Liberal-land sends hearty hello to the rest of America

Liberal-land sends hearty hello to the rest of America

It looks like Jen and I are the last conservative bloggers in Boston, if this is any indication. (Warning: Very rough language.)

(I know that’s not true, of course. There’s at least Tom and Mark.)

What we have at that link above is the Angry Left’s spleen-venting, a vicious tirade of invective against all those people below them who are so stupid and in-bred as to have voted for the President. Kettle, this is Pot: You’re black, too. And it’s not just Boston bloggers, but everywhere on the Net today it seems that most Lefties are showing why they are the Angry Left and why we say they are elitist and arrogant and don’t think the rest of us are smart enough to run our own lives so they should do it for us.

To listen to them complain, you’d think that new laws will be passed in the next week outlawing deviant sex and herding all Kerry voters into concentration camps. Don’t you worry folks, but, to borrow Kerry’s phrase, help is on the way. The economy is improving, al Quaeda is on the run and nearly run to ground, Iraq is getting more and more pacified with elections coming soon. This time next year, you’ll have found a whole new set of things to complain about because the old ones will be gone. (Just like you all used to complain about getting caught in quagmire in Afghanistan back in October 2001; Remember that old chestnut? How’d that work out for you?)

Today more than ever, I think I understand the meaning of the word shadenfreude

Share:FacebookX
43 comments
  • The Daschle loss is very good news.  I’m hoping that this means that the filibuster brigade will loose its steam and that Bush will start getting some of his nominees confirmed.

  • Massachusetts actually reelected every incumbent who ran, except of course Vinnie Ciampa, who lost to anti-Christian sexual activist Carl Sciortino.  My guess is that the 2005-2006 State Legislature will now vote to defeat the Travaglini-Lees amendment.

  • Today more than ever, I think I understand the meaning of the word shadenfreude (sic)

    Wow, that was the word I was looking for, and couldn’t remember it!  Thanks.  As I was watching the Kerry concession speech today, I was thinking to myself, “man, this is a near occasion of sin”, on account of the joy that I was feeling over his loss.

  • I’ve heard repeated references to how the black vote went, how hispanics voted, the gender gap… but no where have I heard about the proportion of how Catholics voted.  And the losing candidate was even (supposedly) Catholic.  Odd, no?

  • Chris, you’re just not spending enough time on the Internet.  grin

    Earlier today, I saw an estimate that practicing Catholics voted for W. 55-45, confirming that there is a distinct Catholic vote.

  • I agree, McNamara’s column was way off-base. It is clear that many, if not a majority of Catholics, have moved into the conservative realm of thinking. For her to suggest anything different is short-sighted and demonstrates a lack of knowledge.

    I also agree that, with hindsight being 20/20, John Edwards would have been a better choice to nominate this year. Kerry was not able to reach out to any of the states that he needed to capture. With such a vulnerable incumbent, it is just unacceptable.

    George Bush was not the better candidate in this race and it was not even close. But his braintrust did a superior job in this campaign and earned a victory that he did not deserve.

    Pundits from the left loved to point out that Bush used issues like gay marriage to cover up the real issues in our country (deficit, economy, relationship with the rest of the world). The thing is: IT WORKED!

    Democrats aren’t happy right now, but he won THIS election. He went out and walloped John Kerry.

    And now, for the next four years, we enter the great unknown. . .

  • Kelly—I’m a recent convert to *Catholicism*. But I’ve been a conservative for 22 years. Not sure where you’re getting the ‘recent’ from—you’re perhaps confusing me with someone else?

  • great unknown. . .”

    Wrong.

    We know what we are going to get and, personally, I’m loving it.

    I personally nominate Terry McAuliffe to a lifetime appointment as DNC head. His work has been remarkable.

    And no thanks to the Massachusetts Catholics Bishops who meekly posted a pro-life statement on election day. (a little late)

  • You’re right that this is in no way an “unqualified win.” Five words: Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Arlen Specter. When the alternative was so bad, Bush and Santorum felt free to deliver their core constituency a slap in the face when it suited them. The exit polls reveal that Bush owes his victory to his championing of moral values, not to his foreign policy. Those “moral values” voters need to remind Bush of this constantly over the next four years; they should have been sounding the alarms the moment he betrayed them by endorsed Specter over Toomey. I guess there was very little outcry because Kerry was so scary; but what does it matter that Kerry was defeated if Bush won’t work towards a Supreme Court capable of overturning Roe? Likewise for his sudden change of heart re: civil unions.

    there is a lot of education needed for Catholics on their civic responsibilities.

    you can say that again, and it doesn’t just apply to those who voted for Kerry!

