Painting with the right hand….

Talking points for both conservatives and liberals tend to be painted with a rather wide brush. In politics it’s hard if not downright impossible to make your point with pointillism. What this inevitably leads us to is big honking broad generalizations that often have little basis in any reality except, of course, within the speakers or writers mind. For example (…and you knew there would be an example) take this Freeper-esque critique of “liberals” who…

…are for the War on Terrorism, but with exceptions. Over time, with the exceptions including everything from Iraq to Iran to Syria to the Patriot Act, there appears to be little in the War on Terrorism that they are actually for.

…are for gay marriage, not because gay marriage would help gay people or the institution of marriage, but because they believe marriage is not particularly important.

…rightly decry legislation to outlaw “partial birth abortion,” and also rightly decry the false rhetoric that has obscured what is in that legislation. They shy away from presenting the public with the actual scientific facts, preferring to trust in popular ignorance and the court system.

…want Trent Lott run out of office for a “gotcha” moment, and want Howard Dean elected in spite of his Confederate flag “gotcha.”

…want to give everyone in America free health care, and want no questions on how that might reduce quality of service or innovations in new medical techniques, research, or treatments.

…demand that NATO, the UN, “our friend” France, and perhaps also the EU take over for our responsibilities in Iraq, and dodge the thought that all of them attempted to stop the US–led coalition from liberating Iraq in the first place.

…are against anti-Semitism and for anti-Zionism.

And my favorite:

…do not think that any of the following are particularly important: leadership, courage, honor, religion, civilization, culture, tradition, responsibility, the English language, or history.

Boy. Those conservative wingnuts and their–oh, wait. Sorry. My bad.

These are the words of “moderate liberal” Andrew Hagen regarding what he calls “paleoliberals” a new construct that fits in neatly with Transnational Progressivism and Andy Sullivans Eagles.

Hagen appears to be part of a growing movement that I think I’ll either call Totten-crats or liberalis falsidicus depending on which looks better on a t-shirt or tote bag at CaféPress. Now I could be wrong about Mr. Hagen. After all he does say:

I hold left-wing views. As an American, I’m a political independent who leans toward the Democratic Party and away from the Green Party.
I have supported the military campaign in Afghanistan and the War on Terrorism, and, should weapons inspection prove infeasible, will support the planned military intervention in Iraq.
I will attack Chomskian ideology for as long as it has its many adherents.
I will never stop attacking the sectarian Left.

…and if it’s on the Internet, it must be the truth.

By the way, I’m a sixteen-year old blonde with large breasts and few inhibitions who just loves unemployed balding engineers interested in long walks on the beach, deep wet passionate kisses, and fighting Islamofacism from the rumpus room iMac.

IM me, won’t you…



Yeah. Like I would tell you....