Out of Pellets

Yesterday Glenn Beck compared health care reform to, among other things, the New Deal (which is only scary to his Social-Security drawing audience, natch..) and, get this– Pearl Harbor.  Now, really.  Obama has nearly three years left in office; what, in heaven’s name, is Beck going to invoke next?   Not that anyone in his audience would know better, but Beck may be burning his cataclysm candle at both ends.  Fortunately, there still are other cataclysms out there to be mined for their awesomeness, but Hiroshima was, after all, the greatest thing since sliced bread to most righties and ought to be repeated as soon as possible, the Depression is already back, thanks to Bush channeling Coolidge and Hoover, and most of his audience thinks that the Civil War was a good thing, except for its unfortunate outcome.   There are only so many world-changing horrors to go around, you know; it’s only prudent to conserve them.  The latest, most pathetic teabagger shindig, which drew dozens of lumpy and unattractive Americans to Washington to wave their misspelled signs, ought to be a warning to Fox News….  ”Armageddon, and so forth”,* can only happen once, and afterward cable coverage is likely to be spotty at best.

Now, Roger Ailes has once again circled the wagons around its craziest (and that’s saying something) host, having long since chosen the loyalty of the deluded quarter or so of Americans who will believe absolutely anything over the increasingly skimpy fig leaf of “real journalism” that used to somewhat unsuccessfully cover Bill O’Reilly’s overeager naughty bits, but the pin in the grenade has been pulled.  Fox has improvidently used up all the best material available, taking out its BS bazooka to vanquish tiny, centrist gnats, when someday, the Democrats might actually try to do something truly “progressive,” and then where will they be?  I’ve always been deeply skeptical of the notion that Obama is playing multi-dimensional chess, but if he’s driven the right this cuckoo by governing somewhat to the right of our last successful Republican President, Bill Clinton, he now faces an enemy that’s already used up its ammo.

But since a couple of off-year elections have been declared earth-shattering triumphs for the roundly and deservedly repudiated right, they are all rubbing the fronts of their trousers in anticipation of further victories yet to materialize, a spectacle that is, to say the least, less than appealing to the viewing public.  They can beat their flabby chests and bray, but don’t they, at some point, have to, well, offer something, anything, to the electorate?  Like their corporate paymasters, all they can do is darkly intone that really, really bad things will happen if they aren’t given the reins of power, but they don’t even bother to concoct any good outcomes from such an unlikely scenario.  Over time, this will definitely be a problem, since the wine they’re drinking invariably increases the desire but diminishes the performance, something Shakespeare once pointed out, but that sort of elitist wisdom tends to be pretty much lost on people who think the earth is 6000 years old.

November, 2010 is still eight months away, but the Republicans seem to think it’s next week, and are behaving accordingly.  They have their judges, they have their media, and they definitely have their “math,” just like Karl Rove did in 2006, but they’ve yet to offer any tangible reason that they shouldn’t be in rubber rooms, rather than running Washington.  Maybe they’ll think of something, but I’m beginning to have my doubts.

Obama may be lame, and a terrible disappointment to those who elected him, but at least he chose the right enemies.  This bunch simply doesn’t know the difference between what’s important and what doesn’t amount to a hill of beans, nor do they care….  About the only thing that could save them is another Pearl Harbor, but, oops, they already used that one up.  So, Glenn, we survived Pearl Harbor, apparently twice now.  What else have you got?

*actual quote from America’s Greatest President, Ronald Reagan


  1. [...] Cocktailhag, the blog » Blog Archive » Out of Pellets [...]

    • cocktailhag says:

      I have no idea why this blog post attracted cat poop spam, but It’s nice to know that it’s not the NSA.

      • Why Total Information Awareness is such a crock of shit. I imagine that the NSA’s filter algorithms are a bit better, but not even a gazillion dollars which we don’t really have can make them a lot better.

