Wednesday, October 24, 2012

"Why has the GOP become the freedom party?"

I love Camille Paglia. Few people analyze pop culture, think deeper about it, and write about it as well as she does. She is the rare liberal who can cogently critique her own side and honestly evaluate conservative phenomena without tearing her hair out, becoming unhinged or lapsing into cliché.  She defended Sarah Palin during the onslaught of unhinged leftwing attacks even as she vehemently disagreed with much of Sara's ideology.

 And most delightful of all, she is so venerable and respected that she can tell blasphemous truths to even a Salon writer and not get her eyes scratched out or get thrown down the memory hole. If her own side would listen to her, perhaps they could find their way out of the wilderness and put the disastrous age of Obama behind them.

She’s voting Green Party this time because she’s disgusted with Obama’s “endless wars” and “creeping totalitarianism,” among other things. 

On the media's love affair with Barack Obama:
The media’s pampering and protection of Obama over the years simply led to his weakening — which was on excruciating public display at his first debate with Romney, who landed blow after blow.
She cuts to the illogical core of Obamacare:
But the childish naivete of so many supposedly well-educated liberals was shown by their complete failure to notice or remark on the most glaringly obvious deficiency in Obamacare: You cannot possibly expand medical coverage to millions of people without also expanding medical training and funding new clinics and hospitals. The total absence of that in the bill was ludicrous. And you still hear mush-minded liberals saying all the time in the media, “Oh, what about this nice provision or that?” When any of those things could have been easily dealt with by free-standing bills passed with bipartisan support.
 She scolds her fellow liberals, who forget liberty is the etymological root of their shared moniker:
The way liberals lay down flat to accept this massive, totalitarian takeover of the American medical system was shocking to me.
Her interviewer goes on a mini tirade, blaming the GOP for the growing surveillance state, but Ms. Paglia stops him cold:
Wait a minute, hold it, no! Listen — a huge point I want to make is that the protest against the surveillance state has, with only a few exceptions, been mainly coming from the Right and not from the Left! Talk radio has been seething with this issue for years. A good example is talk-show host Mark Levin’s “Liberty and Tyranny,” which was a No. 1 New York Times bestseller three years ago and yet got very few mainstream reviews.
Democrats have got to wake up! This is why the Republican Party has gained and why the Democratic Party is in disarray — because the Democrats have lost one of their key signature issues from 1960s leftism. Why has the GOP become the freedom party?
The Left must retake this issue of personal freedom and civil liberties. Over the last 20 years, freedom has become a conservative watch word, and liberals have lost their claim to it. There is a huge difference between contemporary upper-middle-class bourgeois Democratic liberalism and the fire-breathing 1960s leftism that was the mood of my college years. After all, it all began with the free speech movement at Berkeley! But liberals have now been trained to be docile and obedient.
As someone who listens to talk radio, I must tell you that the issue of personal freedom and resistance to a swollen totalitarian government has become primary on the Right.
All Quotes from Salon

Children are our Future

All of this is a lead-in to a wonderful YouTube video made by liberty-loving youngsters, from California of all places! I thought Z was the last Republican in the state...

It’s short, sincere, and very well made. While the left is busy trying to snuff the torch of liberty, it is the right fighting to keep the flame burning brightly.


68 comments:

Constitutional Insurgent said...

She is correct in that most of the pushback against the security state has come from the right, those Conservatives who are dedicated civil libertarians....and she's correct that the left has done yeoman's work in enabling it.

But labeling the GOP as the 'freedom party' is laughable, given that much of the apparatus of the security state has come about through the GOP.

Z said...

I've always loved Camille Paglia, too. She's a thinker and she isn't ideological. She THINKS. A liberal who cares more for the country and rights and fairness than liberalism.
I suspect she and Breitbart would have been fast friends had they met and had he lived. may he rest in peace (Pray for his wife and children, by the way, please)

As for the California video, I'm sending this to a history teacher I know. He's more liberal, but he's like Camille; he believes in our kids knowing all sides.

As for Z being the only Republican in California, I'm DEEPLY flattered but have to say I know some of the BEST Republicans ever and they're in my state. As a matter of fact, the legal Mexicans I personally know are ALL proud Republicans fearful of what's happening to their country. God bless them. My blog has a video now of a Mexican man talking about Romney. I hope you come by.

blessings for your day. Z

Always On Watch said...

