Don’t Bet the Farm On It

Today Joe Scarborough emerged, along with Ron Paul, as another lonely Republican opponent of the anti “Ground Zero Mosque” movement, using about the most risible argument I’ve heard so far:

(h/t Raw Story)

Republicans are going to be embarrassed at the way they’ve opposed a mosque — known as Cordoba House or Park51 — that’s planned near Ground Zero, according to one conservative host.

That would be the rational assumption, of course, but the very idea that after all this time, Joe “shut up about that dead girl” Scarborough would still believe that Republicans are even capable of embarrassment, shows that the poor guy is as dumb as he looks.  Has he never heard of David Vitter?  John Boehner?  Dick Cheney?  Tom DeLay?  Michele Bachmann?  Surely he’s at least heard of Sarah Palin.  The main thing all righties have in common, which Scarborough ostensibly fails to see, is that they are never, ever wrong when looking in the mirror, an endeavor to which they clearly devote considerable time, despite their jaw-dropping and well-documented lies, corruption, tawdriness, and/or flat-out stupidity.  To them, and hopefully their Fox-addled followers, they’re still the fairest of them all, and (Lina Lamont voice) “don’t anybody forget it.”  Despite this glaring oversight, you’ve still got to give Morning Joe a little credit:

MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough told Republicans Monday that they should “speak out against Newt Gingrich and the voices of hate.” While he was at it, Scarborough threatened to leave the GOP for a party “that actually believes in small government.”

Well, Joe never got his Husky Boy briefs in a twist when Bush expanded, drastically, the size and reach of Big Brother Government when it might have mattered, but you have to give him, say,  a free Supersize upgrade for finally waking up after sleeping through the more than usually drunken Republican frat party of 2001-2009, in which Republicans blew up the deficit and destroyed America’s reputation fighting two losing wars against miscellaneous and shifting groups of amorphous ragheads who, we were told relentlessly, “wanted to kill us.”

Last week, Gingrich compared supporters of the mosque to Nazis. Appearing on Fox & Friends, Gingrich said, “Nazis don’t have the right to put up a sign next to the Holocaust museum in Washington.”

Doesn’t this quote kinda disprove Scarborough’s theory that Republicans would be worried about being embarrassed, sometime in the supposedly reality-based future?  You’d think.  But it gets worse.

Prior to that, Gingrich argued that the mosque shouldn’t be built near Ground Zero until churches and synagogues are allowed in Saudi Arabia.

Great minds evidently all think alike; approximately two dozen prominent Republicans, including our very own Nailheadtom, have all proudly babbled essentially the same thing, despite the fact that such idiotic blather has no bearing whatsoever on any of the issues involved.

“This is demagoguery of the first order,” Scarborough, a former Republican congressman, said Monday. “And people in the Republican Party need to separate themselves from these voices.”

Apparently one of Scarborough’s many flunkies just looked up “demagoguery” and explained the term to him.

“And I talk to you, my Republican brethren,” he said into the camera. “I don’t know how much longer you’ll be my brethren. I’ll be honest. I’m looking for a conservative party that actually believes in small government and not engaging in Wilsonian wars but that’s another discussion.”

This is probably the one moment here of actual courage.  Scarborough’s been around long enough to learn that you can bash liberals all day long, no matter how scurrilously or falsely and keep your MSM sinecure forever, but just once tell the smallest truth about a righty, or worse, all of them, and you’d better be updating your resume.  You can tell he’s as nervous as a whore in church as he continues:

“I’m just talking, you know, as a friend,” Scarborough continued. “I promise you this. You’re going to be embarrassed. You’re going to look back two, three, four years from now and this is going to be dark blot on your record if you don’t speak out against New Gingrich and the voices of hate.”

Too bad he’s talking to the Mean Girls, who you can bet are already texting like mad.  In four years, they’ll all have their MRS’s, whether to Cato, Heritage, Koch, or what have you, and will be too busy shopping to think about the Bad Old Days.

“This is an embarrassment and you need to speak out against it,” he said.

…As the pigs flew past 30Rock.

Opponents of the mosque protested in lower Manhattan Sunday. Daisy Khan, the wife of the controversial imam backing the Islamic center, said Sunday that opposition was “like a metastasized anti-Semitism.”

MSNBC’s Willie Geist told Scarborough that the opposition is proof that anti-Muslim sentiment is worse now than after Sept. 11, 2001.

“It shows us that we are probably farther backward that we were maybe even nine years ago in our interfaith relations,” said Geist.

