Subscribe via RSS Feed

Would I Link to Whiskey Fire Just So I Could Take Cheap Shots at an Erick Erickson Column? Yes.

[ 140 ] June 24, 2014 |

…wherein Erick Erickson throws everything at the wall including his Megyn Kelly Love Pillow...

An honest person would concede that most Americans do not find the word redskins offensive and an honest person would concede that at its creation the trademarks for the Washington Redskins were not considered offensive.

An honest person would also concede that most Americans were cool with things like anti-miscegenation laws and slavery for a long time. It has frequently been the case that “most Americans” have been morons inarguably wrong about things. Guess what: they’re wrong again.

Professional victims must now work even harder to find racist things to get worked up about.

Oh, this old chestnut. Of course, people who object to the name aren’t sincere

These guilt-ridden children of privilege and their cousins

…but they’re still guilt-ridden for some reason? I dunno. Please embigify the dumbening, Erick.

These guilt-ridden children of privilege and their cousins — the already rich, white liberal — could care less to walk a day in someone else’s shoes. They could care less to connect a world outside their bubble. They have decided they are the standard bearers of a secular moral code and will punish those who deviate. In their desire for diversity they dress the same, eat the same, read the same and tweet “Game of Thrones” spoilers. When the facts do not suit their demands, they conjure convenient new facts that may fly in the face of reality, but anyone who points that out is labeled a bigot, racist or conservative.

A.) It’s “couldn’t care less.”

B.) “Walking a day in someone else’s shoes” is kind of the liberal raison d’etre, in case you hadn’t heard. Sure, we’re always insincere about wanting to walk in someone else’s shoes, but it’s still “our thing.” I will walk in anyone else’s shoes unless those shoes are Uggs. If you’re wearing Uggs, go die in the gutter, Ugg-wearer. Uggs? More like “Ughs,” amirite, ladies? I’M SORRY. I have no idea why this early-80′s-era comedian interrupted this entry.

C.) “Game of Thrones” spoilers? “The Bold and the Beautiful” or GTFO, Erick!!

D.) Citations etc. etc. I’ve never conjured a fact in my life. I’m too busy conjuring unicorns!

In another age, these people would be called busy bodies.

Pantysniffers say what?

At the end of the 20th century, they were called liberals. Prior to World War II, they were called progressive, but too many of them embraced Hitler’s eugenics programs and Stalin’s pogroms.

Well, they were fabulous progroms, filled with music and dance!

They suddenly shifted to being called liberals and only now, having ruined that label at the end of the 20th century, are transitioning back to progressive.

I have no idea where we’re going with this, but the jizz-coated Megyn Kelly love pillow has landed with a thud on the ground. So I’ll just leave you with this question: Can any of you get a handle on where liberals fall on the socioeconomic spectrum? I’ll read one wingnut column and it’s all “black moocher moocher moocher.” And then I’ll read another and it’s about rich white liberal elitists. I swear, it’s like…moocher/wealthy elite/moocher/wealthy elite… So are we poor black people who just want our Obamaphones or are we the idle rich, sitting around sending rude tweets to Dan Snyder because we’re bored and racism is more fun than Halo? I get so confused.

Comments (140)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Peter says:

    Racist Halo was pretty disappointing, admittedly.

  2. tsam says:

    ERICK!

    U mad, bro?

    • jon says:

      His article certainly doesn’t get off to a good start:

      “The United States Patent and Trademark Office invalidated several patents belonging to the Washington Redskins. This is not the first attempt by aggrieved parties to have the trademarks revoked.”

      Confuses patents and trademarks in the first two sentences. I’ve noticed this same problem in a number of the pro-Redskins articles/blogs I’ve seen since this decision came out.

  3. tsam says:

    Is it a skill or disability to begin with being offended by people being offended by an offensive name to eugenics and pogroms?

    I’m going with disability–like a synaptic disorder or being stupid.

    • bspencer says:

      I mean…they always always have to work Hitler in there somehow. I think it’s required or they take away your Red State Trike Force card.