    I trust it’s OK to put the screws to Bush now that he’s safely elected.

  • You can add my name to your list and I’m from California which went the Kerry way. The thing I was saddened about the most was that not enough of us voted against Prop.71. 6million dollars going to kill babies. That is very, very sad.

  • Not just the “angry left,” Dom.  The supposedly moderate intelligentsia are utterly baffled by the whole “morals thing” (which is what I actually heard Paul Begala and a number of other commentators call it).  You mean – people believe in a big spook in the sky who controls their actions?  That they think the state of their (giggle) “immortal soul” is more important than the mininum wage, or health care?  How. . .quaint.

  • “Earlier today, I saw an estimate that practicing Catholics voted for W. 55-45, confirming that there is a distinct Catholic vote.”

    Obviously nearly half of practicing Catholics need more practice. 

  • Y’know what ‘s really funny about this lament that under Bush bombs will be dropped across America (see comments from the residents of Cambridge)-didn’t we keep hearing that al Queda would do something disaterous to affect the outcome of the election-and Osama himself warned us who we should be voting for?

    I said it before and I still stand by it.  al Queda and Osama wanted Kerry in office so that a. we’d leave them alone b. they could bomb us and Kerry wouldn’t do anything, like, or say, go to war. Or at least seek retaliation for killing Americans.

  • Interesting picture.  Bostonians riot when their team wins the World Series and cry in their Starbuck’s when their guy loses the election.  I wonder what the response would have been if the two outcomes were reversed?

  • Bostonians didn’t riot when the Sox won the Series. A couple dozen drunken college kids set some fires and damaged some property, but that hardly typifies the response. Sorry, but that’s one urban legend I don’t want catching on.

  • So the war in Iraq, the fact that we have gone from surplus to deficit in four years, the fact that we have one true ally in the world and the fact that people are losing jobs at an alarming rate are non-issues?

  • Well, gee, as long as we’re correcting…nobody rioted when we won the Series. The few “knucklehead” (first and probably the last time I agree with His Honor Mayor Mumbles Menino) students made asses out of themselves and incidentally brought about the death of a young girl after the pennant win, not the Series.

    ‘Course, there might’ve been a riot after the “party” on Tuesday night…except there wasn’t one.

  • One true ally?  Is that Australia, Poland, Britain, Romania, Fiji, Italy, the Philippines, Japan, or Israel?

  • Sorry, I didn’t mean to touch a nerve. I fell into the liberal media trap.  Out here in the hearland, they made it look like the whole town of Boston was about to go crazy. 

    My point was that the liberals are so out of touch with reality that they have no idea what the proper response is to anything.

  • Also for the record- most of the knucleheads who rioted during the Pennant win were the same “black shirts” who tried to stir up trouble during the DNC.  Apparently Lansdowne Street is one of the major hang-outs for the local anarchists.

  • Or the rest of the 35-nation coalition with troops in Iraq, never mind the additional countries that can’t send troops, but are nevertheless supportive?

    Yes, the war in Iraq that has removed a brutal dictator who was working hard at developing nuclear weapons and was working with terrorist groups and had vowed to attack America.

    Yes, a deficit caused by an economy that is in its normal cycle of up and down that started to go down when Clinton was president and then took another hit when America’s financial centers were attacked by terrorists. But now the economy is growing at a rapid pace and that people aren’t losing jobs, but that the number of jobs is growing by hundreds of thousands every month and the unemployment rate is as low as it was in the middle of Clinton’s term in office.

    You really have to stop listening to all the crap people shovel you and learn about this stuff for yourself. Your liberal professors and the mainstream media are not the place to get the truth about this. They hate Bush and will tell you anything to get you to hate him too.

  • KeepStAsOpen,

    None of the stuff you list is half as capable of sending people to hell as abortion and gay “marriages.”  Those are intrinsically objective evils.

    What really matters to you anyway?

  • You really have to stop listening to all the crap people shovel you and learn about this stuff for yourself.