Paglia is exactly correct about that huge flaw in ObamaCare.

The coming tsunami of Boomers is being ignored by many on both the Right and the Left.

Within five years, the elephant in the room will no longer be able to be ignored. Then, what?

Darth Bacon said...

Nothing here about the new breaking story regarding what did Obama know and when did he know it?

Read all about it on Drudge today.

Obama's goose is cooked.

FreeThinke said...

I've enjoyed Paglia for many years, but I would never categorize her as a "liberal" -- certainly not in the perverted sense that term has come to mean in our time.

As Z said, Paglia is a THINKER not an IDEOLOGUE -- a refreshing rarity in this brutally bifurcated society.

That she speaks for herself -- not for a "movement" or a "party" -- is the basis of her appeal to rational people.

She is an uncommonly elegant writer. I've never known her to use "talking points," though she may have unwittingly originated a few along the way.

It should be mentioned that Paglia is an unabashed, uncloseted lesbian, but much to her credit has never made a career of her sexual orientaton or joined the thoroughly obnoxious, in-your-face Gay Liberation Movement. Paglia may at times be highly provocative, but I've never known her to be vulgar.

Paglia in truth cannot be pigeonholed. She belongs in no specific, easily labeled category. She is -- like our Founders, themselves, -- a true original, a unique personality with a good heart, a sensible, realistic outlook, and an exceptionally fine mind.

Kudos to the ultra-liberal, usually odious Salon.com for publishing her to-them controversial views -- and to SilverFiddle, who has vigorously affirmed the archaic, Church-generated notion that homosexuality must be regarded as sinful and socially unacceptable, for sharing Paglia's thoughts in such an amiable fashion.

Paglia might well be considered the female equivalent to the late Christopher Hitchens, who was also intelligent, informed and sensitive enough to be "all over the map" on many issues that others dully regard as cut, dried and settled without any need for further discussion.

May God bless those with lively, inquisitive minds and questing souls! They are our best hope for a brighter future.

We may long for stability, as I certainly do, but we must at the same time be aware that too much stability can lead to the stultifying smugness and dull-witted stagnation of Philistinism and mindless chauvinism.

~ FreeThinke

FreeThinke said...

The beautiful young people on the video -- each with a surprisingly mature outlook -- must have been schooled at home. How else could they have escaped the systematic brainwashing and Socialist Indoctrination most receive in public schools today.

Though obviously "scripted," they delivered their lines with uncommon sweetness and wholehearted conviction. Very nice!

~ FT

Ducky's here said...

Wait a minute, hold it, no! Listen — a huge point I want to make is that the protest against the surveillance state has, with only a few exceptions, been mainly coming from the Right and not from the Left!

------
Well here's one leftist who's been concerned ever since COINTELPRO.

But now that the right wing bed wetters are being targeted hey get concerned?
Suck it, Paglia you clown.

Ducky's here said...

How is Sarah Palin defensible?

Ducky's here said...

Remember, FT, Paglia's idea of a strong woman is Madonna.

conservativesonfire said...

Liberty. Freedom. Wouldn't it be nice if both parties really belived in those principles?

Constitutional Insurgent said...

"Liberty. Freedom. Wouldn't it be nice if both parties really belived in those principles?"

I'm not a terribly religious guy....but I'll give that an Amen!

Bunkerville said...

Funny how the ACLU has more or less disappeared from view.

-FJ said...

concerned ever since COINTELPRO....

...because subversiveness should be a one way street that runs from Left to Right... and never the other way.

-FJ said...

Entryism is also a two way street, duckman.

KP said...

SF, much to think about on this blog post. Thanks for providing it.

Ducky's here said...

If there is, KP, it eludes me.

Camille Paglia doesn't like the health insurance bill. So what?
Does she have medical, economic or public policy experience? No.
She's just another schmuck with an opinion like the rest of us.

As far as her essays on pop culture. I've read her Hitchcock criticism and while she knows Hitch it's derivative and not revealing. Just another opportunity for her to write about culture as sublimated (or not so sublimated in Hitch's case) sexual conflict.

Her review of the new Egyptian galleries at the Metropolitan were an embarrassment in my opinion. Just an excuse for her to be shallow and contentious.

But if someone who's idea of a vibrant culture being Madonna and Lady Gaga is Silver's idea of a pop critic, well, I'll stick to Godard.

Ducky's here said...