Ya think?  As Glenn Greenwald pointed out today, the “Islamophobia” that Ron Paul also decried is the direct product of cynical, race-baiting post-9/11 Republican politics, and it got them two wars, two elections, and worked their base into a paranoid but electorally advantageous bloodlust ever since.  What, exactly, are the chances that such a thoroughly discredited political movement is going to drop a thing like that?  (circles of thumb and forefinger around each eye…)

Scarborough has evidently missed a great deal of what is happening in America since he went on TV, not unlike almost all of his colleagues.  Who in the media, Joe, these utopian few years away, would ever deign to call any Republican out for their past failures, given that no one ever does, despite the fact that there are kind of a lot of them?

Embarrassment is in the eye of the beholder, after all, and if you watch Morning Joe on a regular basis, you’ll see that for Republicans, it’s no longer operative.  Someone send Joe the memo.

24 Comments

  1. michlib says:

    The ” Ground Zero Mosque ” = the New Red Meat.

  2. nailheadtom says:

    What’s this all mean? That non-entity Joe Scarborough is going to buy a condo next door to Arlen Specter’s old folks home? Who cares? Even inebriates are able to come to the conclusion that most sane humans don’t follow a party line word for word, unless they’re “progressives”. The most important things in the world aren’t truth or integrity to you meatballs, it’s what some bozo says on the big eye. No wonder the country is going to hell in a leased Lexus.
    “If a man has a genuine, sincere, hearty wish to get rid of his liberty, if he is really bent upon becoming a slave, nothing can stop him. And the temptation is to some natures a very great one. Liberty is often a heavy burden on a man. It involves that necessity for perpetual choice which is the kind of labor men have always dreaded. In common life we shirk it by forming habits, which take the place of self-determination. In politics party-organization saves us the pains of much thinking before deciding how to cast our vote. In religious matters there are great multitudes watching us perpetually, each propagandist ready with his bundle of finalities, which having accepted we may be at peace. The more absolute the submission demanded, the stronger the temptation becomes to those who have been long tossed among doubts and conflicts.” Oliver Wendell Holmes, “Elsie Venner”, 1859.

    • dirigo says:

      Oh, Tom! Sakes alive! My heart just goes pitty pat when you give us your … uhh … wonderful quotes from … uhh. well, uhh, wonderful, WONDERFUL! – historical figures, such as Justice Holmes!

      Why! … it’s as if NONE of us had ever had any exposure to the great minds of the 19th century, until YOU came along!

      You are our hee-roh, no doubt about it.

      Your incessant lectures are SO inspiring.

      Please! Give us more.

      Don’t ever, ever, stop!

      Onward, dear Tom!

      • cocktailhag says:

        Thanks, Dirigo. I didn’t have time to deal with all that horse puckey. It’s 0 curlers 30 here on the Left Coast.

      • nailheadtom says:

        Evidently you didn’t have much exposure, since you don’t know the difference between Justice Holmes and the writer, his father, perhaps the most celebrated American man of letters of his time and the inventor of the stethoscope and the stereopticon. But for your ilk actual knowledge of any kind is secondary to a snarky pose of moral superiority.

      • dirigo says:

        Oh, sorry, ’twas a cursory glance by moi.

        I’m aware there were two of them. But what of that when your game really is about picking nits and honking nonstop from your pedestal, like a really annoying undergraduate? There’s no dialogue happening, Tom. Doncha get it after all this time?

        • nailheadtom says:

          Finally, a statement that’s both true and relevant. “There’s no dialogue happening”. And there’s unlikely to be any from the intellectual cripples in the most progressive camp of the politically deranged.

          • dirigo says:

            You are an intruder here, a bad faith actor.

            Whatever your motivation or purpose, whether out of spite, because you haven’t gotten laid lately, or, because you’re a plant, there’s no dialogue because you disrupt the flow of the author of the site and most commenters, day in and day out.

            If I say you’re an intruder, or an attack artist, I do not wear the mantle of a blog traffic cop; nor do I say you have no rights. It’s is to identify you as a deliberate disruptor.

            You can insult the intelligence of all who post here, but I don’t think you have a rebuttal to this charge.

            Your intent is obvious and that is why no dialogue is happening.

            Funnily enough, it is happening among others here, despite your heavy hand, despite your malignant presence.

            If we were in a real bar or other public place, we would have left you on your stool long ago, so you could be at peace, contemplating the bubbles in your beer.

            You’re unbelievably arrogant.

          • cocktailhag says:

            Calling other people politically deranged. That’s rich, Tom.
            What would you call it besides derangement when you espouse, proudly, the crackpot theories of a couple of old Austrians and a Russian harridan who wrote bad novels, and act as though you have accessed some higher truth? You constantly brag about how smart you are compared to us, and yet daily you embrace the dumbest (and most common) talking points of the Republican noise machine, and look like a gullible ass in so doing.
            You cannot ever point to an example of your peculiar, if oft-tried, ideas succeeding, yet call everyone else statists and utopians, for pointing to examples in the real world. (Say, Germany and Sweden, which both show that you’re, as usual, wrong…)
            You do make it difficult to have a dialogue, since you’re so addicted to including pointless personal attacks and juvenile, unclever insults along with your usual ticker-tape fare, and retreat to the sound of crickets when you are (as is usual) beaten by the facts.
            I know this is a radical idea for a righty, but you ought to try thinking for yourself, Tom. You’re capable of it, and it would make your presence here more productive for everyone.