      • Anonymous says:

        Trike Force Five?

      • runsinbackground says:

        I dunno, eugenics as an idea was around for quite some time before the National Socialists got hold of it, but the bit about Stalin is arguably a fair cop; if I’m reading my Himes and Steinbeck correctly there really were people in the American Labor Movement who were allied to Stalinist Russia.

        • tsam says:

          Eugenics was around among reactionary racists, yeah. American labor was in love with the idea of the power being in the hands of the people instead of oligarchs and plutocrats, which was a tenet of Marxism that didn’t really translate to Stalinist philosophy. So saying liberals like eugenics and pogroms is more than just a stretch of the truth. It’s more like outright bullshit bingo for his pants-shitting, dopey audience.

          • Anonymous says:

            Margaret Sanger was a supporter of Eugenics it’s where the abortion movement came from.

            • Morbo says:

              Mmmm, aged chestnut flavored pancakes.

            • JMP says:

              Oh why don’t you bring up Saul Alinsky next!

              Really I think I’d have forgotten who Margaret Sanger was if wingnuts didn’t think they could play “gotcha!” by posthumously discrediting her. No, sorry, we don’t have the same hero worship you guys do, and don’t really care about your attacks on people who died half a century ago.

              Also, that might be a little more effective if we hadn’t all heard it thousands and thousands of times before. Really, if you bring up the same lame “gotcha!” constantly, it kind of just gets old.

            • DrDick says:

              Daddy Koch founded the John Birch Society and his boys founded and fund the Tea Party. Do you have a point, other than the one on your head?

            • socraticsilence says:

              Yes and Reagan launched his campaign for president by subtly applauding 3 lynchings. Notice only side still idolizes their troubled/bigoted founder.

            • Chris says:

              Margaret Sanger was a supporter of Eugenics it’s where the abortion movement came from.

              You’re adorable.

              You and everyone else who belives the “abortion movement” was invented out of thin air by one devious eugenicist in order to further her plots, because it would never have occurred to women before the 1920s to get one.

              (Certainly there were no issues with pregnancies endangering women’s lives, single mothers getting pregnant with babies they couldn’t raise, pregnancies resulting from rape, back in the Good Old Days. Those things all came with socialized medecine).

            • MAJeff says:

              Don’t forget Darwin’s evolutionary theory leading straight to Auschwitz!

            • tsam says:

              So a phony science invented and perpetuated by racist conservatives may or may not have been supported by someone who was an abortion proponent so therefore liberals = eugenics QED. Is that about right?
              Good lord. You are one stupid stupid person.

        • Mister Harvest says:

          During WWII, the entire country was allied to Stalinist Russia, lest we forget.

        • Brad Nailer says:

          Come for the communism, stay for the forced mass starvation? I don’t think so.

    • DrDick says:

      I am going with severe brain damage resulting from repeated beatings as a child (and admit it, it Erick were your child you would have been sorely tempted).

      • Alan in SF says:

        It’s like he unknowingly got dosed with acid while reading “Liberal Fascism” and now his brain is spiraling out of control.

        Plus I am too busy doing the hippity-hop break dancing to be tweeting “Game of Thrones” spoilers.

      • Hogan says:

        and admit it, it Erick were your child you would have been sorely tempted

        Not cool, my friend.

        • Aimai says:

          I have to agree with Hogan here. If Erick Erickson had been my child he’d be a happy, loveable, well adjusted, liberal right this moment. No beatings necessary or applied. He must have had a terrible childhood to have emerged as such a shitty person.

          • Origami Isopod, Commisar [sic] of Ideology for the Bolsheviks says:

            He must have had a terrible childhood to have emerged as such a shitty person.

            I don’t know that this is necessarily true.

  4. Is it possible to take a “cheap shot” at anything this asshole muddies with his presence? Every shot Erick Erickson gets is well deserved, arguably.

  5. Anonymous says:

    It’s almost reassuring to see such old school conservative projection, aside from how when they use liberal straw(wo)men to describe what they want to do it’s fucking terrifying due to eliminationist rhetoric.

