Their humor is very telling

While I have a desire and perhaps even fantasies of my political enemies being prosecuted for breaking existing law this (NSFW) is a really messed up way to think of your opponents. There are over 600 comments praising it. I almost always think of my opponents getting a fair trial, their sentences matching their crimes, and respecting their right to not be subject to cruel and unusual punishments.

What these people are doing is way beyond resorting to Markley’s Law when we inform anti-gun people about SCOTUS decisions. But it’s of the same mindset. They degrade, insult, and attempt to humiliate those who oppose them.

These people think sexual domination and degradation is a form of humor. Would they think it funny if one of their political commentators were subject to this sort of “humor”?

I find it difficult to imagine this is anything other than a form of “othering” in preparation for making their fantasies come true. This should give more than enough reason to fight for your Second Amendment rights. These people would torture and murder you if they got the chance.


26 thoughts on “Their humor is very telling

  1. “These people think sexual domination and degradation is a form of humor.”

    I know this is a bit of an “A is B, but B is not always A” situation, but it … perturbs… me that the very same people who seem to believe that a woman can be raped without even being touched would consider fantasizing about something akin to rape to be “humor”.

    Even the rationalization of “It’s ok when WE do it” doesn’t seem enough to excuse that…

    • Threat? HaHa. These people are mentally ill. Getting mad at them for things like this, is like getting mad at the dog when he eats his poop.

  2. The writing is brilliant, creative and professional. No editing required. No surprise, it was written by someone in LA because there are so many professional “creatives” here.

    You may not like it because it doesn’t match your core beliefs, but the writing is brilliant.

    • So by your logic, you’d have no problem with me writing a scat and abuse-filled story called “The Degradation of ubu52”, just so long as it was written brilliantly?

      • I’m not exactly a public figure, but, yeah.

        That person has a very large vocabulary and is a prolific writer. (Google his name.) It’s pretty obvious he’s a pro scriptwriter.

        On the other hand, everything I’m reading of his on the Internet isn’t quite up to that standard — but that particular piece was very well written.

        • I’m sure he’ll end up creating the greatest scat porn of all time. Another great progressive mind.

    • How about a followup called ‘The Breaking of Dianne Feinstein’?

      This isn’t about core beliefs, you cheap hypocrite. It’s about how leftists snottily proclaim their love for women’s rights yet have no problem denigrating and degrading women who don’t toe their political line.

    • ubu52, You have left 1,367 comments here on my blog before this one. Not one of those gave me any cause to be angry with you or think more ill of you than you might be trolling. This comment changes everything.

      I read the comment just before coming home from dinner and video with my son. As soon as I walked in the door Barb asked, “What’s wrong?” I told her and we talked about it for a while.

      Last night and this morning I struggled to find the words to use to respond to you and failed be able to articulate thoughts and feelings in a way I thought you would be able to understand. This is because if your understanding of what has transpired so far resulted in you offering nothing other than praise for this person’s writing I don’t think anything I could say could give you a glimmer of the understanding I think is required.

      Therefore, you need to figure this out on your own. I’m not going to help you because I think you may be beyond help.

      • I never said this was my type of humor either. I did say the writing was brilliant. It’s very well written in terns of verbs, nouns, adjectives, adverbs, flow, structure, etc. Look at his last paragraph and look at the construction of a simple conversation. Look at his word choices. Instead of writing “she replied,” it’s “she shot back.”

        Look. Tam is a great writer too. She writes about things I have no interest in and her style of writing is quite different from this author’s, but she is a good writer. (She’s considerably more flowery in her writing than he is.)

        Anyway, several of those 600+ comments are about the actual writing — but unless you are like me and appreciate literary things, you probably wouldn’t notice that.

    • And right there you sum up a MAJOR difference between modern conservatives and modern progressives. Conservatives care about the principles, ideas, and content of what is said. Progressives care about the style in which the words are delivered. In other words, the “color of the skin, not the content of the character.” Progressives are the ones that would follow mass murders because they are eloquent, and elected Obama for his soaring rhetoric, while shouting down an inarticulate monk trying to help the homeless without a permit. You think Christmas is about presents.
      You have a VERY deep mental hole to dig yourself out of.

      • A key flaw in progressive thought also seems to be the lack of fallibility, the consideration that you could be wrong.

        Not that I argue with anything else you said. I once referred to Obama as the American Idol president.

  3. again, and again, and again i say it. who cares?

    as pamela geller has noted many times, if you are catching flak you are over the target.

    take names. when the time comes, exact retribution.

    joe, you keep persisting in believing that these people are interested in engaging in dialog, and in learning and listening, and agreeing upon incontrovertible facts. they are not. they are interested only in mobilizing the troops, inciting them to wrath, and preparing for battle.

    time to do the same this side. that’s all there is to it.

    as john locke, and sir william blackstone noted, let the matter be tried to god. praise the lord, pass the ammunition, and see who is the last man standing.

    john jay

    • While I agree with preparing for what I’m increasingly inclined to believe is some very dark times I will not be disengaging and stopping the dialog. I was talking with my son last night about this some. Neither of us donated any money to a political party this year like we did last year. Our time and money is going into preparation for “rough times”.