  3. Someone should ask Newt about the Japanese interment camps. A) does he know they are no longer in use, and B) how does he feel about that?

    • cocktailhag says:

      Aw, I bet he doesn’t care too much: although he likes to trade up on wives a lot, there’s no evidence that he’s ever logged onto HotAsianTeens as far as we know.

  4. Mourning Joe is a victim of the Greenwald Effect, a syndrome spreading across the MSNBC universe. It travels along several vectors, but those most at risk are loudmouth pundits trying to gin up ratings by glomming on to a proven race-horse of cyberspace. If you know how television works, with it’s emphasis on finding “proven formula” to predict human cognitive/aesthetic choices, then it’s natural that such weathervanes are going to latch on to whatever is generating hits in the blogosphere. Dylan Ratigan, is increasingly proving himself to be another victim of this syndrome. I don’t know if you caught him yesterday, but he was way out of his intellectual depth discussing the Ground Zero issue. Totally clueless about what he wanted to say, or perhaps even thinks about it. Just trying to latch on to a provocative perspective–i.e., that of Greenwald.

    Don’t get me wrong this is good in the long run. But these are yucky people, to put it bluntly.

    • cocktailhag says:

      I think that most people on TV are kind of like Nicole Kidman’s character in “To Die For.” Narcissistic careerists in such a hurry that they don’t have time to think, not that they would bother, anyway.

    • cocktailhag says:

      As GG said, this is no distraction. It’s the whole enchilada.

    • I read both guardian articles recently, which spoke of an insanity here. Which has always made my American years curious, and now has answered a lot of mysteries in my past dealings. For example, impeaching Hillary’s husband was just a drop in the ocean. But where did such a large group come from? It seems more entrenched than victims of clever circumstance only. What was it like in the 1800′s, 1700′s, Old English Country? As divisive as Protestants and Catholics in earlier centuries? Can this skill set be passed along through generations indefinitely? Zombies, witches, dizeezed… Do you say there’s no end in sight? Maybe it feels like when a country legally divides…..

  5. Meremark says:

    -

    audreyandchuck,

    ‘Where did the large [sic] group come from?’, you ask. [It ain't LARGE, it is about 12 to 15 percent continuously, (watch the measure of 'single-issue politics' anti-abortion kooks, 1974-present), but it is waaaay disproportionately LOUD (like dumbhead tom, here); and 12 percent is 1-out-of-8, which is the clue that it (bigoted self-righteousness) is inherited from one of the great-grandparents.]

    Anyway, an amazing New Yorker item this week answers the question: It’s the group bought-and-paid-for, owned-and-operated by the bigoted Koch LIARS family. Finally it is revealed ‘ what’s the matter with Kansas.

    Covert Operations, by Jane Mayer, August 30, 2010.
    ( http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/08/30/100830fa_fact_mayer?printable=true )

    … The Republican campaign consultant said of the family’s political activities, “To call them under the radar is an understatement. They are underground!” Another former Koch adviser said, “They’re smart. This right-wing, redneck stuff works for them. They see this as a way to get things done without getting dirty themselves.” Rob Stein, a Democratic political strategist who has studied the conservative movement’s finances, said that the Kochs are “at the epicenter …

    They have stayed hidden … and fooled all the people for going-on 80-some years throwing money around; and they go on fooling some of the people (about 14 percent) for all time.

    • cocktailhag says:

      That was a great article, Meremark….

    • Thanks Meremark, got the Kansas movie SAVED (not yet) with Netflix. I hear what you’re saying, and used to say that this obvious opposition should be ignored and so quieted. But not many people, including this site, would rather choose another agenda (for example, bring back a National Endowment for the Arts, Science and Humanities, god be praised?)

      15% you say? These days I’m talking about not under 80%. With two in ten people who walk up my drive, will I have a civil discussion, be able to get to a crux of a matter, and for goodness sake. Things used to be more pleasant between Americans though, as old documentaries can be a reminder that’s fading. I guess a “barbarism” has been under the surface, and now provoked, as you point out, rears its ugly head.

      Maybe I shouldn’t have wondered where barbaric people came from. Maybe the dialogue should be about a separating Force that dictates to oppressor and oppressed. That way, communication doesn’t have to get so disagreeable or personal or consequently haughty? Take care.