May 28, 2007 - May 21, 2007
Sunday, May 27, 2007
About the Flag
. Well meaning nincompoops are still nincompoops. The nincompoops
on Fox & Friends
was a truly fine and transcendant idea (and please note the date):
Saying he was frustrated with the
public's fascination with low-grade celebrities in a time of war, the
city manager of Long Beach ordered Thursday that city flags be flown at
half-staff to honor soldiers who died in Iraq.
City Manager Edwin Eaton said he consulted informally with the
five-member City Council before issuing the order, which will remain in
effect until further notice. "Obviously, not forever," Eaton said.
"While our society and media outlets appear to be consumed by the
antics and activities of dysfunctional personalities and the
'glitterati,' we tend to forget that each day Americans are anonymously
dying in Iraq," Eaton said in a memo to city department heads.
"I think it only fair that they be remembered and honored. To achieve
that end, we hereby direct that American flags throughout the city be
flown at half-mast," the memo read.
Eaton, a self-described "draft avoider" in the Vietnam era, said in an
interview that he felt he had to do something after watching
"Entertainment Tonight" and other media outlets focus on celebrities
who have little talent except for getting themselves in the public
Traditionally, the American flag is flown at half-staff for the death
of a former president or other prominent figure, and on Memorial Day or
other designated days of mourning.
What probably gave Eaton the idea was the ill-conceived decision some
weeks ago to fly the flag at half-staff in Virginia after the mass
murders there. Another well meaning act of self-flagellation (pun
The problem with Eaton's idea is that it's completely wrong. Out troops
do not go into battle carrying the flag at half-staff. The iconic image
of the flag that inspires and exemplifies the ideals they are fighting
for is never
It is a proud and audacious banner
that countless men in our armed forces have died trying to raise and
keep aloft under the most terrible battlefield onslaughts imaginable.
And it is precisely in those moments which most test our resolve and
national spirit that the rest of us should be the most determined to
fly the flag
at the very top of the staff.
On Memorial Day, we specifically remember those who have fallen
defending our flag by lowering it for a day. But to honor them truly
the remainder of the year, it's our duty to hold the standard high, as
done and continue to do far more courageously than we ever can.
the troops also means honoring what the troops are fighting for.
A thought to consider this Memorial Day.
Saturday, May 26, 2007
Scott Horn With Concern,
Liberty -- the bell is still cracked
As South Carolina debates how best to protect its college students from Virginia-Tech-type attacks, the Greenville News saw fit to publish the work of a young Clemson student,
Scott Horn. Mr. Horn believes mandatory self-defense training would go further toward protecting students than the use of firearms.
Mr. Horn makes his point with a dramatic, worst-case scenario where two would-be hero's stalk each other while the real bad guy sets up his massacre shooting with unarmed junior class men on the far side of campus.
Unfortunately, Mr. Horn concedes his own point in his fifth paragraph:
The shooter, knowing that only upperclassmen are old enough to carry a gun on campus, chooses an early morning period in Brackett Hall . . .
You see, even in a worst-case fantasy, psychotic mass murders have enough sense to avoid armed victims. This seems to argue for the arming of all human beings with a right to life and a right to protect that life with deadly force if needed. We could discuss at another time why it is that a 21-year-old life is worthy of protection, but a 20-year-old life is on its own.
This unintended point is what that the NRA and others have been making for quite some time.
As an aside, there is nothing sinister about the NRA consulting the U.S. Constitution, citizens cannot be denied the right of free association nor can they be denied the right to address their grievances to the government. The NRA is simply a free association of gun owners, most paying as little as
$35 to join, where they can organize to protect one right that is unalienable their right to life (see the
Declaration of Independence).
From one fantasy that seemingly proves Mr. Horn's point he moves on to another fantasy young college students trained in self-defense unarmed self-defense. Now, there is a fantasy. We've witnessed black-belt martial artists explain to a gathering of would-be-ninja that they would rather jump out of second story window than face an attacker with a knife. Mr. Horn would have us believe that a 5' 2, 105 lb. freshman (let's call her, Amy) could defend herself from rape with a little self-defense instruction. Fascinating.
Opinion is the life-blood of a democracy, but it would be better to say informed opinion. Mr. Horn demonstrates his lack of knowledge of the use of deadly force in South Carolina and overstates the value of unarmed self-defense.
