Feh, Meh, And Bite Me

The NR has "fired" John Derbyshire. Fine but read the post and remember that Derbyshire has made a career out of being a racist, homophobe, and misogynist asshole with the NR's blessing for low these many years. Rich Lowry claims that

Derb is also maddening, outrageous, cranky, and provocative. 

No he isn't; he is a racist, homophobe, misogynist asshole who has benefited from the Rights embrace of racists, homophobes, and misogynists. This firing changes nothing and the Right and the NR in particular need to atone for using their rights to free speech to behave like neanderthals and thugs.

Every "culture warrior" is engaged in the same despicable speech act as is Derbyshire and their supporters ought either embrace Derbyshire or reject a "cultural war" built on lies, vituperation, and vile rhetoric or get out of the "cultural warrior" game. And that includes the vicious scum bags Santorum and Romney.

UPDATE:
Derbyshire defended by Jeff Goldstein.

Lies and Those Who Believe Them

I mentioned more than once that a culture war is impossible without tell endless lies and using vile smears and language. Rush Limbaugh's take on Fluke is a nearly perfect example. Today Rick Santorum insisted the University of California system no longer taught American history. It's not the lie that is so surprising its that he thinks, and he is probably right, that some small number, maybe 27%, will believe it. And what, I ask, does this tell us about a "culture war."

That in addition to vile, lying cretins a "culture war" need credulous, hate-filled louts who are willing to accept the silliest, mean-spirited lies directed at people they have never met.  This is no way to run a country and Santorum ought to be ashamed of himself and, ideally, someone on his side of the "culture war" will make the point that he should not lie with such gay abandon.

Truth In Advertising

Over to the Think Progress, we learn that

Santorum is under fire from Republicans for suggesting that the GOP might as well re-elect Obama if they nominate Romney. He lashed out at a New York Times reporter this weekend for asking about the issue, calling the question “bullshit.”

Except, of course, that's a gross distortion of the events under consideration. Here's a video:



Santorum, who is both a cad and bounder as well as a nutbar, is in fact making the case that as a standard bearer against Obama Romney is the worst Republican in the country.

Whats actually interesting here is that ranting maniacal manner in which Santorum speaks both during the speech and in his interaction with the reporter. This barely suppressed rage and clear desire to either scream at or punch people with whom he is speaking is an aspect of Santorum's persona that I have seen for quite a while. Why, I wonder, do the press forward an erroneous narrative when the actual one seems to be much more interesting.

Rick Santorum is an angry little twit.

Crazy Talk

Ross Douthat has a Op Ed up in which he "argues" that Republican voters aren't either crazy but rather just being good citizens as they desperately seek someone who isn't Mitt Romney. This might be true were it not for the fact that the Republican candidates have been spewing lies about Obama, crazy talk about Iran's invasion and contraception. On the whole, the primary has been a vile and horrid affair in which the candidates are willing to pander to the 27 percent. The voters are crazy and the candidates either crazy or uninterested in governance and truth.

Perverts

This is the kind of interspecies rom-com future from which brave truth telling nut case Rick Santorum is trying to save us:

You Gotta Fight For Your Right to Party

Rick Santorum on contraception;

One of the things I will talk about that no President has talked about before is I think the dangers of contraception in this country, the whole sexual libertine idea. Many in the Christian faith have said, “Well, that’s okay. Contraception’s okay.”
It’s not okay because it’s a license to do things in the sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be. They’re supposed to be within marriage, they are supposed to be for purposes that are, yes, conjugal, but also [inaudible], but also procreative. That’s the perfect way that a sexual union should happen. We take any part of that out, we diminish the act. And if you can take one part out that’s not for purposes of procreation, that’s not one of the reasons, then you diminish this very special bond between men and women, so why can’t you take other parts of that out? And all of a sudden, it becomes deconstructed to the point where it’s simply pleasure. And that’s certainly a part of it—and it’s an important part of it, don’t get me wrong—but there’s a lot of things we do for pleasure, and this is special, and it needs to be seen as special.
Again, I know most Presidents don’t talk about those things, and maybe people don’t want us to talk about those things, but I think it’s important that you are who you are. I’m not running for preacher. I’m not running for pastor, but these are important public policy issues. These how profound impact on the health of our society.

He's nuts and so are they. Outside of people who  have had sex with Santorum and my great aunt Jane is there anyone who thinks that in the "sexual realm," oh crumulent phrase, sex is for the making of babies and naught else? Where, one wonders, does this thou shalt not come from? 

Is Santorum actually running to rid the world of pleasure? What next all food eaten for reasons other than the satisfaction of immediate bodily needs is outlawed as both an affront to God and on public policy grounds. He might be the only president brave enough to shed light on the specific and general dangers of pleasure and its role in the ending American exceptionalism, which is Santorum's mind seems to mean free to do everything but enjoy yourself.

Unfortunately

I've lost track of where this picture came from but it suggests one of the larger problems confronting the  sociopathic robots and defenders of western civilization populating the ranks of the GOP's presidential hopefuls.

Republicans in Disarray

Flush from his recent victory of the sociopathic robot Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum makes with the wisecracks about Romney's wealth. Newt Gingrich, apparently stung because Romeny's fellow plutocrats spent millions making sure everyone remembers Gingrich's record of double-dealing, personal and professional crapulence and asshatery, had his plutocratic pals put out a movie with this for a trailer



I think it's great that this clowns are decrying wealth and neoliberalism; I await Romney's, who calls their kid Willard?, measured and reasonable response.

What I don't get is how they think they can attack Romney who represents decades of Republican, conservative, and neoliberal policies' successes and woe the crazed hordes they need to win the primaries or how they suddenly pivot back to hating socialism, which mean moderate neoliberalism.