When Exactly Did We Become Pussies?

Understand that when I say "we", I mean "we Republicans". That's because I still consider myself a Republican. Although I don't consider myself a pussy. Oh sure, I'm a disenchanted, dispirited, and disgusted Republican, but in my heart and soul, I'm still a fucking Republican.

Which I'm sure a lot of you whiny little Republican pussies won't believe. I mean, I don't toe the line… How can I be a real Republican? I've noticed George Bush is a moron. I've noticed that the Party, given six years of total dominance, accomplished absolutely nothing of consequence (at least of a positive nature, that is). And most unforgivable of all, I've had the extremely bad taste to actually mention such things on my blog…

Heaven for-fend! How could I do that and still be a Republican? How could I say those things and still be One of the Fold? You know, a real Republican…

What I want to know is this: When did Republicans become so terrified of discussion and debate? When did Republicans become too stupid to stake out a position and argue for it with a bit of logic and conviction to the unconverted? When did the Republican Party decide there could only be *one* truly Republican position on any and all issues? When exactly did this happen?

You certainly can't argue it hasn't happened, can you? Look at the way all the real Republicans are up in arms over the Democratic plants at last week's debate. What exactly is the Big Deal? Did I miss something…? Like, perhaps, a question from any one of those plants that might not actually be posed by a real, live U.S. citizen during a real, live campaign?

Are we Republicans so overwhelmed by the real world that we can't cope with half a dozen or so half-assed questions from half a dozen half-assed Democratic operatives?

Is it the candidates? Are they all so completely brain-dead that they can't field a simple question about gays in the military or the outsourcing of manufacturing jobs? Does everything have to be preprogrammed to the point that all each has to do is say they distrust foreigners, hate the tax system, want secure borders, and will keep the troops in Iraq to keep real Republicans happy? What sort of questions was everyone expecting to be asked? What were the "correct" questions supposed to be, eh? Were they questions like these…

"Whadderu gonna do 'bout them Meskins?"
[clap, clap, clap… thunderous applause]
"Whadderu gonna do 'bout them Moose-limbs?"
[clap, clap, clap… thunderous applause]
"Whadderu gonna do 'bout them fags?"
[clap, clap, clap… thunderous applause]

Is that the way the evening was supposed to go?

Isn't it bad enough that the Republican/Conservative media, including the Republican/Conservative blogosphere, has the sort of vibrant intellectual activity one normally associates with a box of dead crabs? Do the candidate debates, which are badly designed enough in and of themselves, have to become yet another self-serving, self-censoring echo-chamber populated by mouth-breathing yes-men? Is there some sort of overriding advantage to pretending everything in Republicanland is really keen when it is fairly obvious everything in Republicanland isn't really keen?

Personally, I'd like to see all the Republican candidates get put through the wringer all the more. It might just keep us from choosing another George W. Bush… Or are all the real Republicans going to ignore to imbecility of Annapolis, as they have ignored the imbecility of just everything everything else associated with this administration, and try to sell undecided voters that G.W. is a misunderstood genius who will be proved right in the end?

Or is the strategy just to sit around and pray that this election's Democratic candidate is as stupid as either Al Gore or John Kerry?

And what is it with the Republican/Conservative side of the blogosphere? Anyone who watched her host The Factor can readily understand why Michelle Malkin would be mortified by the prospect of having to think on her feet, but what explains the all the whining from the rest of the crew? This is the reaction we get from the best and the brightest? Since when are the prissy foot-stompings of self-righteous prigs like Jason Coleman supposed to set the tone for bloggers who regularly congratulate themselves for their bravery in continuing to support the Iraq War? Did it ever occur to anyone that perhaps a better approach to getting all hissy might just be to stand up, stick out your jaw and say something like this:

"Is that the best you assholes can do? I can answer those questions with half my brain tied behind my back. You wanna play with me? Come on, let's fucking play!"

You know, it's bad enough that we've backed a president who couldn't find his ass with two hands and a mirror. It's bad enough that given a window of six full fuckin' years we couldn't pass meaningful Social Security, tax, budget or immigration reform. It's bad enough that we spent money like a bunch of drunken Democrats on boondoggles and pork. And it's bad enough that we took corruption to heights that would embarrass Boss Tweed. Or even Ted Kennedy. What we do not need to do now is to compound the felony by pretending that none of this evil shit actually happened.

Honest.

More importantly, what we do not need to do is spend our time expressing contempt for the sort of people the Democrats brought to that debate. As an aside to perpetual dimwit Michelle Malkin: Howling that a retired military man should be shut out because he isn't one of us might appear a bit, well, strange... especially after you spent August excoriating Jon Soltz for the stunt he pulled at YearlyKOS. Or have you forgotten that? Isn't there just a wee bit of a chance that such a position on your part might seem hypocritical to, say, an undecided voter.

