I will say this: Vanity Fair seems to hire a disproportionate number of idiots.
So I’m reading Drudge, and I come across an article from Vanity Fair editor Graydon Carter. It’s titled, “Man Up, America!” I read the droning diatribe by an obvious leftist liberal, (it’s obvious because the man is as dumb as a rock, and I’ll illustrate below) and thought I’d point out a few flaws in the criticism of his fellow Americans. The kind of Americans he wouldn’t be caught dead being seen with in one of his upscale restaurants; you know, about 99.999999999999999999% of the American public.
(By the way, the reference to “man up” comes from Sharon Angle’s criticism of Harry Reid, and the fact that she probably has more testosterone in her system than her opponent. Then again, Harry Reid only gets brave when there’s an opportunity to spend someone else’s money for his benefit.)
The general anti-Obama rage out there is palpable. But it’s no more virulent than the anti-Bush sentiment that has pervaded the country for much of the past decade—although this being America, there’s an attendant hatred for Obama that has more to do with race than anything else.
You mean, because he’s half-white?
Typical liberal – if you don’t like the fact that an obvious communist is running the country, you’re “racist.”
What makes today’s fury more worrying is the fact that angry right-wing extremists tend to carry guns in disproportionate numbers to their liberal counterparts.
Well then, I guess you’re faced with the dilemma that those angry right-wing extremists often cite: if a man has a gun, you don’t, and the police aren’t around to protect you then you’re basically screwed. Which is the reason why those angry right-wing extremists are armed in the first place: they choose to be prepared. Maybe you should put your money where your mouth is, and make sure you get your local police department to provide you 24×7 protection from all those hostile right-wingers.
Until then, shut the hell up weenie-boy.
You call it teenaged. Is voting for a deranged Tea Party candidate such as Christine O’Donnell, who has no demonstrable talent for lawmaking, or much else, so different from shouting “Whatever!” and slamming the bedroom door? Is moaning that Obama doesn’t emote enough or get sufficiently angry so different from screaming, “You don’t understand!!!”
Oh THIS one is rich! “Demonstrable talent for lawmaking?” Does it take a whole lot of lawmaking talent to vote on legislation that you’ve never read beforehand? Or how about spending $800 billion dollars of stimulus money that had the EXACT OPPOSITE effect on the economy than what was promised?
It is really “lawmaking talent” to go out in public and discuss how Osama bin Laden pays to build daycare centers in Afghanistan (here’s a hint to you left-wing idiots out there: since women under the Taliban don’t work outside the home – because they’re beaten if they do – there is no need for daycare centers)? Is this they type of “demonstrable talent” Carter is talking about?
Furthermore, one of the most poorly kept secrets in Washington DC is the fact that legislators don’t actually write legislation: their staff does. Does anyone really think that John Dingell pulled out his feather quill (he’s had it since his first term in office) and started writing out that heath care reform debacle in a spiral-bound notebook? No. His staff and like-minded lobbyists did all of that. End of discussion. That type of “work” requires virtually no talent or skill whatsoever.
You know why the Founding Fathers – who were pretty sharp people in their own right – didn’t place some sort of prerequisites on aptitude when it comes to electing senators and representatives? The simple reason is: any idiot can, and should be able to do it. If the Founding Fathers actually put in prerequisites, I guarantee you that virtually all of the Democrat party would be ineligible. The minute people like Madame Carter get their way in this arena is the minute this country switches from a representative republic to a fascist state. Then again, most “progressives” are fascists at heart, so this comes as no surprise.
And we should have seen this coming. Both Bush and Obama, believing that their elections gave them mandates for seismic change, yanked the nation away from the center, which Bill Clinton, despite the morass of his personal life, knew was the place to be.
And this is where Graydon Carter shows either his contempt for the intelligence of his audience, his total and complete stupidity, or a mixture of the two. I mean anyone with a brain who lived through Clinton’s first term knows that because of total control of both Congress and the White House during that time resulted in a COMPLETE takeover of Congress by Republicans in 1994. It was the reason why Newt Gingrich became Speaker of the House, the purpose for the Contract for America, and so on, and so on. Baby Doc Obama’s policies, profound leftist arrogance, and sheer stupidity along with that of Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats in Congress mimicked that Bill Clinton’s first term. Even down to the attempt to socialize health care in this country, which Hillary Clinton spearheaded. The main difference is that health care “reform” failed miserably during Clinton’s term, and managed to pass under the reign of the idiot boy king (for all you liberals out there, I’m referring to Imam Obama).
It was only AFTER Republicans took control that Clinton – being the political animal he was – moderated his views, motivated by his strong instinct for survival. Bill Clinton didn’t govern from the center, he was FORCED into it by Republicans. No one with a brain in their head denies ANY of this.