Clearly, Amy would be better served by a .357 magnum against a 6' 4 240 lb. attacker than from an Austin-Powers-type judo chop. And, clearly, properly trained, gun carrying students represent a clear and present danger to psychotic mass murders.
As for education and training, we have a few suggestions. Instruct freshman that the world they find themselves in is a dangerous one. Teach them that gun powder and metal projectiles have been with us for over three hundred years and no amount of nannying will eliminate their use in a free society. Teach them that guns are no more to be feared than the automobile a more recent and more deadly invention. Teach them that life is the most precious thing they possess and that all major moral systems over say, the last five thousand years, have advocated extreme deadly action in the defense of that possession.
Further, all freshman should be required to take the SC Concealed Weapon Permit (CWP) training course even if they do not intend to carry a weapon or the government deems their life unworthy of self protection. This would at least avail them of the requirements of the use of deadly force and halt the creation of fantasies that do not have a place among educated people.
CLICK HERE for a summary of the rules.
Then, maybe Mr. Horn won't have to worry about the student squinting at the blackboard along with him with a bulge on his side anymore than he worries if the driver approaching him on the opposite side of the road has had enough sleep in the past 24-hours to operate his vehicle; talk on his cellphone; and tune in his favorite radio station as he approaches at 50 mph.
NOTE: If you are not already aware of the work of John R. Lott, Jr., get his book, or at least read
UPDATE: David Hardy's Of Arms and the Law has added a link along with his unique insight -- Thank you Mr. Hardy (corr., thanks to Tom Gun).
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
She thinks the world is full of
NOT THAT WE BELIEVE IT
A commenter (Brizoni
asked us to expatiate about liberal projection. It's very simple. In
Freudian terms, projection is imagining that other people suffer from
the same obsessions and illnesses you do -- even as you deny those
obsessions and illnesses in yourself. In other words, you have a
propensity for seeing your own weaknesses as the defiining traits of
others. That's pretty much the whole story about liberals of the last
They see, and thoroughly condemn, in other people what they recognize
yet blindly reject in themselves. Their self-congratulatory proclamations
about tolerance (PC, anyone?) arise from their own -- TA DA -- in
tolerance of opposing views.
Their monomania about racism is a function of the fact that they
believe devoutly in the inferiority of black and brown peoples and are
therefore committed to permanent condescension in the form of
affirmative action programs that will NEVER be repealed. Their 'blame
America first' mentality is born of their purely personal guilt about
how little they have actually done to secure their own prosperity;
accomplishment and wealth must be a kind of plunder ripped from the
hands of the more deserving by parasites just like them. Their paranoia
about fascism and Nazism has to do with their own totalitarian
impulses; in their heart of hearts, they
want to be the elite who tell everyone else who to be, how to act, and
what to think. The historical record is depressingly clear about this.
Their continual charge
of McCarthyism against all who disagree with them is a signpost of
their own unblinking determination to destroy everyone who threatens
their self-esteem by holding an opposing view. Whenever they accuse
someone else, they are projecting their own flaws and prejudices onto
Not a new point. But not an insignificant point, either. Here's an antique
 from this blog (inspired by an Andrew Greeley column
no longer available on the internet -- shorthand version: he's a
leftwing Catholic priest who compared George W. Bush to Hitler, and I
The History of an Evolving
One of the most longstanding fallacies in American political
culture is the identification of Nazism as a right wing phenomenon. The
term "Nazi" is essentially an acronym for National Socialism, which was
a political movement that positioned itself in opposition to what it
regarded as weak representative democracy. Hitler's notion of the ideal
state was as far away as it could be from the principles of limited
government, personal liberty, and individual rights which typify
Republican/conservative views in this country. He believed in big
government, secular government (else why oppress and silence the
churches), intrusive, controlling government embodying all the moral
ideals of the nation. Does this not evoke more comparisons with
American left/liberal ideology than with American right/conservative
Historically, it has been a clever trick of American Democrats to
sneak Nazism's position on the so-called right wing of the Weimar
Republic into a left-right spectrum of American politics defined by
entirely different factors. Hitler was right wing in a German context
because he was opposed to the brand new 'liberal' experiment with
democracy in a country which had been ruled by a monarchy throughout
its history. He was reactionary in wanting a government that returned
to the strong controls of the past. At the exact moment that he was
engineering his rise to power, however, the reactionary thrust in
America was in the opposite direction: to return to the weaker, less
intrusive central government which had obtained in America prior to the
1932 quasi-revolutionary turn toward big government known as Franklin
Roosevelt's New Deal.