        Once you’ve picked a victim, TIA can find him for you. It’s not very useful in selecting a victim, though, unles you want to lock up, or assassinate, the whole damned country. You’d think that decades of studying the failures of the Soviet Union would have taught these cheerleading assholes something, but apparently they’re too ignorant, and too enthusiastic, to learn anything from anybody.

        • cocktailhag says:

          Of course, just like in the Soviet Union, the spying doesn’t have to be effective, merely there, just like Big Brother. And accepted as such.

          • Few in the Soviet Union accepted it. They endured it, at best. Which is why it unraveled overnight.

            I call it the Totalitarian House of Cards. The watched, the watchers, the watchers-who-watch-the-watchers in an in an infinite — and horribly inefficient — regression. Eventually, everything grinds to a halt. They pretend to pay us, and we pretend to work, etc. Then one day everyone goes home and digs out the vodka, and the whole rotten business collapses.

            Lots of collateral damage before that moment, of course, as anyone who’s read Solzhenitsyn is well aware, but that moment is inevitable nevertheless.

          • cocktailhag says:

            It’s funny how the political right can embrace so many totalitarian policies; as long as it’s not commie, having a Stasi, KGB, and gulags is just peachy keen. Let the watchers try to form a union, though, and all hell will break loose.

  2. nailheadtom says:

    Captain Capitalism says:
    Wednesday, March 17, 2010
    Some Short Observations About Liberal Talk Radio
    Well I was going to go to my favorite Irish bar and do taxes, but I forgot that today is St. Patrick’s Day and there was no way I was going to get any work done, so allow me this short post.

    I can’t listen to right wing talk radio any more because

    1. I can finish their sentences.
    2. I already know everything they’re going to say.
    3. It’s really depressing.

    So, for the past month I’ve been listening to Air America (which I thought was going bankrupt, but apparently they are still on the air). It’s really hard to listen before you turn it off or change the station, but after a month, I’ve come up with some observations about liberal talk radio that are not biased, but just simple observations.

    1. They are reactionary to right wing talk radio.

    I would say the most prominent thing you notice about liberal talk radio is how about 35% of their show is responding to right wing talk radio. You can’t listen for more than 4 minutes before you hear “Glenn Beck” or “Rush Limbaugh” of course referred to in the pejorative. It shows me that their entire existence was founded in countering right-wing talk radio. The problem is this doesn’t really pioneer any new lines of thought. It’s just them bashing on right wing radio. Not once have I heard Rush or Glenn or Sean utter, “Nick Schultz” or “Mark Malloy.” Ergo, right wing talk radio is established unto itself, while left wing talk radio is merely reactionary. There was no real ideological reason for it except to debunk or besmirch right wing talk radio. It’s almost like a shell corporation, no real purpose to it.

    2. No “Linking” “Domino” or “Cause and Effect” Thinking

    To varying degrees all right wing talk show hosts carry through their lines of thought to a logical conclusion or result. Dennis Prager in particular is good at this, but regardless, ALL right wing talk show hosts do a “Cause and effect” analysis of policy, statements, economics, etc. Their left wing counterparts do NONE of this. And it’s frustrating because half the reason I started listening was to understand the rationale or reasoning behind the socialist ideology. But since there is no explanation or linking all you get is talking points or stances. For example their arguments are really no more complex than “Oh, those partisan Republicans are trying stop health care because they’re rich.” No consideration is given to maybe the procedure or the constitution or the real reason “why” Republicans (as well as some democrats) are against the health care bill. It’s just “they’re rich, they’re in bed with the insurance industry” and that is as deep as they get. In other words, even though the hosts are well into their 50′s, it’s no deeper than having a conversation with a 20 year old theater major.

    3. Hate speech

    This was the most shocking one of all. Mark Malloy, if you haven’t listened to him, puts to rest the notion the right wing of politics in America is the source of hate. He has threatened to kick Glenn Beck’s ass more than once, you can’t go 10 minutes with out him calling the Republican’s nazis and cursing up a storm (amazing the FCC doesn’t shut him down) and wishing them essentially death. You think I’m joking? Listen in yourself.

