SUBSCRIBE:
Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2014/12. Is its parent directory writable by the server?

Stuff Leftist People Like #11-20 (aka Top 10 Things Leftists Like Continued)

by
Posted on November 10 2010 9:00 am
Scott Spiegel blogs at http://www.scottspiegel.com. He can be reached at spiegelscott@yahoo.com.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • RSS
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Digg
  • PDF
Print This Post Print This Post

Note: For the first installment of this series, please see Top 10 Things Leftists Like (aka Stuff Leftist People Like #1-10).

Two years ago, the satirical site Stuff White People Like (SWPL) debuted with the self-description:

“This is a scientific approach to highlight and explain stuff white people like. They are pretty predictable.”

Author Christian Lander released a book last year compiling the first 100 items in his list, and plans a follow-up release next month titled Whiter Shades of Pale: The Stuff White People Like, Coast to Coast, from Seattle’s Sweaters to Maine’s Microbrews. Copycat sites have sprung up since then, including Stuff Asian People Like, Stuff Black People Like, Stuff Latino People Like, and Stuff Queer People Like.

Though Lander’s write-ups are insightful and entertaining, there’s one problem: too many of the items in his list constitute stuff leftist white people like. For example, Lander offers the entries: Being Offended, Bumper Stickers, Non-Profit Organizations, Picking Their Own Fruit, Political Prisoners, Public Radio, Taking a Year Off, The Sunday New York Times, The World Cup, Threatening to Move to Canada, and Unpaid Internships. This is to say nothing of more obvious entries such as: Barack Obama, Diversity, Free Healthcare, Hating Corporations, Recycling, The Daily Show/Colbert Report, Toyota Prius, Vegan/Vegetarianism, and Whole Foods and Grocery Co-ops.

In the spirit of SWPL, and to extend the tradition for the amusement of those on the Right, I hereby continue “Stuff Leftist People Like”:


#11: Double Standards

Leftists love setting higher standards for their ideological opponents than themselves, because it allows them to condemn the supposed wickedness of the opposition while downplaying their own shortcomings. The complicity of the mainstream media allows them to pull off this duplicitous posture with élan.

For example, consider the issue of environmentalism. Most delegates to last year’s Copenhagen Climate Conference made firm commitments on behalf of their constituencies to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, but such privations most definitely did not extend to summit participants themselves. Laughable hypocrisy was abundantly on display in conference attendees’ lavish, luxury-filled, CO2 emission-intensive accommodations and entertainments. The UK Telegraph documented that the summit, including jet and limousine travel, would “create a total of 41,000 tonnes of ‘carbon dioxide equivalent,’” about the same as the daily emissions of 30 smaller countries.

Regarding free speech: at a townhall meeting on the Iraq War in San Francisco in 2006, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi highlighted the critical, historical role of legislator-constituent meetings and the importance of face-to-face confrontations between congressmen and the voters they represent. Pelosi declared:

“I draw great inspiration from [Franklin Roosevelt], because he was a disruptor. I’m a fan of disruptors.”

Three years later, Pelosi coauthored an editorial in USA Today on protestors at health care townhall meetings, in which she characterized health care townhall protests as “un-American.” She portrayed the protestors as enemies, not just of reform, but of our very way of life:

“These disruptions are occurring because opponents are afraid… of differing views… Drowning out opposing views is simply un-American… [I]t is now evident that an ugly campaign is underway… to disrupt public meetings and prevent members of Congress and constituents from conducting a civil dialogue.”

Regarding ethics reform: in 2006 the mainstream media and Congressional Democrats screamed bloody murder when President George W. Bush asked eight U.S. attorneys to resign, an act which he had full discretion to carry out. Several years later, President Barack Obama discharged Inspector General Gerald Walpin in retaliation for his critical report on Obama supporter and Sacramento mayor Kevin Johnson’s misuse of funds with nonprofit organization St. Hope Academy. Obama, instead of giving Congress 30 days’ notice regarding Walpin, as required, had a staffer contact Walpin on his cell phone and tell him he had one hour to resign or be fired. In doing so, Obama violated the Inspector General Reform Act—which Obama himself had cosponsored the previous year. Bush’s firing of his attorneys was within his right, whereas Obama’s firing was illegal. Naturally, mainstream newspapers broke the Bush story the second they got a whiff of it and didn’t remove it from their front pages until months later, whereas they practically ignored the Obama story.

Next: You are free to do as we tell you…

Continue reading page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

No comments yet

Leave a Reply

Note: You can use basic XHTML in your comments. Your email address will never be published.

Subscribe to this comment feed via RSS

Copyright 2014 NewsReal Blog

The Theme Foundry