      I won’t “exact retribution”. I’ll be defending innocent life and encouraging the prosecution of criminals. I expect there will be innocents and criminals on nearly every side of the political divisions in this country.

  4. Those who agreed with that piece of badly written Porn show me that Age, Education and Social Status are no criteria when judging whether one is a Swine or not.

    In other words, ubu52, Lipstick on a Pig doesn’t change it into Marilyn Monroe.

    • I’m sure that ubu would enter a museum of Nazi artifacts and comment on the delicacy with which the lampshades had been stitched…..

  5. Is it just me or is the lack of Social Justice Warrior activity against this “rape culture activity” an example of the most blatant hypocrisy?

    Evidently only “progressive women” deserve to be free of rape? Considering the treatment other conservative women have received from the left this seems to be the case.

    The only way this isn’t blatant hypocrisy is if the Left has denied even basic humanity to the Right. So that conservatives aren’t human, and thus not deserving of human rights. Which makes sense considering how many, “we’ll have the police round you all up and kill you” comments have been thrown at “gun nuts” over the years.

    Progressives, still looking to blame someone else and implement their final solution.

    • And this is how things go down a very dark road. As the header at Shenandoah says, I always wondered what Germany in the 20s and 30s was like, but I never expected to live it.

  6. It’s a game. The idea is to be mean and insulting and if the other side takes it then you win because you successfully insulted your opponents.

    If the other side responds with revulsion then your side can mock them for being humorless prudes, puritans, overreacting whiners and/or unsophisticated.

    If the other side responds in kind then your team can respond that that was beyond the pale, disproportionate, hurtful, hateful, and crude all while minimizing the original as simply harmless satire or even pretending there was no provocation.

    The key is to have a set of people who find their principles less important than their team affiliation. The downside of the game is that this often leads to overreach and people who don’t see the importance of team identity will see the naked hypocrisy.

  7. Pingback: Quote of the day—Defens | The View From North Central Idaho

  8. As I have said before, modern leftism aka progressivism, has abandoned ideas almost entirely. People on the Left cannot articulate specific policy that they stand for. Whether because their policy proposals are such failures, or just their inability to compile proposals.

    What has substituted for actual ideology is that the Left has devolved to compiling lists of people to hate. This is therefore as sophisticated a political thought as you are going to get from them.

  9. Pingback: Quote of the day—AM | The View From North Central Idaho

  10. This phenomenon could be very well defined with one word;


    Though there are varying degrees of sophistication and effort put into it, “Mapplethorping”, if I may coin a term, is very common. It starts with hatred of a particular group, and sets out to form the maximum insult to that group. When the cries of “foul” arise (as anticipated- they play right into the hands of Mapplethorper), the response is some version of “I’m sorry if some people are too stupid to understand the underlying message and artistic nuances…” Thus the cries of foul play are to be seen as proof that the target group is every bit as dumb, blind, backward, narrow-minded and hateful as the attacker believes.

    It’s a silly game of adolescents.

    The feces-throwing monkey, in human form, is Mapplethorping his victim. The insult is an end unto itself, it’s mere implementation is a victory, and your reaction is proof of its justification. If it garners national attention, or makes money, so much the better.

    I once saw a homeless, dirty bum pick up an old toothbrush off the street in Seattle. He then, mockingly and jeeringly, pretended to brush his teeth at me, looking me in the eye as though he were making a point about something profound. When he failed to get a reaction out of me, he threw the toothbrush at me after I passed him. Thus was his victory in his protest against “the system” that had “done him so wrong”. If he’d been a photographer with ties to major publishers with tax-payers’ money, he’d have been another Mapplethorpe.

    If you can’t appreciate the quality of the writing, the clever nuance, and the over-arching significance relative to the social and economic disparities among the global family, then it only goes to prove beyond all doubt that you are in fact the bigoted, stupid, simpleton-bumpkin-lock-step-robot-cousin-humper with a small penis that the left has always said you were, in spite of your education or professional status which are no more than covers for your sickness. It is a victory.

  11. Oh, so many ways to take this.

    Ann has a VERY dead pan style of delivery for her own little jokes…

    “We need somebody to put rat poisoning in Justice Stevens’ creme brulee. That’s just a joke, for you in the media.”

    “We need to execute people like (John Walker Lindh) in order to physically intimidate liberals.”

    “We should invade their countries, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity.”

    “I think the government should be spying on all Arabs, engaging in torture as a televised spectator sport, dropping daisy cutters wantonly throughout the Middle East and sending liberals to Guantanamo.”

    She swims with other (rather inept) sharks for a very nice paycheck, and has her own teeth. Don’t sweat it, Joe.

    And if you look at her bio, the years of following the Grateful Dead, etc.? Followed by her taking up the vocation of a cartoon caricature grade far right polemicist. I suspect she considers any such free publicity her work elicits as a “gimmee” and laughs all the way to the bank, then writes fat checks to the acid dealer and tie dye T-shirt merchants of her choice. AS IS HER PERFECT RIGHT.

    Keep trying for dialogue, Joe. It beats hell out of shooting people- While understanding the human condition and the universal truth that there’s good money to be made by others on BOTH SIDES in breaking the dialogue and polarizing things, of course.

Comments are closed.