... because make no mistake about it, the scripted kiddies in that video are paying more attention to Gaga than Middle Est dynamics or health care.

FreeThinke said...

Ducky just REVELS in playing the part of an asshole, doesn't he?

It HAS to be an act he's putting in, because NO ONE could be quite THAT stupid.

Ducky's here said...

Put up or shut up, FT.

Where did I go wrong?

Bring it and let me tear strips of flesh off your punk ass.

You want a war? Let's go Show Tunes Boy.

Z said...

POOOOR DUCKY, the minute a liberal exalts conservatives she's got ugly names flung at her.
Ducky, the kind of the "KILL THE MESSENGER, I DON'T LIKE WHAT SHE'S SAID SO SHE MUST BE ANNIHILATED"

By the way, everybody at THE NATION does like the Health care fiasco; do THEY have any medical experience, Ducky?
hilarious

-FJ said...

...if Obama has proven anything, duckman, it's that COINTELPRO took down the Left and put a corporatist puppet stooge in charge.

BWAH!

Ducky's here said...

Z, again, where did I misrepresent Paglia?

She is frequently nothing but a cheap provocateur (George Lucas is the greatest artist of our time? Bore me later.).

She presents herself as an expert on sexuality but never touches on anything difficult. Hitchcock? She's a real come lately to that topic and her idea that The Birds thematically indicates natures sadomasochism seems a real stretch.

She has come to Kael's side on the matter of homosexuality in film but it's pretty light. You're not going to read her take on something like the homosexual subtext in Bresson's Pickpocket which is a terrific topic given Bresson's reputation as a Catholic film maker.

Do you support her contention that home schoolers are part of the reason for the decline in the arts?

Again, if you want to discuss Paglia beyond the infantile, "but I agree with her", bring it.

And the writer's at The Nation often DO have medical, economic or public policy expertise. How often can you be wrong?

KP said...

@Ducky << Let's go Show Tunes Boy. >>

You are hilarious. That is one of the most entertaining blog comments in years.

I know my limits. I will not argue sadomasochism, art or theater with you!

skudrunner said...

At least Obama finally gave up the Hope for Change slogan. He has also given up on saying he will do anything different if he gets another 4 years. He seems to take pride on his zero new jobs policy because he has given a lot of people the opportunity to choose welfare as a career.

His idea of looking presidential is to snark about his opponent and give no idea what he would do to turn around his dismal record. Maybe that is because he has no idea!

Ducky's here said...

Nah, KP, I love to discuss that stuff honestly.

What gets me is that we have a post on Paglia. I post in good faith that there are some holes in her resume and she does thrive on self promotion.

Freethinker immediately goes ad hominem for no reason. It would be one thing if he threw out a few ideas but no, he just calls me an ass.
I've been called worst but generally in situations where I deserve it.

So feel free to banter. Just so long as you don't believe George Lucas is the greatest artist of our time.

FreeThinke said...

Believe me, Ducky, you ARE an ass, and everyone in the blogosphere knows it but you.

It isn't WHAT you say that so objectionable, it's your MANNER that makes it so.

I still think it's an affectation, but your Vaudeville Act has gotten SO stale by now I wish you'd think up another.

Your rudely outlandish taunts and gibes hark back to the heyday of the British Music Hall when baggy pants comics could entertain and endear themselves to the rowdies in the audience by rhythmically farting out tunes to the accompaniment of the pit "orchestra."

In other words yours is NOT a class act, Canardo.

~ FT

skudrunner said...

Damn Duck, are you saying George Lucas is not the greatest artist of all time. Another belief down the drain.

Ducky's here said...

Not one of Camille's better positions.

I'll give her this though, her defense of capitalism as an instrument of women's liberation carries some weight.

Thersites said...

She presents herself as an expert on sexuality but never touches on anything difficult. Hitchcock? She's a real come lately to that topic and her idea that The Birds thematically indicates natures sadomasochism seems a real stretch.

Yeah, everyone knows that it's all a "reverse Oedipal" complex... a mother's inability to let go of her grown son that is causing nature to go wild.

SM? If only....

Thersites said...

Her we"weight" on women's issues is about 145 pounds.

Thersites said...

...on "other" issues, it's about 140...

Finntann said...

Come on Ducky, don't you know George Lucas assumed the mantle of Greatest Living Artist when Thomas Kincade died?

But I snark...

