left, but it says to me that you need to review the Posting Rules, in particular the last paragraph.
BTW, it never occurred to me that using “douchebag” was derogatory towards women. However, not being one myself, I’m willing to be enlightened.
Not being a woman, that is, dunno about the other…
This is great. Folks who find no problem with douchebag and f-this f-that but get offended by the usage of the word left.
I believe my usage was quite accurate:
The last paragraph or the second? I used “left” by it’s own in the second.
“Anti-Bush left” has a determiner. “Anti-Bush” is the determiner. If I said “Anti-Bush Democrats” that would be too limited and non-inclusive, since many of the Dean supporters were left-of-center independents.
The posting rules need to be clarified as to when left and right are acceptable or if they are to be avoided altogether, because just pointing out that some folks may get offended at their usage isn’t really much of a guideline to work with.
I could, of course, resort to something less accurate and call them the “anti-Bush crazies” or “anti-Bush hate-mongers” or some other more derogatory term, but would that really make you feel less offended?
If someone points out the religious right are often acting crazy, “religious” is the determiner. If someone says the right often act crazy – there is no determiner but the word often acts as a selective determiner. My first post in which I declared, “The left never liked a moral enough to embrace – and it shows.” had no such determiner – and was a bit harsh because of it.
I should’ve said, “The left holds many individuals who never found a moral they liked enough to embrace – and it shows.”
My first declaration was indeed inaccurate and done for effect. However, I expected rational readers to realize this and to cause them to question their affiliation with individuals on the left who demonstrate this moral vacuity. In essence, by my sweeping generalization – I was trying to make those who clearly disagree that they have lax morals get frustrated that this perception is evidenced due to the efforts of members of their ranks. So, really my sweeping generalization was a compliment – because I knew the readers here would not include themselves and would feel uncomfortable at the association. Thus spurring an internal re-evaluation of some of their values.
It’s purpose therefore was fulfilled.
😉
“Dunno what it says about the left, but it says to me that you need to review the Posting Rules, in particular the last paragraph.”
Yea, verily. Sweeping generalizations bad; if there’s a single blessed thing that either the entire Right or the entire Left agree upon, I can’t think of it offhand. Do not vex Happy Fun Webmaster.
“…if there’s a single blessed thing that either the entire Right or the entire Left agree upon, I can’t think of it offhand.”
“It’s useful to drink water from time to time.”
I don’t see what’s so terrible about Kerry doing a Tonight Show skit. How is it different from Nixon’s “Sock it to me?,” or Bill Clinton’s playing the clarinet, or George H. W. Bush, Barbara Bush, Al Gore, Rudolph Guiliani,George W. Bush all going on Saturday Night Live, or Bob Dole doing David Letterman? Or George W. Bush’s campaign appearance on Letterman doing the Top Ten List? Or George W. Bush’s going on the Tonight Show and doing a sketch wearing a Gore Halloween mask?
Has everyone lost their memory?
I’m not objecting to his appearing on the Tonight Show, I’m objecting to the lame, blatantly image-manipulating way in which it was done. Clinton could pull off stuff like that without seeming like a dog walking on his hind legs.
However, you’re entirely correct to point out that this sin is hardly original to Kerry.
I kinda don’t see how most, if not all, of the examples I cited weren’t also “lame,” and “blatantly image-manipulating.” None strike me as brilliant examples of forthright truth-telling, but mileage does vary.
Clinton and Reagan came to that sort of thing most naturally, to be sure. And the Governator could hardly do otherwise.
I’m objecting to the lame, blatantly image-manipulating way in which it was done.
Would it help any to know that Kerry does in fact ride a motorcycle in his spare time, and has for years? He used to have a Ducati, but gave it up because of back problems. And Jay Leno’s a die-hard motorcycle fan, so it’s not really surprising that they’d find a way to work bikes into Kerry’s appearance.