And while we're on the subject of undecided voters, might it not also occur at least some of them to ask a few simple, yet potentially devestating, questions of my crybaby collegues? Questions such as...

"Why are they so afraid of this sort of questioning?"
"Why are they so hellbent on avoiding any discussion of their position on this issue?"
"What are they trying to hide?"

Beyond that, did anyone other than ol' Dennis happen to notice that the best question of the evening came from David McMillan, a staunch John Edwards supporter? If you missed it, here it is…

That's a good, fair, and very tough question. And it's open-ended enough to create the possibility of generating very revealing answers. It's exactly the sort of question a candidate cannot fully prepare for. It's the sort of question that a candidate, if he isn't sharp, could get himself into a shitload of trouble over. I don't know about you, but before I hand the keys to the nation over to some boob for a full four years, I'd like to know he's bright enough to navigate that sort of question. If he isn't, I'd bet he isn't going to have much luck solving immigration, health care or the global war on terror. But then again, that's just me making assumptions…

And while we're at, just what about David's question was actually going to help John Edwards? Or Hillary Clinton? Or Barak Obama? That's the question I'd like to ask the pussies…. Because I can assure you all, if I'd been able to ask a question at that debate, it sure-as-shit would have tougher than anything David McMillan or any of the other Democrats actually asked…

And where would that have left Michelle, Jason and the rest of the prissy folk? Having to whine that I wasn't a real Republican, that's where. Boo-hoo.

Talk about pathetic.

You know what? It really is time for Republicans and Conservatives to sit down, shut up and take stock of the situation as it actually is...

Republicans...

It's time to get back to Republicanism of O'Rourke!

It's time to get back to the Conservatism of Friedman!

It's time to get back to thinking and debating and challenging and causing trouble!

It's time to get back to innovating and problem solving!

Republicans of all stripes, un-unite!

You have nothing to lose but your whiners, prigs and pussies!

Remember this: Ronald Reagan was a trouble maker. He was a trouble maker to the complacent, self-absorbed and completely brain-dead country club Republican ruling caste of his day. He displaced those men, and accomplished what he accomplished, because he wasn't afraid to stick out his jaw and say, Give me your best shot. I can take it. We need to get back to that. And we need to do it yesterday.

Addendum: I wasn't going to mention this, but what the fuck, this guy really annoyed me with his whiny pussy act.

Here's a sample of what's wrong with today's version of a "Republican". The guy's name is Jason Coleman. I'd never heard of him before last week, when Michelle Malkin gave him an approving link. That was enough, in and of itself, to alert me that I was gonna meet a serious dimwit...

Quoth Jason:

Ok, this is getting ridiculous, yet another Democrat posing as a Republican for the CNN/YouTube debate.

This one is David McMillan, an aspiring TV writer in California, AND, a Bush and Rove hatin', John Edwards fan, who asked why the Republican party doesn't attract more African-Americans to it's side.

I'm beginning to wonder, did CNN try to Vet these questions at all???? I mean, come on people, all you had to do was look at his YouTube page which features multiple videos about John Edwards, more than a couple of VERY tasteless and discriminatory videos featuring the "Blind Black Republican" (of course the "it's just satire" excuse would probably be put in play here by defenders, but I'm sure that a satirical video featuring the Deaf Dominican Democrat would be villified by libs far and wide). Not satisfied with David's video collection as proof of his liberal/democrat bona fides? Ok, then check out his blog, which is light on links but does feature as it's sole blogger on his blogroll, that most famous of sock-puppeteers, Glen Greenwald.

Christ, what a pussy.

There is absolutely nothing "tasteless and discriminatory" about McMillan's Prescott Ellison (the Blind Black Republican). It's a parody, and a pretty good one. If Campbell had spent a bit more time actually looking at some of the other parodies McMillan had done - instead of looking for all the pro-Edwards stuff to snivel about - he'd have found some characters that do a pretty good job of parodying Leftists and African-Americans. For example, he has a character named Professor Clifton East, who is a dead-on (and completely hilarious) parody of Cornell West. Of course, Jason Coleman would have to actually know who Cornell West was to get it, so that could explain the problem right there. McMillan also has a character named Myron Angelou, who is supposed to be Maya Angelou's cousin, and who provides us with a perfect parody of Angelou's poetry. Of course, Coleman would have to have read a bit to have understood that as well...

Here's one of McMillan's Prescott Ellison videos:

Here's a couple of his Prof. Clifton East videos:

Here's his Myron Angelou video:

Now, name me one Republican blogger that's done anything that funny on video...

And by that I mean intentionally funny, so don't bother mentioning any of the "Roger Simon interviews so-and-so." videos over at Pajamas Media.

Can't name any, can you?

Should you want that I put up Malkin's "Defeatocrats' Cheer" video? The one where she has an epileptic fit in a cheerleader's uniform? Or maybe one of Pammycakes' videos? Eh? How about the one where she raps?