Lots of additional Democrat sleight of hand parlayed this initial
misrepresentation into an accepted cliche. Hitler's opposition to
Communism helped American liberals to reinforce his position as a
rightwinger. But this was also a spurious inference. Hitler opposed the
communists not because his totalitarian approach to government differed
in any material way from that of Lenin and Stalin, but because
communism was internationalist by definition, which was incompatible
with the nationalist mission of German empire. Still, with this double
falsehoods in place, it became easy for Democrats -- long after the war
-- to depict Republican antipathy to communists as fascism, i.e.,
Nazism, and subsequently to equate Republican resistance to sweeping
federal Civil Rights legislation with Nazi racism and genocide.
All such associations were primarily rhetorical devices;
Nazism/fascism was a convenient bucket of tar that could be used to
smear any Republican or conservative who opposed Democrat positions on
social and foreign policy matters. The continuing fringe existence of
the Ku Klux Klan enabled canny Democratic politicians to characterize
all Republican positions as veiled manifestations of Hitlerian
supernationalism and racism. Lost to us now in these days of historical
ignorance and amnesia are the original contexts for a variety of
post-WWII Republican positions.
The symbolic rite of passage for 20th century American liberals was
the period they have succeeded in labeling the "McCarthy Era." If
Republicans had been half as rhetorically astute, we would in all
likelihood know this time by a different name, as "The Era of Soviet
Infiltration." The end of the Cold War has almost universally
vindicated the charges by Republicans in the late 1940s and 1950s that
Soviet espionage agents occupied critically compromising positions in
multiple agencies of the U.S. government and the military. Despite the
villainization of Richard Nixon, his target Alger Hiss was, we now
know, guilty. The Rosenbergs were guilty. FDR's Chief of Staff Harry
Hopkins was, in all probability, guilty. Staggeringly important secrets
were passed by
American citizens to the Soviets, including plans for both the atom and
hydrogen bombs. There is simply no way to deny the truth that the
communist conspiracy claimed by the Republicans did, in fact, exist and
was consistently denied, dismissed, or provided cover for by the
Nevertheless, the liberal/left elite in this country has succeeded
in perpetuating a dramatic myth that is flatly contradicted by the
facts. The anti-communist crusade of Joseph McCarthy, by reason of its
impoliteness and its incompetence, has become the secular Passion of
liberalism, its sanctifying crucifixion, the basis of its arrogant,
continuing, and utterly unjustified claims of moral superiority over
the conservative opposition. (Lest you regard this as overstatement,
please read "The Crucible," Arthur Miller's play about the McCarthyism
of the 17th century Salem witchcraft trials -- as we all know, there
were no witches/communists . . .) We are supposed to overlook the
enormity of the fact that at the very dawn of the nuclear age, American
citizens conspired to transfer the deadliest technology ever developed
to the mortal enemies of their country. This terrifying event is
supposed to pale beside the prospect of a Hollywood screenwriter whose
career was damaged by his membership in the 'party' that led the
conspiracy. It doesn't -- except in the minds of those who have never
quite understood, and probably never will -- the sickening, murderous
evil that was the Soviet communist state.
Yet the Democrats won the word war. The term 'McCarthyism' entered
the language and has been kept vigorously and determinedly alive. It
is, by usage, synonymous with fascism, because it has come to mean the
ruthless persecution and demonization of an imaginary enemy for purely
political purposes. And ever since the great Democrat Passion of the
1950s, this word has been hurled at every concerted Republican attempt
to uncover any kind of wrongdoing in the left/liberal establishment.
Another shoe dropped during the Civil Rights movement. Almost no
one now remembers that many Republicans opposed the 1964 Civil Rights
Act for reasons that had nothing whatever to do with racism. Partly
this is occasioned by the fact that almost no one remembers where the
core of virulently racist opposition to the Civil Rights Act reposed --
in the Dixiecrat (i.e., southern) wing of the Democratic Party.