  6. Owlbear1 says:

    What is it they say of Erickson?

    “A bit on the stupid side but an incredible self-promoter.”

  7. Second cousins, once removed, of the guilt-ridden children of privilege says:

    These guilt-ridden children of privilege and their cousins

    What about us? And the in-laws, are they included? Also crazy Uncle Bert is feeling left out now.

    • crazy Uncle Bert says:

      Actually, I think this Erickson guy needs help.

      Which says a lot, coming from me.

      • Alan in SF says:

        Is he talking about us guilt-ridden children, and our cousins, or does he mean that we are children of both privilege and our cousins? Now he’s really projecting.

    • rea says:

      Privileged Evelyn Mulwray: She’s my daughter.

      [Gittes slaps Evelyn]

      Jake Gittes: I said I want the truth!

      Evelyn Mulwray: She’s my cousin…

      [slap]

      Evelyn Mulwray: She’s my daughter…

      [slap]

      Evelyn Mulwray: My sister, my cousin.

      [More slaps]

      Jake Gittes: I said I want the truth!

      Evelyn Mulwray: She’s my sister AND my cousin!

      Forget it, Jake, it’s Erickson . . .

  8. herr doktor bimler says:

    “Walking a day in someone else’s shoes” is kind of the liberal raison d’etre

    Typical free-loaders, can’t be arsed buying your own shoes, so you just borrow someone else’s.

  9. herr doktor bimler says:

    First we called them busy-bodies. Then we called them liberals, now we call them progressives. Why won’t they make up their minds what we call them?

    It is as if EE is under some sort of geas to speak in a Homer Simpson voice.

  10. Hogan says:

    It’s “couldn’t care less.”

    THANK you.

  11. Something something manifolds says:

    So much effort being expended to protect the sacred right to enjoy a previously-uncared about thing once it’s discovered it’s offensive to someone else. Such resentment. Wow.

  12. Hogan says:

    I swear, it’s like…moocher/wealthy elite/moocher/wealthy elite… So are we poor black people who just want our Obamaphones or are we the idle rich, sitting around sending rude tweets to Dan Snyder because we’re bored and racism is more fun than Halo? I get so confused.

    I once almost wrote a dissertation about the construction of Catholics as a weird kind of Other: not the opposite of American, but simultaneously the two extremes at the reasonable middle of which Americans stand: both authoritarian and permissive; both sexually repressive and libertine; both inflexibly dogmatic and hypocritical.

    Then I got a full-time job. The end.

    • steve says:

      That goes well with the Madonna/whore dichotomy.

    • tsam says:

      You could write that for all eternity. American sensibilities are so fucking crammed full of paradoxes and blatant inconsistencies that I can’t even keep up.

      Please write that dissertation. I need a reference manual.

      • Hogan says:

        All funding offers will be given serious consideration.

        In the section on Fenimore Cooper’s The Prairie I walked it back to the pre-1763 English colonial sense of encirclement by the mighty Spanish conquistadores and the mighty French, uh, fur traders. I’m not sure current me can stand by that connection, but it’s an English department, so what the hell.

    • UserGoogol says:

      One way of reconciling it is that the liberal elitists are controlling the dumb moochers, which conservatives periodically explicitly describe politics as being like.

      To be somewhat fair, it’s not particularly uncommon for liberals to treat conservatives as a dichotomy between rich plutocrats and dumb hicks. I think liberals are generally better at not broadly stereotyping people like that, but it’s a pattern that exists throughout the human condition in general. But some writers really embrace that sort of stereotyping.

      • bspencer says:

        Problem is that wingnuts often describe ALL liberals as moochers. Then in the next breath describe them ALL as wealthy elite. We can’t be both at the same time.

        I, OTOH, have no problem admitting that the right wing is made up of a coalition of dumb hicks and rich plutocrats.

        • tsam says:

          They’re moochers who got wealthy and elite from mooching offa hard working heartland folks.