I found the video trite, over done, heavy handed, and obviously staged, no matter how much I agree with the message they are simply regurgitating common conservative talking points.

A 13 year old? Yeah, there's a reason you're not old enough to vote.

Cheers!

Thersites said...

Pervert! :P

Thersites said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Z said...

Ducky, we GET IT, DUcky, You don't like Paglia. So she "thrives on self promotion", she's not entitled to criticize Obama care because she's not a doctor......we GET IT
\
:-)

Ducky's here said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Ducky's here said...

No you don't, z.

Paglia's credentials are thin, very thin. Anyone who make the statement that "few people analyze pop culture, think deeper about it and write about it as well ..." should be ready to put up.

Paglia is not profound simply because you agree with her. You should stick to posting about how marvelous Condominium Rice is. Then you can censor anyone who rips holes in that asinine statement.

Silverfiddle said...

When Ducky quacks this loudly, you know he's stung!

It's my opinion, and not knowing much about pop culture, I could be wrong, but I do know the lady writes brilliantly and, unlike you, can justify her thinking and opinions.

Now, why has the Republican Party become the freedom party?

Progressive, heal thyself.

Thersites said...

Hey, ducky's just part of the chattering class protecting his turf from the evil lawyers...

Thersites said...

Oh, wait, she IS one of the chattering class, too...

She is known as a critic of American feminism, and is also strongly critical of the influence of French writers such as Jacques Lacan, Jacques Derrida, and Michel Foucault.

The S&M would have been Foucault... the Oedipal link was Lacan... & the Duck is pure Derrida (deconstruction).

Ducky's here said...

It's my opinion, and not knowing much about pop culture, I could be wrong ..."
-------
Could be?

The women is more agitprop than substance.

Seriously, you should read her reviews of the new Egyptian wing at the Metropolitan. She don't like it and she's all over the curators despite admitting she knows nothing about Egyptian art.

When she ventures into the fine arts it's a disaster and when she makes a statement that George Freakin' Lucas is the great artist of our age then you know you have to take anything she says with a grain of salt.

It's simple, Silver, you're wrong. She has written some good studies but the woman is hardly an expert.

Ducky's here said...

@Farmer ... ... & the Duck is pure Derrida (deconstruction).

-----
Why is it in error to move away from a system of strict binaries?

How can you criticize the current political swamp without deconstruction?

I'm curious that you would dismiss it out of hand, Farmer.

Silverfiddle said...

Ducky, the wrongness of my opinion, and however much you question her matters not at all to this blog post.

As usual, you divert attention from the main point:

Why has the Republican Party become the freedom party?

Progressive, heal thyself!

Silverfiddle said...

And Ducky, like all the other people you bash and trash, Paglia has produced intelligent and entertaining writing, unlike you.

-FJ said...

Why is it in error to move away from a system of strict binaries?

Because it isn't really. Deleuze/ Guattari Anti-Oedipus isn't a move away from strict binarties, it's a substitution of a "single" binary for "multiple" binaries. And the only way to free the boy is to give him a SINGLE body w/o organs.

Medusa, we hardly knew ya. Put ONE snake behind Pallas' shield. But ya GOTS ta CHOOSE one!

If ya don't like the snake you've got, by all means MOVE to a country that protects the snake (binary) you favour.

-FJ said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
-FJ said...

The
paradox (binary) is a GREAT tool for thinking, duckman, but a lousy one for living. You want to live in "interesting" times? Move to China.

-FJ said...

One tragic comedy is enough for ANY man's lifetime.

-FJ said...

ie - Shakespeare, "Hamlet" (Act I Sc IV)

HAMLET

The king doth wake to-night and takes his rouse,
Keeps wassail, and the swaggering up-spring reels;
And, as he drains his draughts of Rhenish down,
The kettle-drum and trumpet thus bray out
The triumph of his pledge.

HORATIO

Is it a custom?

HAMLET

Ay, marry, is't:
But to my mind, though I am native here
And to the manner born, it is a custom
More honour'd in the breach than the observance.
This heavy-headed revel east and west
Makes us traduced and tax'd of other nations:
They clepe us drunkards, and with swinish phrase
Soil our addition; and indeed it takes
From our achievements, though perform'd at height,
The pith and marrow of our attribute.
So, oft it chances in particular men,
That for some vicious mole of nature in them,
As, in their birth--wherein they are not guilty,
Since nature cannot choose his origin--
By the o'ergrowth of some complexion,
Oft breaking down the pales and forts of reason,
Or by some habit that too much o'er-leavens
The form of plausive manners, that these men,
Carrying, I say, the stamp of one defect,
Being nature's livery, or fortune's star,--
Their virtues else--be they as pure as grace,
As infinite as man may undergo--
Shall in the general censure take corruption
From that particular fault: the dram of eale
Doth all the noble substance of a doubt
To his own scandal.