Republicans who entirely agreed with the ultimate aims of the Civil
Rights movement as they were then described -- the G.O.P. was proudly
the party of Lincoln, after all -- nonetheless opposed the scope of
proposed federal legislation that would dramatically reduce the rights
of individual states to write their own laws. Thirty years of virtually
uninterrupted transfers of power to the federal government gave
Republicans pause; they opposed subsequent Medicare legislation for
much the same reason: fear of a central government growing too big, too
powerful, too intrusive, too expensive. Of course, to the most
enlightened social progressives of the time it was impossible to allow
that anyone might hold such a contradictory view; all opponents of the
legislation had to be regarded as racists and were branded as such.
Once again, the tarring worked. How many American citizens know
today that a higher percentage of Republicans voted for the 1964 Civil
Rights Act than did Democrats? From this point forward, the Republicans
were racists by definition (and by repetition) and were forever to be
associated with a KKK whose most prominent members had been Democratic
A further subtle transition was accomplished during the antiwar
movement of the late 1960s. The baby boomer leftists who opposed the
Vietnam War traded the term 'McCarthyism' for the more general purpose
'fascism.' This was the period when it was impossible to walk across an
elite university campus in America without being handed a smudged
mimeograph denouncing the "fascist imperialist U.S. pigs . . ." Vietnam
had started as Lyndon Johnson's war, but it fell to Republican Richard
Nixon to find the way to end it. The fascist label was accordingly
transferred to him in the blink of an eye, and it was precisely during
this phase of the war that the antiwar movement migrated from
opposition to treason, meaning open alliance with the North Vietnamese
enemy, hysterical accusations of war crimes against U.S. soldiers, and
even some cheering of the death and suffering of American troops. This
was also the timeframe within which the left/liberal wing of the
American political spectrum began to employ the term 'genocide' and
proclaim it an instrument of American foreign policy. Not
coincidentally, the same people transformed 'patriotism' into a term of
If the McCarthy Era was the left/liberals' crucifixion, Watergate
was the resurrection. How serendipitously easy it was to caricature
Nixon aides Haldeman and Ehrlichman as storm troopers . . . how
remarkably convenient it was to conceal the repudiation of the left
represented by the crushing defeat of George McGovern in the 1972
election underneath the mushrooming scandal . . . and how lucky it was
that the consequences of the left's 'principled' stand against the war
-- i.e., the massacre of 2 million or more Cambodians -- disappeared
into the opera of Nixon's downfall. Yes, despite the Cambodian
holocaust, American left/liberals now regarded themselves as wholly
vindicated, and to this day they cling to the memory of Richard Nixon
as if he were their own Shroud of Turin, the incontestable (if
fraudulent) artifact of their self-anointing to political divinity.
Nixon became the American Hitler they implicitly opposed in all
Republican opponents, the one most evident incarnation of the demon
they would always see and attack in every strong Republican leader --
corrupt, conspiratorial, racist, and perversely opposed to every ideal
treasured by the morally initiated, including the rights of women,
children, and minorities.
The Contemporary and Obsessive Uses of Falsehood
This entire history collapses into a single article of faith which
can be transmitted to young recruits without much explication of the
formative events. The article of faith is that the Republicans,
especially conservative Republicans, are fascists at heart, ever slyly
in search of ways to rob less privileged people of rights,
opportunities, freedoms, and money. Thus, the image of Hitler springs
easily to mind for people of so-called liberal persuasion. It is a
deeply satisfying image, one they have used to considerable advantage,
and (the dirty secret) they have learned much from their long
association with it.
What have they learned? Precisely what Andrew Greeley references in
the first sentence of his column: the efficacy of the Big Lie. This is
a recurring theme in Democrat rhetoric precisely because they have used
it so routinely and effectively for their own purposes. A more familiar
term for it is the "spin" perfected by the Clinton administration,
which consists of "talking points" to be used verbatim by every
conceivable spokesman for the party. The mechanism is not truth, but
repetition. If Republicans oppose automatic budget increases, they are
"seeking drastic cuts in services" for needy men, women, and children.
An increase in the school lunch program that is not as large as desired
can be compared to "genocide." Concern that affirmative action programs
may promote more resentment than genuine opportunity can be branded as
"racism." All that's necessary is to repeat the charge ad nauseam, see
that it spills out of every mouth that has access to a microphone, and
eventually a significant percentage of the population will believe it.
Does this clarify anything for you and yours, Brizoni
you have to fall back on the important stuff.