          (That’s my interpretation–somewhere there is a wingnut Rosetta Stone, but this is my translation.)

      • Chris says:

        So, they think liberal elitists are the Vorta to the dumb black moochers’ Jem’Hadar?

    • Aimai says:

      I would have loved to read that dissertation. Fascinating. I am still in the middle (because I started five other books and re-read Shogun in the middle, ok?) of reading The Paranoid Style and it has a long section on the way Catholicism stood in for other pagan/sexy/rapey/abortiony fantasies for and clericals ever since the French Revolution. You can see it still in the various Protestant/far right approaches to Catholicism to this day.

      • Xenos says:

        Is there anything like a coherent class analysis going on in Wingnuttia? A lot of this sounds like a bourgeois screed that the Monarchists (with “Celebrities” as the royalists) are controlling the urban mobs in order to oppress the Huguenots or something.

        At other times the true conservatives are the ones with the true religion, being hounded by the Roundheads and their standing army.

        I don’t even know what century they are talking about.

  13. steve says:

    An honest person would concede that at the time Washington’s trademark was ceeated, most people did not find eugenics and pogroms offensive either.

  14. NBarnes says:

    Even by the previous high standards set by Erik son of Erik, that was a MASSIVE ragegasm. He must have needed a cigarette after that.

  15. runsinbackground says:

    Regarding his assertion that “there are numerous sports teams on Indian reservations around the United States that use the name Redskins,” I don’t know about any place else, but the athletic teams from the Pine Ridge School are called the Thorpes after Jim Thorpe. Their symbol is a guy wearing a war-bonnet, but it seems to me that if anyone has a right to use that image to represent them it’s a group of Native American highschoolers.

    • DrDick says:

      I have never heard of any such things (and I have been living around Indians all my life and studying them professionally for more than 40 years), though it was likely quite common in the white border towns surrounding the reservations.

    • JMP says:

      Even if that were true, it would be just as bullshit as the common “rappers use the N-word, so I should be allowed to use it too!” racist complaint, and for the same reasons.

    • Bill Murray says:

      I am pretty sure that none of the South Dakota reservation schools call their teams Redskins. Their are Falcons, Crusaders, Mustangs, Warriors, Braves, Chieftains, Wambdi, Indians, Skyhawks, Sioux, Thunderhawks, Chiefs, and Raiders. Unless Wambdi means Redskins there are no Redskins in South Dakota schools.

      • NonyNony says:

        And even if the word “Wambdi” literally translates as “Redskins” it still wouldn’t carry the racist baggage that the word “redskin” carries when applied to a person.

        Context matters. This is something that assholes don’t seem to get. If the logo for the Washington Racial Epithets were a small red potato rather than a fairly obvious native American face, then I doubt that there would be nearly the number of objections to the name.

        • I'm Nobody -- what's it to you? says:

          I would totally go back to my abusive boyfriend, football, if the Washington team changed their mascot to a small red potato! Imagine the concessions!

  16. tsam says:

    An honest person would concede that Manifest Destiny wasn’t offensive at the time of its inception.

  17. SatanicPanic says:

    Greedy conservatives are even trying to hog all the outrage. Typical.

  18. Jim Harrison says:

    You’re going to see quite a fee free passes given out if the parole board is staffed by the other inmates.

  19. JMP says:

    He says “When the facts do not suit their demands, they conjure convenient new facts that may fly in the face of reality” – and then goes on to claim that progressives prior to World War II “embraced Hitler’s eugenics programs”. Uh, no, those were conservatives, just like Hitler himself, so Erik is already creating his own facts. And I bet it wouldn’t take long to find him engaging global warming denialism, though that would take reading his columns beyond the vague headers and pretentious historical allusions he begins most columns with before torturing them into somehow seeming relevant to whatever contemporary issue he’s lying about.

  20. KmCO says:

    Shorter Ewick Ewickson: The right* white people are precious, delicate snowflakes who bristle when atrocious white behavior toward other ethnicities is brought up, so how dare you, wrong** white people

    *Those who live in HeartlandTM outer-ring suburbs, exurbs, and rural areas.