    At least when Rush or Glenn or even myself was broadcasting, our ideas were for the overall good of the nation. Balancing the budget, getting the economy going, fighting terrorism, stopping illegal immigration. But this guy just abandons any intellectual honesty and views all conservatives and republicans as nazis no matter what you say or do. You are the enemy to him and forget being Americans, you need to be taken out of the gene pool.

    4. Presumption of Premises

    When callers call in, there is a whole host of premises and assumptions leftists make that they just take for granted. For example George Bush is to blame for everything. Economy, war on terror, the terrorist attacks themselves. There’s no discussion of it. It’s just a given Bush caused this all when an intellectually honest person would maybe suggest 100 million Americans spending more than they made was the cause of the recession.

    But Bush aside, simple childlike assumptions are the bedrock of their ideology. “Rich people need to be punished.” The insurance companies are out to get you. Mark Malloy even cited that some CEO at one of the largest insurance companies in the US made something like $37 million over the past 3 years. Well….yeah, that’s about right. By the same logic he should LOATHE professional sports, which he might, but you never hear about it. The overall point is that you can’t listen to any intellectual discussion, not matter how intelligent or insightful the people are on liberal talk radio, because they’re operating from false premises and thus the entire conversation is worthless.

    5. Absolute Ignorance, Pushing Cluelessness, About Economics

    Perhaps what gets me to turn to another station so quickly is when I hear them spout off some statistic I know to be completely wrong or just statistically impossible. They have no clue just how much spending Barack Obama has committed the US to, but it’s not that they care, they literally think there’s $100 trillion in GDP to tax. If you ask them, EVEN THE RADIO SHOW HOSTS, how big the government budget is relative to GDP, or just how much in GDP we produce, I don’t think they could answer correctly.

    Worse still is the borderline indifference about what the economic ramifications are to implementing higher taxes, higher spending, nationalization of industries, etc. They don’t seem to understand that the government gets its money from the private sector. They don’t seem to realize that the government needs the private sector and not vice versa. The impression I am LITERALLY getting from them is they think the “economy” is this big, amorphous blob including the government and basically, “stuff comes from it.” No concept of taxation, no concept of the Laffer Curve, no concept of income statements or balance sheets. Just, “there’s the economy and we get money from it and rich people control it and they suck.”

    In any case, if you have the time I DO recommend tuning into liberal talk radio and I would love to hear your observations. I just can’t listen for more than 10 minutes at a time because it’s like listening to 10 year olds trying to explain why they don’t like to work.

    • cocktailhag says:

      Well, first of all, it’s Mike Malloy, and he is certainly the most bombastic and not a particular favorite of mine. I listen to Thom Hartmann, Ed Schultz, and our local morning show, Carl and Christine. When I’m in LA I listen to Stephanie Miller.
      Naturally righty bloggers have a “theme” to their thinking; what they’re selling must be built around false narratives wherein everything that pisses them off is somehow connected. It’s not complicated.
      Having listened to lefty talk (which is extremely successful here) for six years, I can confirm that a lot of what the author says is BS. Hate speech? Righty radio is nothing but, so that’s about the lamest argument I’ve ever heard. Thom Hartmann, in particular, is always polite to right-wing guests, many of who are regulars on his show, and has a special line for conservative callers.
      Lastly, anyone who speaks of the Laffer Curve as though it were anything but a naked scam to “starve the beast” is basically unworthy to comment on much of anything. The bit at the end about ten year olds who don’t like to work is that same horseshit you believe, against all evidence, even though that is both stupid and impossible. Show me a liberal freeloader, and I’ll show you a dozen righty grifters like Sean Hannity with his fake charity.

