On my obsession with wingers

September 29th, 2007 9:40 pm · 13 comments

Goldilocks and Pericles, among others, have asked the question:

Why am I so obsessed with wingers?

Simple question, simple answer:

I think wingers are destroying the country.

First, though, we ought to get a clear definition of “winger.” Not all Republicans are wingers - though virtually all wingers are Republican.

“Winger” is, of course, short for right-winger. But what it means is extreme right-winger, far right winger. But, a true hallmark of the winger is that he - and most true wingers are male - don’t perceive themselves to be as extremist as they are. They think of themselves as mainstream; it doesn’t quite occur to them that a broader swath of the country than they could ever hope to represent would fail to see the humor in, say, Ann Coulter’s suggestion that the best way to talk to a liberal is to take a baseball bat upside said liberal’s head.

It’s just a joke, they say. But most people get that, down deep, they’re not really joking.

Indeed, a strain of muted violence runs through winger dialogue. We’ve gotten into this here before - how wingers like to portray their opponents as weak, feminine. They think of themselves as real He-Men, who know that violence is often necessary; for the winger, at least in international affairs, it tends to be the first resort, or the first choice.

But it goes further than that. If you’ve ever wondered why so many winger pundits write books that accuse liberals of treason, it is this subtext of violence. For - what’s the penalty for traitors?

Why - isn’t it death?

That is the sentiment that lies at the heart of winger “thought,” if such a thing can be said to exist. It is indeed a Brownshirt mentality, and for many years in this country - essentially, the entirety of the 1990s - it was permitted to run amok. And make no mistake: That hardcore style was extraordinarily successful; it won wingers and the party which they oh-so-loyally served many battles. The pull-no-punches rhetoric had much to do with the Republican Revolution, really the Republican dominance of politics this last generation. They were tough - and it worked.

But it triggered the inevitable backlash. Now - via outlets like Media Matters, which does for the left what Newsbusters did for the right; via George Soros, who does for the left what Richard Mellon Scaife did for the right - now the left gives as good as it gets.

And it is driving the wingers crazy.

And it has led much of the nation to conclude that the political atmosphere is entirely too partisan. But while that conclusion may have finally come about because the left finally stood up and started punching back, the reality is that this harsh partisan environment is almost entirely the fault of the wingers - of the conservative movement, of Rush and Hannity and Coulter and the like.

But the wingers aren’t merely responsible for this ultra-partisanship. The country has come to identify the war in Iraq with the wingers, and rightly so. This was an ideological war - at least from the view of the movement conservative - and staying in Iraq “until the job is finished” remains an ideological imperative.

If you know your history you may recall the SS units that roamed Berlin as the Russians were closing in, the young fanatics who hung old men and children from the lampposts for daring to display “defeatism” - which meant they refused to take potshots at advancing columns of T34s. There is an absolute historic parallel between that fanaticism and the right-wing fanaticism we see now.

Being fanatics, they are are constitutionally incapable of objectively evaluating the war effort; then, and now as in Iraq. There is a bigger reason why wingers don’t want to “cut and run” from Iraq: It is not merely that “the terrorists will win,” but that they will have lost; it would be an admission that they were wrong.

And wingers are constitutionally incapable of admitting that they have ever been wrong.

And because of this - so long as the wingers are running the show, we are fated to keep making the same mistakes over and over and over again. And it is for this reason that wingers must be opposed. And why I do so here.

Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Netvouz
  • DZone
  • ThisNext
  • MisterWong
  • Wists

  13 comments  Tags: Uncategorized

There are currently 13 comments on this blog post
View Topic | Comment on this blog
Goldilocks
9/29/07
9:56 PM
Whew, what a relief, since I am female and a pacifist, I don’t qualify to be one of Gil’s “wingers”.

Did it ever occur to you, Gil, that being an "extreme" liberal is no different than an "extreme" winger. You are just at the opposite end of the proverbial stick.

Shawn
9/29/07
10:19 PM
QUOTE(Goldilocks @ Sep 29 2007, 09:56 PM) [snapback]324944[/snapback]
Whew, what a relief, since I am female and a pacifist, I don't qualify to be one of Gil's "wingers".

Did it ever occur to you, Gil, that being an "extreme" liberal is no different than an "extreme" winger. You are just at the opposite end of the proverbial stick.