So you tell me, just what does Jason Coleman have to whine about? The fact that CNN didn't show Pammycakes asking a question while lounging in a pool wearing an itsy-bitsy, teeny-weeny, yellow polka-dot bikini?

Or what?

Finally, go to YouTube and search "David McMillan". See much of an attempt on his part to disguise his leanings? Think that perhaps, just perhaps, David took it for granted that anyone with an room-temperature I.Q., including Michelle Malkin, could readily discover his political leanings?

Oy.

We Republicans are such pussies these days.

Comments

[DonnieDarko]

The only thing I know for sure is that Hillary has larger huevos than any of the Republicans or her husband. God I hope she isn't the next president.

[Fec]

I was gonna pick a fight with one of the local mouth breathers this morning and end it all. Then I read this post...

[markg8]

Mmmmmm dead crabs...makes me want to go to Chickie and Petes.

[evariste]

I just watched some MTV meet-da-yoof thing, with college students asking John McCain questions, and it made me despair for the future. And want to vomit. Does everyone think only in cliches these days? They had a bunch of moron kids demand a plan from McCain for global warming, and they had them all shout "what's your plan" together after one of them read their collective question, like some kind of extra-idiotic episode of Captain Planet. And all the kids were asking "what's in it for me" type questions. One girl wanted to know if McCain would support stem cell research so her diabetes could be cured. Another girl wanted to know what McCain would do for her learning disability, and he replied that he didn't know much about it but his wife is a special ed teacher, but he guarantees there will be "full funding". Hey, does anyone care about the good of the nation as a whole or are we just going to ask questions like "my welfare check is late. Will you yell at the post office for me?" I hope all those kids die in a fire. I don't understand why McCain didn't snap and bite their heads off. Instead he submitted to this indignity and told lame jokes.

[DonnieDarko]

They are a long way from "Ask not what your country can do for you...." aren't they?

[markg8]

Fellas you've got a post here from Dennis deriding his own Republican party for turning into "pussies" because they don't want to answer hard questions and then you go and emphasize his point again by complaining about the questions McCain had to answer. The vast majority of legit climate scientists think global warming is quickly getting precipitately worse. Seeing as the current president has wasted 7 years doing nothing it stands to reason kids might want to know what a possible future president might do.

[PeterUK]

"The vast majority of legit climate scientists think global warming is quickly getting precipitately worse."

As opposed to slowly getting precipitately worse.

[Doug Williams]

Yes indeed. That was what I thought Dennis was talking about... Global Warming. *smacks head*

See kids, this is why no matter how mind-bogglingly idiotic the Republican Party gets - and I think we're just beginning to probe those depths - disaffected Republicans do not equal left-wingers, Democrats, or God forbid, blog commenters like DonnieDarko. We'd rather be cranky and unliked than drinkers of the kool-aid across the aisle. In fact... we kind of LIKE being cranky and unliked. Also we prefer bourbon to kool-aid and silently pray for MORE Global Warming as we shovel the snow from our godforsaken midwestern driveways (had we the courage of our convictions we'd all be driving Hummers, but truth be told, we're too cheap to contribute like that to The Cause until gas prices drop again).

[Doug Williams]

Aww crap. I made fun of DonnieDarko when I meant to make fun of markg8. It was the bourbon speaking. To the global warming. In a Hummer. Anyway, sorry Donnie.

[Marcus]

"Whadderu gonna do 'bout them Meskins?"
"Whadderu gonna do 'bout them Moose-limbs?"
"Whadderu gonna do 'bout them fags?"

Yer on a mathafuckin role, thanks for the best laugh of the day.

To answer David McMillan's question: As much as blacks don't like Meskins, Moose-limbs, and fags they know0 the darker the color the deeper the fear in tightie whitey.

[David N. Scott]

My thought is that somewhere along the way Repblicans decided it was a good way to win arguments... trying to fight fire with fire. 'We''re victims and minories too!'

[Terrye]

Dennis:

I don't like Roger Simon a lot myself. I don't want to go to war with Iran. I don't want to round up all the Mexicans, but dammit, Bush is not a moron. That kind of crap is every bit as sophomoric as anything Malkin ever had to say. In fact it sounds like something Malkin would say.

[markg8]

Let's put it this way Terrye, Bush isn't a moron he just plays one on TV.

[Tim Worstall]

"It's time to get back to Republicanism of O'Rourke!

It's time to get back to the Conservatism of Friedman! "

The only problem with that is that Friedman wasn't a Conservative: he was a liberal.* And the only part of Republicanism that O'Rourke has ever expressed affection for is its liberalism.

So what we all ought to be trying to attain is liberalism, as they argued for.

* Yes, I know, the Brit and classical meaning of "liberal", as in get that fucking government out of my damn face, except in those very few areas where it has to stick its slimy damn arse into my personal space.