  3. retzilian says:

    Well, speaking of cat litter, I’ve been following a few Twitter feeds today and read that the Teapartiers are behaving badly. Rep. Lewis was called a nigger by several baggers standing in protest in D.C., and Barney Frank was met with the ever-favorite “faggot” along with a chant using a lisp.

    They’re in fine form!

    Glenn Beck is the Mark Geragos of cable TV hosts. His outrage and hyperbole are always on Fortissimo. Where can you go with the dynamics if everything is loud? You use up all your ammo and then what have you left? Beck gets most of his ideas from LaRouche’s website, I swear.

  4. retzilian says:

    And don’t ask me how I know what’s on LaRouche’s website. I have traveled along many slimy paths in the underbelly of the Internets.


    • cocktailhag says:

      Don’t worry, sister; your secret’s safe with me. I left a positive comment on Debbie Schlussel yesterday. Over at theimmoralminority, (it’s on my blogroll) they have a hilarious series of interviews with the ‘baggers I just watched; it’s, well, compelling.

  5. mikeinportc says:

    Debbie Schlussel? Did you say “Debbie Schlussel” ?
    Drove whatever thought I had, right out of my head. Because of this :

    Along with being almost completely* inaccurate, the they-deserved-it vibe is absolutely vile. Along with everything else, there’s also some personal aspects (to me).

    Sorry for the interuption. Carry on.

    * There was a shooting incident,in Binghamton, otherwise she got eveything wrong.

    • cocktailhag says:

      I Know, I know…. but the absurdly photoshopped whatchamacallit nailed Hannity six ways to Sunday for his fake charity concerts, and now ABC and others have picked it up, and it seems to check out. You have to find actual journalism where you can, y’know, even if it’s behind a dumpster and you might get crabs.

  6. mikeinportc says:

    ‘ ”Armageddon, and so forth”,* can only happen once, and afterward cable coverage is likely to be spotty at best.’ LOL!


    “Why Total Information Awareness is such a crock of shit. I imagine that the NSA’s filter algorithms are a bit better, but not even a gazillion dollars which we don’t really have can make them a lot better.”

    Doesn’t have to be effective. People just have to think it is. Or might be , against them.

    Somewhere(?), I read a comment by a former STASI agent, that’s stuck with me . (A lot of clutter up there) The STASI tactics were effective in controlling the population because even though they only (only? – still a lot!)had the resources to keep tabs on ~10%, everybody thought that they had a STASI file.

    • cocktailhag says:

      That’s true of all “security” bureaucracies… It’s the thought that one might be being watched, not the actual thing, that exerts the control.

      • People do weary of being afraid. If you look at the whole arc of the history of oppression, when you ain’t got nothing, you got nothing to lose may operate very low down in the totalitarian limbic system, but there’s no doubt that it’s determinative.

        To make a country work — which to tyrants means to provide them with power — you don’t just need the people’s acquiescence, you need their participation. It’s the one mistake that these morally befuddled dictator types can always be counted upon to make.

  7. mikeinportc says:

    “even if it’s behind a dumpster and you might get crabs.”
    LOL! On a roll, CH.
    Glad I enforce a no-drink policy, while reading the Hag. I’d be wasting a lot of good beer in the All-Spew Zone. ( Not to mention monitors & keyboards)

    • cocktailhag says:

      I of course don’t know anything about crabs, but I have a friend who does,,, maybe you know her. I hope I’m not encouraging abstinence here; the hag itself would be quite impossible without copious amounts of drink.

  8. mikeinportc says:

    So….she’s from Baltimore?

    re crabs, should I ask Debbie to the dance? :)


  9. Meremark says:


    Months of bullsh!t bogosity screaming about this health care bill crap ‘crammed down their throats’ now lodges it there in the hate talkers — LIARS Larson, Rash Lamebrain — and I don’t care anymore what’s in the 2000 pages so long as it chokes their airhole and shuts them up.

    nailed dead tom: “one short post” allowed, now it’s over, it ain’t your blog to ‘post’ on — choke on it!