What are the "extreme liberal" views that you would associate with Gil? Does pointing out the idiocy of the extreme right wingers automatically make someone an "extreme liberal" by definition?



Later...Shawn

hahaha
9/29/07
11:21 PM
It is his paycheck pure and simple. If he was not getting paid to do it, nothing would ever be said. We are the suckers who actually read it and give him the attention.
citydweller
9/29/07
11:53 PM
Hardly about his paycheck. Gil blogged extensively, mainly about politics, on blogspot.com and made narry a cent for sharing his views. He only stopped when his masters essentially told him to.

Once some rocket-scientist figured out that Gil's blogging could make money, they allowed him to blog again, but only on LNP's money grubbing site.

You may not like the notion that Gil actually writes what he believes, and does it because of his love for our country, but the evidence tends to point in that direction.
bigstew
9/30/07
8:55 AM
The right is responsible for partisanship, blah blah blah. The right is destroying the country, blah blah blah. The right is like the nazis, blah blah blah.

Same old same old. Irony is not lost on me gil, when you write that wingers think themselves mainstream. Did it ever occur to you that some people can be middle of the road politically, and yet support the war effort.

I think gil get's his inspiration in the mirror, and uses his distasteful accusatory rhetoric to fling self-hating zingers at the other side, all the while knowing his extreme left winger views, along with the people that share them are just as guilty as his "wingers" are.
johnq
9/30/07
12:41 PM
Does it ever occur to anyone that there are really not that many extreme right wingers? And that that there are really not that many extreme left wingers? And that casting dispersions at on or the other is really not productive or helpful?

I get vilified on here because I am am republican. Yet I support gay marriage, and I am pro-choice. These are hardly extreme right wing views, yet any time I say I support something the right is doing, I get labeled a wingnut.

I would certainly agree with those that believe our country is headed in the wrong direction and that we need to make some changes. I would hardly agree that we are on the verge of destruction. One of the great things about this country is that we have always been able to right the ship when things get off course, and I believe we will again this time. Call me crazy, but I believe in thsi country and what it stands for, and I believe in us, and that we will make things better.

I do not believe in the hate filled rhetoric that comes from both sides. Frankly, I believe the name wingnut is thrown around with the same hatred as ni%&*# or f@# and some of the rest of what is widely regarded as hate speech. If usedmeat calls pericles a wingnut before shooting him should he be prosecuted under hate crime laws?

In the end, solutions will come from reasonable people on bith sides of the issues who will work together to reach common goals, not people who call each other and our elected officials names on weblogs.



Now, go Giants! Kick the crap out of the Eagles!
Artie See
9/30/07
2:54 PM
QUOTE
If you know your history you may recall the SS units that roamed Berlin as the Russians were closing in, the young fanatics who hung old men and children from the lampposts for daring to display “defeatism” - which meant they refused to take potshots at advancing columns of T34s. There is an absolute historic parallel between that fanaticism and the right-wing fanaticism we see now.
The parallels between this decade in the U.S. and Germany in the 1930s are both undeniable and terrifying.
citydweller
9/30/07
7:02 PM
Terrifying parallels indeed.

From Why the Germans supported Hitler - Part 1

QUOTE
Hitler’s war on terrorism

One of the most searing events in German history occurred soon after Hitler took office. On February 27, 1933, in what easily could be termed the 9/11 terrorist attack of that time, German terrorists fire-bombed the German parliament building. It shouldn’t surprise anyone that Adolf Hitler, one of the strongest political leaders in history, would declare war on terrorism and ask the German parliament (the Reichstag) to give him temporary emergency powers to fight the terrorists. Passionately claiming that such powers were necessary to protect the freedom and well-being of the German people, Hitler persuaded the German legislators to give him the emergency powers he needed to confront the terrorist crisis. What became known as the Enabling Act allowed Hitler to suspend civil liberties “temporarily,” that is, until the crisis had passed. Not surprisingly, however, the threat of terrorism never subsided and Hitler’s “temporary” emergency powers, which were periodically renewed by the Reichstag, were still in effect when he took his own life some 12 years later.

Is it so surprising that ordinary German citizens were willing to support their government’s suspension of civil liberties in response to the threat of terrorism, especially after the terrorist strike on the Reichstag?