And Graydon Carter has the gall to take pot-shots at the “angry majority” after making this obviously stupid, and ill-informed statement? Let me just be clear on this: Graydon Carter just identified himself as being an ignorant moron. Such abject stupidity in such a profound public manner, in my opinion, automatically disqualifies him from employment at Vanity Fair. That publication is ill-served to have such an ignorant boob controlling content.
Thanks to these dramatic political lurches—and aided by the exponential magnification of the Internet and the seething blogosphere, and with the martinets at the command center at Fox News marshaling forces—the fringe has achieved considerable purchase on the middle ground. Indeed, the fringe has almost become mainstream.
Again, another grossly idiotic statement! “Dramatic political lurches?” What in the hell do you call the American Revolution, or the Civil War? I dunno, but bullets being fired back and forth sounds kinda “lurchy” to me. And the results of these “lurches?” One gave us freedom from tyranny, and the other abolished slavery. And this was a bad thing…how…?
(I’ll say it again: this guy is an absolute moron.)
When Americans refer to 9/11 as the day the world changed, they should be mindful of what London went through in the early days of the Second World War. On September 7, 1940, 348 Luftwaffe bombers crossed the English Channel. They were over London by late afternoon and for the next two hours ignited the city with incendiary bombs. That same evening, the Germans were back, raining 625 tons of high explosives on East London. The Blitz (from the German Blitzkrieg, for “lightning war”) went on for 57 consecutive nights and then spread to other cities in the U.K. It was estimated that by May of the next year more than 43,000 people had died in the strategic air raids. The English, being the English, just got on with it. A survey taken during this period found that weather had a greater impact than air raids on the day-to-day worries of many Londoners. As Gardiner observes, “egg rationing produced more emotion than the blitz.”
When you consider what this one man endured, or the entire city of London, whatever annoyances are bothering you, whatever problems you have in your own life, will seem minor by comparison.
These comments just about made my blood boil. They are truly illustrative of how much of a clueless doorknob Graydon Carter really is.
The one thing that people in London had during that time was leadership that took the Nazis seriously, and didn’t blithely point out that England could “absorb” the Nazi attack. They actually showed defiance and resolve in the face of the agressors. This is wholly unlike Baby Doc Obama and the rest of the Progressive Idiot Chorus that demands that we “understand” Islamic radicals, make excuses for their terrorist attacks, and inevitably blame the US for being attacked in the first place. If some leftist liberal professor made the “little Eichmanns” comment (or something equivalent to it) ala Ward Churchill while the Nazis were bombing the living crap out of London, they’d probably find the remains of said professor spread out over the rubble of Trafalgar Square.
Furthermore, if a Nazi pilot got shot down over England, I seriously doubt that ANYONE in Britain would shed a tear, or try to sue Parliament because that pilot had to endure three hours of listening to Heavy Metal music, or being stripped naked and placed in a cold cell. Hell, if the pilot was delivered alive to the British authorities, they could consider themselves lucky. And if some solicitor tried to stand up for a Nazi’s “civil rights,” they’d probably end up a “sad victim” of the constant air raids whose remains were never found.
More importantly, the English made no bones about taking the war to Nazis, and not standing around to be bombed indefinitely. In fact, they sought to just outright kill the little buggers, and not make a whole lot of excuses as to why the Nazis did what they did. Nor did anyone in Parliament describe British soldiers as being “jack-booted thugs,” or call them murderers (Jack Murtha) for participating in a massacre that never existed in the first place. If they did, I think they too would end up another “sad victim” of the Nazi air raids whose remains were also never found.
I could write an entire book on just how aforementioned comments by Madame Carter were utterly clueless, foolish, uninformed, and wholly lacking in genuine intellectual character. Does this dimwit not read the papers, or watch the news? Is he truly this frickin’ stupid? How does a completely mindless boob like Graydon Carter obtain the prestige and position of Editor at Vanity Fair? Seriously! It’s like this guy has never read a book, taken a high school history class, and/or lived in a cave for the last ten-frickin’-years.
America, you have it pretty damned good. Smile.
It may come as a huge shock to you, Graydon Carter, but some of us would like to keep it that way, thanks. We do this by ignoring or belittling lack-wits such as you. And believe you me, given the drivel you’ve thus far provided, your sophomoric comments are a target-rich environment for ridicule.
How you can maintain your employment by being this outright dumb is a little beyond me. Then again, I guess even the stupid people have to eat. The problem is, however, what does this say about the quality standards of Vanity Fair to have hired and promoted such an individual whose critical thinking skills are virtually non-existent?
I’m sure he dresses quite well. So I guess that counts for something…