WHERE THE SUN COMES UP
Yesterday was a bummer. Every screaming idiot in the universe seemed to
be in full cry, and every observable outcome was bad. In the finale
last night, Jack Bauer didn't
kill every employee of CTU and the government. Laila Ali was doomed to
lose Dancing with the Stars
by judges who think breasts, hips, and estrogen are abominations
against the natural beauty of the human race. The Republican Party
upped the ante in its irrational impulse toward suicide by libelling
most faithful adherents for their "bigoted" rejection of an immigration
bill designed to swell the ranks of the Democratic Party to an
insuperable majority. Leonardo
got abundant friendly press for his "Apres moi, le Deluge"
pronouncement that Global Warming should compel our children to live
like cavemen rather than movie stars. A former vice president of the
United States (nicely defended with respect to his opulent lifestyle by
) hurled hysterical
against the president of the United States. And a
former president of the United States slandered
both the current president of the United States and
the prime minister of the
United Kingdom just because he could.
Most of this nonsense can be tolerated. But the two most important news
items can't be. It's impossible to accept that Jack Bauer has more
family than the Waltons (Does James Bond have a father, a brother, a
nephew, a witless sister-in-law, and a Lincoln-esque ex-girlfriend
distracting him from battling Smersh?) and more family issues than
clips for his Glock. It's horrifying that the dance vote in America
rests in the hands of 10 million dotty women who prefer a a diminutive
speed skater and a fat boy-band has-been to the electrifying daughter
greatest athlete in recorded human history. The mind boggles.
Since the mind can only take so much boggling, I've learned to take a
step back when the news gets too bad. You should too. If you don't
already live there, move to the country. It won't unboggle the mind,
but the boggling that does occur is of a much more manageable variety.
For example, the picture at the top of this post is of turkey eggs. The
nest is situated at the base of an aged willow tree no more than fifty
feet from the house.
The eggs are hidden in the day lilies.
Now here's something worth boggling
over. Are turkeys as stupid as they say? Or are they smarter than we
think? We have two turkeys living on the property -- a mama and a papa
-- and we're nonplussed that they've chosen our little patch of country
to be their home.
If your own experience of free-range turkeys consists of seeing them
run panic-stricken from every sound and movement they encounter, you'd
be hard put to explain this particular domestic arrangement. Our yard
is not the most somnolent of habitations. There are two driveways,
subject to the usual coming and going of vehicles that seem to unnerve
even large flocks of turkeys. Gardening occurs on a regular basis,
accompanied by lavish amounts of swearing and tool throwing. At least a
couple times a week, a very loud lawn tractor veers hither and yon,
flinging stones and weed clippings in all directions. Less than a
hundred feet from Mama's nest, there's also a terrifying noisemaker
from Milwaukee that erupts into a frightening din on no regular
The tractor and the noisemaker live
in the little house at the far left.
The noisemaker perilously close to the nest.
Granted, there's a tolerably decent view
from the nest, both east and west, but don't expectant mothers prize
peace over the picturesque?
Mama's view west.
Mama's view east.
One more thing. Did I forget to tell you that this is a mixed marriage?
We don't pass judgment about such things down here in the country --
live and let live is our motto -- but color can definitely be a factor.
Papa turkey is the standard tweed color of most wild turkeys. Mama,
however, is snow white. Which means that if you happen to pass too
close to the nest and she decides to vamoose, any humans on the scene
are overwhelmed by an explosion of whiteness so blinding that it could
precipitate a heart attack. To date, this has happened twice. First,
when I was cutting grass (or what passes for grass in our wilderness),
which was no big deal, really, because I came to only a few hours later
and finished the mowing without the least outward sign that twenty
years had been amputated from my lifespan in a nanosecond. Second, when
that exceptionally pleasant older man from the junkyard came to haul
away the rusted old pickup truck I installed opposite the willow two
years ago just to show our new neighbors I knew the kind of lawn
ornaments that are de rigeur
in South Jersey. I swear the poor old duffer actually clutched his
chest and called out to the Lord when Mama took flight from the day
lilies two feet to his left. She could fly, too. She cleared all the
trees to the northeast at about thirty miles per hour. (I'm thinking
she's not a domestic turkey but a kind of wild Jean Harlow specimen,
only more athletic.) I had to give him a smoke and a shot of bourbon to
stabilize his cardial rhythms before he could proceed with the rest of
I don't know. Maybe the mowing is worth it for the smell of cut grass,
which is sweet and fine regardless of your species, and the gardening
brings the songbirds in profusion, which must be a wonderful orchestral
lullabye for gestating young'uns in their shells. The views east and
west, as I've said, are soothing. But there's still the puzzle of why
both Mama and Papa put up with what's happening due north. That's where
the sighthound run is located. Three or four times a day, two
greyhounds and a deerhound charge out of the big white box into the
open air, and they see EVERYTHING. The deerhound in particular feels
compelled to comment whenever he sees a turkey. He says, "HOO HOO HOO
HOO HOO." Then he springs about five feet straight into the air and
says, "HOO HOO HOO HOO HOO."