Can you say "Patriot Act" ?
erstwhile
9/30/07
8:05 PM
There are more recent and more local examples. Former President of Peru Alberto Fujimori was extradited back to Peru a couple of weeks ago and it got barely a mention in the US press. Fujimori's "war on terrorism" and Peru's loss of democracy during it are instructive to say the least. I realize that it's somehow considered to be un-American to look to the experiences of other countries for guidance on how to run our own. I suppose that it comes with the territory when history is viewed as something quaint and inconsequential. Anyhow, the story of Peru's war on terrorism is fascinating and it follows the same story arc as all wars on terrorism.



QUOTE


Consider Peru--a democratic, diverse, capitalist country of 26 million people that has confronted terrorism.



In 1980, a handful of armed bandits took over a provincial office in a small Peruvian town. Despite this inauspicious beginning, these guerrillas began a reign of terror. They killed fellow Peruvians for supporting capitalism, democracy and organized religion; for voting in elections; for organizing unions; and simply for being merchants. In exceptionally brutal ways, the terrorists murdered urban and rural people, and the native-born and immigrants, all alike.



Such incidents multiplied rapidly, as did the terrorists' followers. At its peak, the main group of terrorists -The "Shining Path"--was estimated to have about 10,000 members.

...

By the early 1990s, these radical terrorist cells had crippled Peru, controlling more than a third of the country, causing mayhem, and creating an incredible climate of fear.

...

Normal police patrols and the judicial process did not seem to be effective against this terrorist threat. Judges who ruled against accused terrorists would be killed or tortured; police could not effectively combat the Shining Path.



In 1992, then-President Fujimori panicked. In a "self-coup," he closed Congress, shut down the judiciary, and ordered the arrest of a wide range of governmental opponents, most of whom had no terrorist affiliations.



In addition, Fujimori ordered heavy-handed measures to combat the rising wave of bombings, kidnappings and assassinations. Hooded military judges were given the power to pass life sentences on defendants for treason based on secret evidence obtained in equally secret tribunals.





http://www.counterpunch.org/leavitt06142003.html





[/font]

[font="Verdana"]


usedmeat
9/30/07
9:22 PM
QUOTE
The right is like the nazis, blah blah blah
I think city and erst put the lie to this statment.
QUOTE
Did it ever occur to you that some people can be middle of the road politically, and yet support the war effort.
You mean invading Iraq on a lie?
QUOTE
I think gil get's his inspiration in the mirror, and uses his distasteful accusatory rhetoric to fling self-hating zingers at the other side, all the while knowing his extreme left winger views, along with the people that share them are just as guilty as his "wingers" are.


Extreme left wing views? Hmmm.

Single payer health care?

Not invadig a country because the UN inspectors are doing their job?

Not gutting federal agencies to the point where they can't respond to natural disasters?

Not stripping the constutional protections that America has enjoyed in worse times than this?

Pericles
10/1/07
3:34 PM
QUOTE(Artie See @ Sep 30 2007, 02:54 PM) [snapback]325069[/snapback]
The parallels between this decade in the U.S. and Germany in the 1930s are both undeniable and terrifying.


Artie,

It's the Nastradamus syndrome. Take the writings of Natradamus and make a comparison to something in modern history to validate his claims. A psychic does the same thing.

It reminds me of a visit I had to Amarillo Texas. I was sitting in a restaurant listening to old timers talking about the World. One mentioned something about the Bible saying that in the end days, "They will be going to a fro." The other agreed that, "Yes, that's what's going on now, they are going to and fro."

You're saying that the US is doing exactly what Hitler did in Germany in the 1930s and that it's undeniable.

You completely discount our history, our political system, our form of government, our Constitution, our courts, and most everything else that makes us entirely different than 1930 Germany.

If the Patriot Act is Terrifying, then the alternative must be reassuring. That is, allow enemies to plot and plan without interference. Don't allow the CIA and FBI to communicate. Don't listen to terrorist phone calls. The list goes on and on.

The World you live in to believe this nonsense must be filled with conspiracy theories and necessarily relies on the belief that the government has only the worst intentions.

That's Whirlwind's realm. Is it really yours too?

QUOTE(usedmeat @ Sep 30 2007, 09:22 PM) [snapback]325112[/snapback]
I think city and erst put the lie to this statment.You mean invading Iraq on a lie?

Not gutting federal agencies to the point where they can't respond to natural disasters?



What federal agency was gutted? How did that contribute to the response to Katrina?


QUOTE(citydweller @ Sep 30 2007, 07:02 PM) [snapback]325100[/snapback]
Terrifying parallels indeed.

