Pissing In The Wind
So it has been brought to my attention that I've been slacking on my postings. Hell, I knew that -- I just wasn't sure if anyone cared. I was testing y'all. So apparently, people DO read this thing. One or two of them, anyway. I was hoping to hear from Dubya himself; I was hoping he read this thing Religiously (grin) and was disappointed that I hadn't written anything nasty about him in days. Actually, I haven't written anything TRULY nasty about him at ALL yet; I've been afraid of disappearing without a trace like they used to do in El Salvador back when Dub's dad (and his wacky cohorts) were running things. Back in the Good Old Days, something I never thought I'd call that now-halcyon era before that rape of the Constitution known as The Patriot Act reared its ugly opportunistic paranoid head.
So obviously, I'm not a Conservative. Or a 'Neo-Con' -- what does that mean, anyway? I mean, I know what 'Ex-Con' means, as well as 'Con-Artist' and 'Con-Job'. But to me, a 'Neo-Con' looks pretty much just like the rest of the Cons out there. In fact, it seems like an oxymoron to me -- how can people who basically want to return to the Stone Age describe themselves as 'Neo' anything? Huh? Answer me THAT?
OK, maybe Neo-lithic. Or Neo-Anderthal. But Neo-Conservative? Nah, you're the same old conservatives as far as I can tell. The people who supposedly want less governmental interference in their lives, so they make everything illegal. Duh.
Sorry, boneheads, but do you think any of the shit you take for granted as part of your so-called 'freedom' wasn't fought against tooth-and-nail by 'conservatives' throughout the ages? Do you think it was 'conservatives' who brought us child labor laws or food safety laws or women's suffrage (that's the right to vote, not wife-beating, for all you memory-challenged NeoCon geniuses out there)? Nope. According to 'conservatives', every major step forward our culture has made was going to bring about The End Of The World. Ending slavery was going to destroy the economy. 'Letting' homosexuals get married is going to bring the Wrath Of God upon us or whatever. It's always the same shit: I mean, look up 'conservative' in the dictionary. It means, essentially, RESISTANT TO CHANGE. And since history shows us that change is inevitable, that sorta means you're all pissing in the wind, doesn't it?
I DO have to give Modern Konservative Korporate Amerika props (as the kids say these days) for inventing two things the world has NEVER seen before:
1) Fat poor people
Yes, thanks to the fast-so-called-food industry, we have people who weigh 280 pounds and yet are dying of malnutrition. All throughout the entire history of the planet, a sure sign of poverty was somebody whose skeleton you could actually see through their skin. Nowadays, at least in THIS country, that's only the rich models we're supposed to aspire to look like. The people who are truly dirt-poor tend to be big fat pigs, living on piles of 59-cent mad-cow-burgers. What a brave new world, indeed.
2) The most unlikely coalition ever assembled -- that's right, the surreal teaming-up of the fat-cat corporate carpetbaggers and the blue-collar peasantry they exploit. Yep, traditionally there has been enmity between those groups, with the former laughing at the latter all the way to the bank. But now the hayseed-chewing undereducated (yet still underpaid) millworker is in bed with the guy who owns the guy who owns the guy who owns the tax shelter that owns the mill. And the guy who owns the guy is laughing even louder and harder than ever, and all the workers are apparently too busy chewing on their burgers to hear the laughter. Or, worse yet, they're laughing right along with them, too stupid to know what's so damn funny.
And by the way, Bush Junior seems adamantly against (and obsessed with) gay marriage for some unknown but suspicious reason, yet he has no problem giving it to all of us up the ass on a daily basis -- so apparently he has NO problem with gay sex itself. Just not in the context of marriage. Of course, this conflicts with his absurd and anachronistic position on teaching abstinence (which, if it were effective, would have undoubtedly shown some sort of scientific success after all the centuries it has been imposed by The Church -- but people used to fuck each other like crazy when the penalty was a fiery death, so what makes Bi-Curious George think it's gonna work now?) Anyway, I digress. My point is this: if two guys (or grrls) want to get married, that's apparently bad. On the other hand, sex itself is bad -- gay or straight -- unless you're married. And then only for procreation, because we all know that increasing the world's dwindling population is a Biblical imperative. And gays can't technically procreate, so what's the point? So we should stop them at all costs. Why? Because, um, well, God says so. But if we all bend over for Dubya, to whom none of us except LauraBot is married, that's apparently good. That's in the Bible too, I guess. OK, so I guess what The Shrub is trying to say is, "Your ass is mine, and nobody else's. But if you have a vagina, you should share it with your husband once in awhile, but only for the glory of Jesus. Amen."
