For Lack Of A Better Post (Or, Considering Politics On The Left)

Here’s what I wrote on Facebook after the midterm election results came in:

Speaker John Boehner? As someone who has worked with retarded people, this country is retarded.

Four people liked my status.  I clarified as follows:

Like literally, mentally retarded people: this country is like them. Only less adorable. Jesus.

And then everything went to hell.  As they sometimes do!  Ha!

Chris:  gotta be said tho, the dems did a shit job. also, the reps did an amazing job of turning complete oblivion and lack of coherency/cogency to their advantage.

Kevin: Theres a reason why he won, cause Pelosi is a retard

Haha!  Oh, jesus.  But we’re just getting started…

Chris: it’s true pelosi is a retard, but it’s the retards who put her where she is/was who are the real retards, so to speak.

And here’s the part where my mom comes in!!!  Wait for it…

Cathryn: Excuse me. I think Kevin and Chris are sexists. Did you speak like this when a man was speaker? No. Your type make witches of women and boogie men of black presidents because you’re narrow minded and buy a lot of foolish fear mongering that panders to your prejudices instead of your brains.

All fun and games until someone loses an eye, amirite?

Chris: Really? Yes, as a fairly effeminate half-nigger I’m terrified of negress witches. They might turn our beautiful cracker-based cum-filled doughnut country into a place of measured compassion and intelligence…. actually, I should be combative about this: Yes I speak this way when men are house speaker for goddam sure. What worries me is when people believe in a person because of their physical attributes. White guys liking white guys is old news. Wome liking mama grizzlies is new and foolish and dangerous. Pelosi dropped the ball massively, particularly in that she couldn’t make this shit economy stick to the Republicans, which should have been a no brainer, which is why i comfortably, if coarsely, dub speaker Pelosi a Retard, Axelrod and Rahm, Retards, Obama nigger-Retard-coward. How ya like me now.

This is the part where I chime in.

Tom: Holy fuck. Oh, no.

Then I elaborate, still horrified, but extremely diplomatic-like:

Tom: Or, to be clear: Mom, nothing Kevin or Chris said signaled sexism. Being disappointed with Nancy Pelosis’s leadership in the House is completely independent of her gender, and nothing either of them said suggested otherwise. If Chris called you out, you kind of deserved it. (Still love ya, though Being my mom, and all).

Chris tried to join in the party:

Chris: and i apologize for using the words “nigger,” “negress,” “cum,” “Retard,” “cracker,” and “doughnut.” i got a lil heated. i’m from new england.

Chris: and for saying “how ya like me now.” uncouth. but i still think my points stand. while i agree that it would be nice to have a Lady Speaker, just as it’s nice to have a Black Prez, it would be nicer if she were more competent and he tougher.

And so I’m all like, “Cool.  Facebook drama resolved.  Mom and very dear friend aren’t arguing public policy on my wall anymore.  Hooray!”  Here is the text of my Hooray:

Tom: Nah. Yer hyperbole was warranted. But yer attempt at civility is noted and perhaps rewarded in the afterlife.

Hahahahahahahaaahaaahhhahahahahahahha!!!!!  Naivete, thy name is Facebook.  Chris and my mom were just getting started…

Cathryn: Excuse me. But, when Clinton was president, the Republican strategy was to demonize Hillary because she was a strong women. Of course, Clinton made that strategy a moot point by being a jerk with Monica Lewinsky. (Let’s not mention the Republican hypocrites who had to leave Congress when they had cried “Oh my” about Clinton but then were found to be in the same sexual-dalliance fix) But, I do think that an awful lot of this foolishness about Nancy Pelosi has to do with attacking the Democrats’ policy through the usual prejudice against women. Please tell me what other speaker has had as much bullying? Surely one must realize this is just one person in a position of power and hardly the most powerful person. This is fear-mongering and women-bashing in order to avoid any real discussion of issues. I won’t comment again. You all can use your foul language to continue the argument, which will only reinforce my own, which is that political discussion is short-changed by prejudice and lazy, inflammatory language.


