I’ve taken a certain amount of flak over the years for saying things like “Democrat pols can say anything they want, because they know their voters just don’t think that critically”, and “the Democrat base are essentially intellectual herd animals”.

That seems…tart. Uncivil. Uncomfortably inflammatory, for a guy who tries to keep things as measured and “civil” (whatever that’s worth, these days).

But it’s accurate.

And we know this because Big Left tells us it’s accurate:

But the headlines above aren’t revelation. Just confirmation.

9 thoughts on “Clarification

  1. What they (the cultural elites) are trying to do is replace reason with narrative. And creating a narrative is a statement about power, not reality.
    The narrative tells you that there is an ethnicity that identifies as “Latinx.” The narrative tells you that knowing that a person has male genitalia and can father children tells you nothing about his biological sex.

  2. “Time to give up” on Facts? Critical thinking? Science?


    Did you hear that Peevee? Hahahah!
    Hahahahahahahahaha!…rat Emery doesn’t get the joke!!! Hahahahaha

  3. MP, I have it on very good authority that beaners resent being called “Latinx”. A Messkin friend (actually he’s Puerto Rican, but whenever he reminds me of that, I tell him they all look the same to me) told me it “sounds like some new kind of faggot”.

    He’s got a point.

  4. I imagine that they resent being called “beaners” as well, BPCT.
    There is some kind of war going on within the bourgeois that knows no color. It wasn’t Hispanics who originated the term “Latinx.” It wasn’t native Americans who renamed Lake Calhoun “Bde maka ska.”

  5. 1984. It will be read as a history book. Or most likely all copies will be burned and Orwell will be excised from all libraries and his name verbotten.

  6. “The moral arc of history is long, and it bends inexorably toward tyranny and barbarisim”.
    – Kevin Williamson.

  7. Here is the Slate article in MBerg’s screenshot:

    It’s a propaganda piece,and not a very well written one. ” . . . we liberals tend to pride ourselves on caring about evidence, science, and accuracy.”
    Does anyone think our resident liberal troll values “evidence, science, and accuracy”? I don’t. On the contrary, the troll will believe anything that fits his narrative.

    The problem with the article can be seen in it’s claim that “No, there won’t be death panels. No, Sarah Palin didn’t cut funding for special education. Yes, Obama was born in America. No, he wasn’t in the video for ‘(Whoomp!) There It Is.'”

    All of these statements (other than the last) are opinions, not facts. some of them may be more reasonable and easier to argue opinions, but that does not make them facts. The reason why “fact checks” are so controversial is that you need to word a statement very carefully to even make it a proper subject for a “fact check,” and politicians don’t use that kind of language. Fact checkers usually just give us their opinion that a thing is true or false. It is an op-ed trying to pass itself off as a statement of fact.

  8. Mitch, your post adds credence to the theory that BELIEVE THE SCIENCE is merely another religion, possibly leaning toward a cult.

    I still have my Baltimore Catechism books. My early religious educators were very clear that I had no business reading the Bible. “You’ll only confuse yourself,” they said. The Bible had already been read by People Smarter Than You and they had written it down everything a good boy needed to know. Just shut up and memorize it.

    I’m having a horrible vision of the E-Boy wearing a nun’s habit and cracking me with a ruler while yelling, “Stop thinking for yourself!” No way in Hell I’m getting shot with their Kool-Aid.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.