HORATIO

Look, my lord, it comes!


Enter Ghost

Ducky's here said...

Silverfiddle, folks like yourself and z (and myself also) are dismayed about the overt vulgar sexualization of the culture.

That change has had no greater champion than Paglia. Now, just why do you support the major thesis of her writing.

She did a competent essay on "The Birds" but anything poor Hitch put on the screen that was longer than it was wide was phallic. The women has a serious blind side.

But like z (and unlike Farmer) I can't get a response.

-FJ said...

Stop trying to convince America of it's need to go on the wagon.

You want to join the temperance union? Do it in Saudi Arabia.

Ducky's here said...

But what if they are the same snake, Farmer?

-FJ said...

Silverfiddle, folks like yourself and z (and myself also) are dismayed about the overt vulgar sexualization of the culture.

The man who built Fishtown inside Belmont now regrets that Fishtown's bathos is becoming Belmont's pathos?

lol!

-FJ said...

Good and Evil, duckman.

Not Good, Bad AND Evil.

a single binary.

-FJ said...

Coeus, we hardly knew ye!

-FJ said...

Father,

How many poles would he have you spin on?

-FJ said...

Keep throwing dates and nuts into the audience to "win the Palm", and the standards for judging your play will likely change to suit the tastes of your audience, the combined "consensus" opinion becoming the defacto "arbiter "of LAST resort.

-FJ said...

...not BEST resort.

-FJ said...

Let Godard be auteur today, and Scorcese, tomorrow. Don't force them to direct this film by consensus

Silverfiddle said...

Now, just why do you support the major thesis of her writing.

You're committing a logical fallacy, Ducky.

Just because someone may be wrong on one issue doesn't make her wrong on all issues.

On her statements I feature here, she is absolutely and demonstrably correct, and I agree with her completely.

-FJ said...

Smith and Marx may be the poles, but America and Saudi Arabia ain't the same snake. One's a cobra, the other a ball python.

-FJ said...

Jowett summary of Plato's "Statesman"

There was a time when God directed the revolutions of the world, but at the completion of a certain cycle he let go; and the world, by a necessity of its nature, turned back, and went round the other way. For divine things alone are unchangeable; but the earth and heavens, although endowed with many glories, have a body, and are therefore liable to perturbation. In the case of the world, the perturbation is very slight, and amounts only to a reversal of motion. For the lord of moving things is alone self-moved; neither can piety allow that he goes at one time in one direction and at another time in another; or that God has given the universe opposite motions; or that there are two gods, one turning it in one direction, another in another. But the truth is, that there are two cycles of the world, and in one of them it is governed by an immediate Providence, and receives life and immortality, and in the other is let go again, and has a reverse action during infinite ages. This new action is spontaneous, and is due to exquisite perfection of balance, to the vast size of the universe, and to the smallness of the pivot upon which it turns. All changes in the heaven affect the animal world, and this being the greatest of them, is most destructive to men and animals. At the beginning of the cycle before our own very few of them had survived; and on these a mighty change passed. For their life was reversed like the motion of the world, and first of all coming to a stand then quickly returned to youth and beauty. The white locks of the aged became black; the cheeks of the bearded man were restored to their youth and fineness; the young men grew softer and smaller, and, being reduced to the condition of children in mind as well as body, began to vanish away; and the bodies of those who had died by violence, in a few moments underwent a parallel change and disappeared. In that cycle of existence there was no such thing as the procreation of animals from one another, but they were born of the earth, and of this our ancestors, who came into being immediately after the end of the last cycle and at the beginning of this, have preserved the recollection. Such traditions are often now unduly discredited, and yet they may be proved by internal evidence. For observe how consistent the narrative is; as the old returned to youth, so the dead returned to life; the wheel of their existence having been reversed, they rose again from the earth: a few only were reserved by God for another destiny. Such was the origin of the earthborn men.