    **Those who live in inner-ring suburbs and coastal large cities.

  21. Shakezula says:

    could care less to walk a day in someone else’s shoes. They could care less to connect a world outside their bubble.

    I must note – for perhaps the 11 jillionth time – that the people who run around screaming that America is an English Only Nation sure seem bent on assaulting and insulting English until she runs screaming from the country.

    However, I do hope Ewick’s claim that it is the non-liberal who has walked in the shoes of the oppressed gets picked up for massive distribution. Members of the GOP claiming that only they understand the problems of the darkies, bitchez and queers would have to be good for at least a couple of seats in the house.

  22. JustRuss says:

    the already rich, white liberal — could care less to walk a day in someone else’s shoes.

    Ahem:

    “Empathy my ass!”– former RNC Chair and not-liberal Michael Steele

    • Aimai says:

      Holy shit, didn’t they practically have some congressman symbolically shoot the dictionary (jk) for including the word Empathy during the nomination hearings for Kagan and agan for Sotomayor? The very word makes them retch.

  23. mtraven says:

    Can any of you get a handle on where liberals fall on the socioeconomic spectrum? I’ll read one wingnut column and it’s all “black moocher moocher moocher.” And then I’ll read another and it’s about rich white liberal elitists. I swear, it’s like…moocher/wealthy elite/moocher/wealthy elite…

    Oh I know this one! The theory (which I’ve seen made explicit often enough in my journeys through wingnuttia) is that the left is an alliance of these two groups against the put-upon hard-working middle-class white family man. That is why the seeming incongruity.

    If you trace this trope backwards, you get to the question of how the Nazis managed to create an anti-semitic caricature of Jews as simultaneously wealthy elitists, communist subversives, and loathsomely impoverished vermin, all allied against the normal Germans. Same shit different era.

  24. Chris says:

    At the end of the 20th century, they were called liberals. Prior to World War II, they were called progressive, but too many of them embraced Hitler’s eugenics
    programs
    and Stalin’s pogroms.

    So… We’re all Nazi, eugenicist, white supremacist supervillains, and that’s why we’re siding with American Indian activists against those poor beleaguered white people on a matter that we and they believe is white racism?

    Good talk!

  25. James Wimberley says:

    “Could care less” is accepted American usage and is recognized by the OED. Read the experts at Language Log.

    Mind you, the phrase is only used by the sort of semiliterate hicks who use “careen” of speeding getaway cars and not in the correct everyday sense of drawing up your pirate ship on to a Caribbean beach so the barnacles can be scraped off, or insult the memory of the very effective viceroy Count Grigori Potemkin by mindlessly repeating his enemies’ invention of fake villages built to impress Catherine the Great, rather than the real cities he actually had to show her.

  26. actor212 says:

    A REALLY honest (white) person would admit that while he does not find the term offensive, he doesn’t know how a Native American would feel so he goes and asks them and realizes it’s an offensive term.

  27. Matt says:

    So are we poor black people who just want our Obamaphones or are we the idle rich, sitting around sending rude tweets to Dan Snyder because we’re bored and racism is more fun than Halo?

    Both. See also wingnut views on religion (“Merika is a Christian nation” and “Christians are horribly persecuted”), women (“unable to do great things” and also secretly controlling every aspect of “feminized” society), African-Americans (“lazy + shiftless moochers”, but also secretly plotting a race war and hiding behind every bush waiting to mug white people) and undocumented immigrants (also “lazy moochers”, but simultaneously “taking all our jobs”).

    Doublethink, yo.

    • Some Guy says:

      Don’t forget that Obama is both a incompetent, pantywaisted, limp-wristed pussy who projects weakness to our enemies, and an unstoppable tyrant who is single-handed destroying the country with his iron fist.

    • DrS says:

      It’s almost like you can’t be a conservative without massive amounts of cognitive dissonance.

      Spent the weekend with my gung-ho tea party dad…oh brother.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

  • Switch to our mobile site