To which Chris responded thusly:

My inflammatory language was NOT lazy. I also don’t see how anything I’ve said was “fear-mongering” in the least. Nor do I think that Democratic policy is usually attacked because there are more female dems than r’s in congress. But then you create an apologist tone over what Pelosi’s post and accomplishments were. It’s not “Look at what she,” It’s “Look at what she let them do.” It’s “her” abject failure to pass meaningful healthcare reform, emissions reform, financial reform, etc. There’s neither fear mongering nor woman bashing going on in this silly silly thread. Nor is there prejudice, except maybe against Afrikaaners, cuz I unabashedly don’t like them. But, Mrs. O’Hare, I take offense to your assertion that my language was at all lazy, and I would wonder why you think that your dear son is friends with anybody but nutjob lefty wackos like myself!

To which I responded:

Holy fuck.
Oh God.
What is this monster I’ve created?

Kate pretty much won the thread with this:

As a native of San Francisco, Washington D.C. – yay Eleanor Homes Norton! – and a woman, I’d say that the constituencies of Pelosi and Obama are generally pretty disappointed, at least those of us that retain a belief in the efficacy of national party politics. I’m fairly confident that’s for reasons that have nothing to do with the color or shape of their genitals.

But I will conclude with this, for the purposes of self-edification:

Dear Mom, You’re right when you say that “political discussion is short-changed by prejudice and lazy, inflammatory language.” You’re wrong when you say that Chris is engaging in such discussion. (Though, to be fair, he’s getting closer to it as you egg him on. And to be clear, you are egging him on). Look, both of y’all motherfuckers: We have two fucking years of random Republican investigations into make-pretend-scandals to look forward to. Why don’t we all just get along? I mean, there’s Sarah Palin 2012 to have nightmares about, after all.


6 responses to “For Lack Of A Better Post (Or, Considering Politics On The Left)

  1. I was right.


  3. I thought about making a joke here rather than a legitimate point, but instead I’m opting for a long-winded diatribe, which goes thusly: I think that any self-aware individuals using intentionally inflammatory vocabulary like retard, nigger, etc. — whether lazily or with the utmost consideration and application — in so-called intelligent discourse (dis-coarse?), political or otherwise, and then combining said vocabulary with ad hominem attacks of a highly uncouth nature (however amusing and/or accurate said attacks might be), have to acknowledge that they are setting themselves up to have their opinion discounted from the outset — all while leaving little high ground from which to launch a counteroffensive (literally, in this case) when their propositions are inevitably objected to. Then again, perhaps this is intentional — though whether at a conscious or subconscious level is debatable — because then any response chastising them for the form, rather than the fact, of their argument fuels the very persecution complex that allows them to likewise preemptively discount the opinions of those who would discount their opinions simply because the language used to share them with the world runs a tad blue at times. Such a strategy would allow sailor-mouthed debaters (or are they “mass debaters,” this being the Internet and all?) to feel smugly superior in their ability to make cogent, rational arguments while still staying true to themselves, and fuck you if you can’t see that. All this when it’s obvious to any clear-eyed third party (ahem) that such profane predilections are merely an escape hatch that the dis-coarsers have given themselves — again, perhaps consciously, perhaps subconsciously — under the guise of, as the kids say, “keeping it real,” because (if I may mix the metaphor), they are afraid to let their argument stand on its own two legs…it’s own two clean, recently shaven, and perhaps cocoa-buttered legs….(Mmmmmm….cocoa butter)…uhhh, however valid and insightful said argument might be.

    Sorry, sort of lost my Balloon Boy of thought at the end there. Anyway, you see what I’m saying. Because I’m concise.

  4. I didn’t read into it all that much. I just watched in horror and tried to get everyone to calm down. In retrospect, it’s absolutely hilarious (to me, not objectively). Hence the post.

    In other words, no Pressing Issues of The Day were resolved. Because it’s the Internet, and nothing ever gets resolved on the Internet. (That’s what guns are for!)

  5. I still regret my one mis-step: forgetting the L in Eleanor HoLmes Norton. What kind of constituent and/or articulate patriot am i? Damn. Also, Tom, I would have appreciated a mention of the fact although I threatened by text to provide Chris with your mom’s phone number, we both ultimately abstained from that level of telecommunicative discourse. You should be proud.

  6. Also, no, Catherine, you weren’t.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s