'And is this cycle, of which you are speaking, the reign of Cronos, or our present state of existence?' No, Socrates, that blessed and spontaneous life belongs not to this, but to the previous state, in which God was the governor of the whole world, and other gods subject to him ruled over parts of the world, as is still the case in certain places. They were shepherds of men and animals, each of them sufficing for those of whom he had the care. And there was no violence among them, or war, or devouring of one another. Their life was spontaneous, because in those days God ruled over man; and he was to man what man is now to the animals. Under his government there were no estates, or private possessions, or families; but the earth produced a sufficiency of all things, and men were born out of the earth, having no traditions of the past; and as the temperature of the seasons was mild, they took no thought for raiment, and had no beds, but lived and dwelt in the open air.

-FJ said...

(cont) Such was the age of Cronos, and the age of Zeus is our own. Tell me, which is the happier of the two? Or rather, shall I tell you that the happiness of these children of Cronos must have depended on how they used their time? If having boundless leisure, and the power of discoursing not only with one another but with the animals, they had employed these advantages with a view to philosophy, gathering from every nature some addition to their store of knowledge;—or again, if they had merely eaten and drunk, and told stories to one another, and to the beasts;—in either case, I say, there would be no difficulty in answering the question. But as nobody knows which they did, the question must remain unanswered. And here is the point of my tale. In the fulness of time, when the earthborn men had all passed away, the ruler of the universe let go the helm, and became a spectator; and destiny and natural impulse swayed the world. At the same instant all the inferior deities gave up their hold; the whole universe rebounded, and there was a great earthquake, and utter ruin of all manner of animals. After a while the tumult ceased, and the universal creature settled down in his accustomed course, having authority over all other creatures, and following the instructions of his God and Father, at first more precisely, afterwards with less exactness. The reason of the falling off was the disengagement of a former chaos; 'a muddy vesture of decay' was a part of his original nature, out of which he was brought by his Creator, under whose immediate guidance, while he remained in that former cycle, the evil was minimized and the good increased to the utmost. And in the beginning of the new cycle all was well enough, but as time went on, discord entered in; at length the good was minimized and the evil everywhere diffused, and there was a danger of universal ruin. Then the Creator, seeing the world in great straits, and fearing that chaos and infinity would come again, in his tender care again placed himself at the helm and restored order, and made the world immortal and imperishable. Once more the cycle of life and generation was reversed; the infants grew into young men, and the young men became greyheaded; no longer did the animals spring out of the earth; as the whole world was now lord of its own progress, so the parts were to be self-created and self-nourished. At first the case of men was very helpless and pitiable; for they were alone among the wild beasts, and had to carry on the struggle for existence without arts or knowledge, and had no food, and did not know how to get any. That was the time when Prometheus brought them fire, Hephaestus and Athene taught them arts, and other gods gave them seeds and plants. Out of these human life was framed; for mankind were left to themselves, and ordered their own ways, living, like the universe, in one cycle after one manner, and in another cycle after another manner.

FreeThinke said...

Minutiae!

Minutiae!

Minutiae!

"Straining out gnats while swallowing camels" makes for piss poor occupation.

Worse, it gives me a headache.

(:-x

-FJ said...

Chill, FT. ;)

Ducky's here said...

@Silverfiddle --- On her statements I feature here, she is absolutely and demonstrably correct, and I agree with her completely.
----------
Oh-oh, that's Beulah the Buzzer announcing right wing nonsense. Let's look at her brilliant analysis.

1. The first is simple opinion. Repeating the a variation of the "mainstream media" silly. This is hardly obvious to anyone but the rabies radio fringe.

2. What health care models has this lamer run? Has she factored out the insurance company vigorish (Obummer hasn't), factored in less expensive delivery, better preventative care? Just what models has she run.
The huge volume of the health care dollar is spent in the last two years of life (generally low quality of life). Is she ready to discuss that like an adult or is she going to defend Sarah the Pole Dancer?

3. She scolds liberals. BFD, I scold ugly short women. Now were are we.
She doesn't even show that she knows the difference between the delivery and the insurance systems. Absolute cheese from someone who isn't that strong in her own field and definitely someone who i trying to punch outside her weight.

Silverfiddle said...

Lame Ducky, but then I knew you had nothing all along.

The louder they quack, the emptier the argument.

FreeThinke said...

I still have that headache. Eternal contentiousness induces great pain.

(:-x