    There are sound reasonable people that thought that going into Iraq without an exit strategy would be a mistake. ( Bush Sr. is one of them. )

    There are sound, reasonable people that believe that a coalition of 100 countries where 90% of the cost and a greater percentage of soldiers coming from one country ain’t much of a coalition.

    There are sound, reasonable people that think a negative job growth is a bad thing.  Yes its going up but its still negative.

    Is George W. the better choice over Kerry?  Yes. But if someone has reservations over his first four years, it is entirely possible that it isn’t just “crap shoveled upon him”

    The President is positioned to make a historic difference in the Supreme Court.  If, when the opportunity comes, he appoints pro-choice justices, he will have no excuses. 

  • It’s one thing to come up with reasonable reservations, but it’s another to parrot back campaign slogans. Tell me why it was bad, don’t just tell me it was bad. (That’s a rhetorical question. I’m not asking for a long discourse on this stuff; I still disagree with you on most of it.)

  • Keep St. A’s –

    “People dying. “

    Right, 1.3 million people murdered in the womb every year. With John Kerry as the train conductor as the little bodies get loaded on to the boxcars.

  • Dom, who’s watch did 9/11 happen on with the warning signs all there?

    All right, let me ask you this. . . this is a hypothetical obviously but answer honestly.

    If John Kerry didn’t ignore his Catholic faith completely and ran this campaign pro-life and anti-gay marriage, who would you have voted for?

  • Who ignored the 1993 WTC bombing, the Khobar Towers bombing, and the Cole bombing, let Osama get away scot-free and generally treated terrorists like a nuisance for eight years, leaving a mess for Bush to clean up?

    Secondly do you mean if John Kerry wasn’t John Kerry would I have voted for him? No, because even if he was pro-life and against gay marriage his foreign and domestic policies would still be the wrong prescription for the country. But that’s irrelevant because the Democrats will never nominate a pro-life presidential candidate. They’re too beholden to the radical fringe for that.

  • Wow.. interesting hypothetical..

    If (yeah big if) Kerry proclaimed to follow Catholic teachings (i.e. pro-life) was running against Bush (pro-choice), you would then base your vote on foreign policy?

    Oh and Dom, when the new job creation catches up to 1.5 percent of the population annually,about I’ll quit bringing up the whole negative job growth thing. 

  • How high must job growth be? The unemployment rate is right at structural unemployment. It’s not like this is double-digit percentages. It’s as low as it was all through the 90s when everyone was talking about the roaring economy. The only reason people think there’s a lot of unemployment now is because the media is telling them there is.

    As for the hypothetical, I took it to mean, what if there were no difference between Kerry and Bush on life issues. I don’t consider Bush to be pro-choice. He is not in favor of abortion as Kerry and his ilk is. Someone who falls just short of the Church’s teaching on abortion is not automatically pro-choice, pro-abortion.

  • 5% unemplyment is full. We’re at 5.4% right now.

    Liberals are just testy because these 337,000 new ones are private sector ..they prefer gov’t jobs where they don’t have to work so hard.

    With a pro-life stance..  Kerry would have never made it past the Iowa caucuses. Gov. Bob Casey (PA) was the last pro-life Dem. Even Ray Flynn, former mayor of Boston and Clinton regime Vatican Ambassador, was stumping for W.

    Catholic and Democrat? Impossible nowadays. 

  • Keep,

    “….whoDATA[Patrick Sweeney]]>
    extremecatholic@nyc.rr.com
    http://extremecatholic.blogspot.com
    24.29.134.67
    2004-11-03 15:53:08
    2004-11-03 19:53:08
    The Daschle loss is full of meaning here.  It’s time to take the gloves off and treat the Democrats as a “national party no more”.  We don’t have 60 votes in the Senate but the 46 Dems will need some roads built in their districts and other pork.

    We don’t have to crush them, but if they want to self-destruct let’s not stand in the doorway.

  • George Bush, in the most powerful position in the world, has not been able to capture Osama Bin Laden, though openly promising to “smoke him out of his hole.”

    At least he killed hundreds of innocent Iraqis though,

  • “George Bush, in the most powerful position in the world, has not been able to capture Osama Bin Laden, though openly promising to Kerry still has a job.  I wonder if he’ll start showing up for it now.

Archives

Categories