But um, anyway. Bueller?
So obviously, I'm not a Conservative. Or a 'Neo-Con' -- what does that mean, anyway? I mean, I know what 'Ex-Con' means, as well as 'Con-Artist' and 'Con-Job'. But to me, a 'Neo-Con' looks pretty much just like the rest of the Cons out there. In fact, it seems like an oxymoron to me -- how can people who basically want to return to the Stone Age describe themselves as 'Neo' anything? Huh? Answer me THAT?
OK, maybe Neo-lithic. Or Neo-Anderthal. But Neo-Conservative? Nah, you're the same old conservatives as far as I can tell. The people who supposedly want less governmental interference in their lives, so they make everything illegal. Duh.
Sorry, boneheads, but do you think any of the shit you take for granted as part of your so-called 'freedom' wasn't fought against tooth-and-nail by 'conservatives' throughout the ages? Do you think it was 'conservatives' who brought us child labor laws or food safety laws or women's suffrage (that's the right to vote, not wife-beating, for all you memory-challenged NeoCon geniuses out there)? Nope. According to 'conservatives', every major step forward our culture has made was going to bring about The End Of The World. Ending slavery was going to destroy the economy. 'Letting' homosexuals get married is going to bring the Wrath Of God upon us or whatever. It's always the same shit: I mean, look up 'conservative' in the dictionary. It means, essentially, RESISTANT TO CHANGE. And since history shows us that change is inevitable, that sorta means you're all pissing in the wind, doesn't it?
I DO have to give Modern Konservative Korporate Amerika props (as the kids say these days) for inventing two things the world has NEVER seen before:
1) Fat poor people
Yes, thanks to the fast-so-called-food industry, we have people who weigh 280 pounds and yet are dying of malnutrition. All throughout the entire history of the planet, a sure sign of poverty was somebody whose skeleton you could actually see through their skin. Nowadays, at least in THIS country, that's only the rich models we're supposed to aspire to look like. The people who are truly dirt-poor tend to be big fat pigs, living on piles of 59-cent mad-cow-burgers. What a brave new world, indeed.
2) The most unlikely coalition ever assembled -- that's right, the surreal teaming-up of the fat-cat corporate carpetbaggers and the blue-collar peasantry they exploit. Yep, traditionally there has been enmity between those groups, with the former laughing at the latter all the way to the bank. But now the hayseed-chewing undereducated (yet still underpaid) millworker is in bed with the guy who owns the guy who owns the guy who owns the tax shelter that owns the mill. And the guy who owns the guy is laughing even louder and harder than ever, and all the workers are apparently too busy chewing on their burgers to hear the laughter. Or, worse yet, they're laughing right along with them, too stupid to know what's so damn funny.
And by the way, Bush Junior seems adamantly against (and obsessed with) gay marriage for some unknown but suspicious reason, yet he has no problem giving it to all of us up the ass on a daily basis -- so apparently he has NO problem with gay sex itself. Just not in the context of marriage. Of course, this conflicts with his absurd and anachronistic position on teaching abstinence (which, if it were effective, would have undoubtedly shown some sort of scientific success after all the centuries it has been imposed by The Church -- but people used to fuck each other like crazy when the penalty was a fiery death, so what makes Bi-Curious George think it's gonna work now?) Anyway, I digress. My point is this: if two guys (or grrls) want to get married, that's apparently bad. On the other hand, sex itself is bad -- gay or straight -- unless you're married. And then only for procreation, because we all know that increasing the world's dwindling population is a Biblical imperative. And gays can't technically procreate, so what's the point? So we should stop them at all costs. Why? Because, um, well, God says so. But if we all bend over for Dubya, to whom none of us except LauraBot is married, that's apparently good. That's in the Bible too, I guess. OK, so I guess what The Shrub is trying to say is, "Your ass is mine, and nobody else's. But if you have a vagina, you should share it with your husband once in awhile, but only for the glory of Jesus. Amen."
But um, anyway. Bueller?
posted by brioSphere at 4:48 PM
<< Home