North: "HOO HOO HOO HOO HOO."
It's true that Mama never puts in an appearance while all this is going
on, but Papa does. He strolls in, his head jerking back and forth in a
sort of perpendicular Oprah motion, and makes his way to the bird
feeders located about twenty feet from the slavering hoo-hooing ones.
HE DOESN'T CARE ABOUT THEM AT ALL. It's hard not to reach the
conclusion that turkeys, supposedly the dimmest of the entire feathered
branch of the zoological community, can conceptualize the
impenetrability of a fence. Either that, or Papa can somehow envision
the import of a scene he never gets to see:
Psmith and Andrew: "We're
The predatory instinct doesn't go away when the sighthounds come
inside. Since the turkeys arrived, a sort of rotating guard has been
established in the room that overlooks the garden. The lead sentinel is
the greyhound shown above: Andrew. When he arrived in the household,
Andrew was timid and made it a practice to embarrass close friends of
the family by acting as if they were child molesters or people who made
campaign contributions to Global Warming. Now he's the d'Artagnan of
turkey terrorism. He stations himself at the window and waits for the
tweed interloper to show his face. Which means it's time to BARK. And
BARK. And BARK. You get the idea.
You can't let the turkeys invade.
Papa Turkey is particularly fond of the corn the woodpeckers peck out
of the feeders. He motors right up to the best spot, about ten feet
from the window, and goes to town while the greyhounds BARK. (The pug
also barks but she's no sighthound, so it's safe to say she's never
laid eyes on the turkey and has no idea whatsoever what he looks like.)
Confronted by a nearly constant wall of barking during his trips to the
feeder, Papa Turkey -- huge and more dignified than Edward
-- DOESN'T CARE AT ALL.
The mind boggles. But pleasantly. And that's a tremendous relief. Even
so, the greatest sigh of relief will be heaved when the eggs hatch. I
still can't believe Mama has no concerns about the hullaballoo
surrounding her nest. It would be great to be proved wrong. Which I
mostly never am. Or why would I be so depressingly right about Jack
Bauer and Laila Ali?
Monday, May 21, 2007
worst president in history keeps getting uglier.
. Why is
everyone acting as if this
is the first time Jimmy Carter has showed off his white trash roots as
an ex-president? We've had many opportunities to marvel at his petty
vindictiveness, vile character, and stupidity.
Elder Statesman Pass
Moore takes charge
(scroll for reference)
Raisin in the Sunset
(scroll to find it)
The only thing that requires any explanation is the benefit of the
doubt so many people used to give this accident of history. You almost
always heard it the same way: "Sure, he was a lousy president, but I
think he's a good man."
Well, he isn't. He never was. They say that eventually you get the face
you deserve, regardless of what you were born with. Look at Jimmy
Carter's face. He was never a good looking man, but now he's growing
more monstrous every year. He looks as if he's being dissolved from
within by his own corrosive spite and envy. I can't think of a more
terrible way to grow old. He's become an embarrassment to our nation.
What should be embarrassing to Democrats in particular -- but isn't, of
course, because they're never embarrassed by anything -- is that Jimmy
Carter is the archetype of the evil fundamentalist they think they see
when they look at right-leaning Christians. He's almost a caricature of
the bitter, hateful, tight-lipped Baptist prig they wanted Jerry
Falwell to be. But Falwell actually acted like a Christian and a
gentleman, a kind of behavior Democrats invariably treat with derision
and disdain. And when one of their own speaks up to revile their
opponents, as Jimmy has just done from his sick-souled time warp, they
can't wait to cheer his every misplaced smear.
Just another classic example of liberal projection.
You'd think they'd get tired of themselves at some point. But they
I'm tired enough of them for everybody.