From Why the Germans supported Hitler - Part 1



Can you say "Patriot Act" ?


Can you say, "even liberal Democrats supported it."

Can you say, "A reasonable response to the murder of 3,000 citizens."

Can you say, "You have not lost one right, you only experience some discomfort."

Can you say, "You don't have a reasonable alternative."

Can you say, "It's easy for you to say when you aren't responsible or accountable."


QUOTE(Lancaster Online @ Sep 29 2007, 09:45 PM) [snapback]324943[/snapback]


Post your thoughts and comments about this blog post.


Why am I so obsessed with wingers?

Simple question, simple answer:

I think wingers are destroying the country

It's not just a matter of wingers having a different opinion, in fact, they are destroying the country. That's an amazing statement.

Amazing that such a small group of ultra conservatives weld so much power over everyone else that they are capable of destroying the country. The Democrat majority in Congress, the federal courts, the media, and centrist masses are all incapable of modifying the goals and behavior of this small minority.

It's really in the realm of conspiracy theories. That Jews run the World.

It's not enough to disagree with wingnuts. It's not enough to point the flaws in their logic. It's not enough to offer alternatives. Gil has to make the point that they are destroying the country.

Who is the wingnut?
bigstew
10/1/07
5:39 PM
QUOTE(Pericles @ Oct 1 2007, 03:34 PM) [snapback]325278[/snapback]


Artie,

It's the Nastradamus syndrome. Take the writings of Natradamus and make a comparison to something in modern history to validate his claims. A psychic does the same thing.

It reminds me of a visit I had to Amarillo Texas. I was sitting in a restaurant listening to old timers talking about the World. One mentioned something about the Bible saying that in the end days, "They will be going to a fro." The other agreed that, "Yes, that's what's going on now, they are going to and fro."

You're saying that the US is doing exactly what Hitler did in Germany in the 1930s and that it's undeniable.

You completely discount our history, our political system, our form of government, our Constitution, our courts, and most everything else that makes us entirely different than 1930 Germany.

If the Patriot Act is Terrifying, then the alternative must be reassuring. That is, allow enemies to plot and plan without interference. Don't allow the CIA and FBI to communicate. Don't listen to terrorist phone calls. The list goes on and on.

The World you live in to believe this nonsense must be filled with conspiracy theories and necessarily relies on the belief that the government has only the worst intentions.

That's Whirlwind's realm. Is it really yours too?



What federal agency was gutted? How did that contribute to the response to Katrina?




Can you say, "even liberal Democrats supported it."

Can you say, "A reasonable response to the murder of 3,000 citizens."

Can you say, "You have not lost one right, you only experience some discomfort."

Can you say, "You don't have a reasonable alternative."

Can you say, "It's easy for you to say when you aren't responsible or accountable."




Why am I so obsessed with wingers?

Simple question, simple answer:

I think wingers are destroying the country

It's not just a matter of wingers having a different opinion, in fact, they are destroying the country. That's an amazing statement.

Amazing that such a small group of ultra conservatives weld so much power over everyone else that they are capable of destroying the country. The Democrat majority in Congress, the federal courts, the media, and centrist masses are all incapable of modifying the goals and behavior of this small minority.

It's really in the realm of conspiracy theories. That Jews run the World.

It's not enough to disagree with wingnuts. It's not enough to point the flaws in their logic. It's not enough to offer alternatives. Gil has to make the point that they are destroying the country.

Who is the wingnut?




Nice post!



Amazes me how "wingers" supposedly question antiwar libs patriotism, and how horrible that is. But its fine and dandy to say the right is destroying the country.

Gil, your a hypocrite.

usedmeat
10/2/07
12:33 AM
The stupid, it burns!!!

QUOTE


If the Patriot Act is Terrifying, then the alternative must be reassuring. That is, allow enemies to plot and plan without interference. Don't allow the CIA and FBI to communicate. Don't listen to terrorist phone calls. The list goes on and on.




There is a difference between unrestricted secret eavesdropping on American citizens and keeping records and having judicial oversight. It's not and either or situation you dolt.



QUOTE
You completely discount our history, our political system, our form of government, our Constitution, our courts, and most everything else that makes us entirely different than 1930 Germany.
And Bushco is working day and night to dismantle it. "We don't need no steeking habeus corpus!"

View Topic | Comment on this blog