A Victorian Era idiot
No, Sparky, that’s not an ad hominem. It is the only term that would describe a sober assessment of her latest drivel in the formerly great Washington Post. To whet your appetite, however, this brilliant complete misunderstanding of Actual Reality:
Not even Jimmy Carter did this much, I would suggest, to jerk his party to the left …
Seriously? Did Ms. Rubin bother living through the 1970s? The Carter Administration?
Jimmy Carter was to the right of the mainstream Democratic Party. That’s why Teddy Kennedy decided to challenge him (fatally, as it turned out) for the renomination in 1980. What Ms. Rubin in her “thoughtful conservative” manner has proposed herein is far more amazing science fiction than anything Ray Bradbury ever produced. It is turning Stalin into a hero, Lincoln into a villain, day into night, sheep into pigs, cats into dogs — and clueless ignorance into “conservative intellectualism” (an oxymoron if ever there was one).
But reality doesn’t matter to these folks.
The Conservative portrait of Obama
They have to have this “narrative” that Barack Obama, rather than being the long-suffering centrist pragmatist that he demonstrably has been in the Real World™, must suddenly become some crypto commie/Marxist intent on being the SINGLE MOST LIBERAL/LEFTIST president in the history of the United Snakes of Amerika. Here is her opening salvo in the GOP War on Reality™, Day One Gazillion:
Obama also has wrecked [sic*] havoc in the the Democratic Party. He’s firmly affixed the “tax and spend” label to it after Bill Clinton declared that the era of big government was over. He’s made Clinton into a pitch man for Mitt Romney. His rejection of the Keystone XL pipeline has split the party. His refusal to adopt the Simpson-Bowles commission’s recommendations has turned Democrats into reactionaries, defending the status quo on entitlements. He’s alienated Jewish voters. He’s re-McGovernized the party, which now stands for appeasing despotic powers, turning on allies and slashing defense spending.
[* I would ascribe the misuse to a lazy copy editor, rather than Ms. Rubin. The correct word is "wreaked." "Wrecked havoc" is a meaningless term. Then again, the use of the term "Democratic Party" is clearly ALSO a copy editor's work, since, as we know, all Republiklan/KKKonservatives are bound by a Blood Oath to Satan to NEVER use the correct term and only use the idiotic slur "Democrat party."]
Get a grip, conservos.
This noxious posting OUGHT to be fisked, line by line, but I leave that to the reader. For the nonce, let’s merely pull back and appreciate the Grand Canyonesque void in Rubin’s intellect that the entirety represents. The “tax and spend” line is as reflexive as the jerk of a dead frog’s leg when the biology teacher applies electrical current.
The tax cuts Obama has championed and passed have become an Inconvenient Truth that can only be responded to by denying their very existence, as the “birthers” attempt to deny Obama’s fundamental existence as, first, a citizen (which, since his mother was a US citizen, is a moot point, no matter WHERE he was born; Hawaii, the FACTS tell us) and then as an actual person living in the real world who has taken actual actions with real consequences.
How “facts” affect GOP columnists
That last is legitimate fodder for agreement, disagreement, criticism, etc. But the real President Obama is not interesting to hacks like Rubin, who prefer, instead, to critique a fictional character they’ve collectively made up, I guess, because ACTUAL reality is either frightening or utterly incomprehensible to them.
“Appeasing”? The guy who invaded Pakistani sovereign territory to take out Osama bin Laden? Yeah. That dog whistle doesn’t even play well with actual dogs.
But soft. There is a final whopper, a feat of intellectual contortion, logical legerdemain and utter abnegation of reality that leaves one breathless in its sheer idiocy:
Rather than spin endless excuses and blame it all on money, liberal elites might want to reconsider tying themselves too tightly to Obama’s mast. They have already become quite whiny and sacrificed a good deal of intellectual rigor in trying to defend every misstep as brilliant and every loss as a win.
They should take a page from the conservative playbook from the second Bush term. Then, conservatives stuck by their principles, criticized him where appropriate and maintained their integrity.
“Elites”? A favorite term of those defending the weltanschauung (and pocketbooks) of the .01%.
Meet Jennifer’s owners
Defend every “misstep”? I don’t know what Koolaid you been drinkin’ sister, but it’s clearly got more bite than Kickapoo Joy Juice, if you think anyone sober would buy this swill. If “liberal elites” have been defending every Obama action, I sure haven’t seen it.
Indeed, “liberals” have never mindlessly defended ANY Democratic elected official with anywhere near the vehemence and crazy salad consistency that conservatives have defended EVERY Republican official for EVERY looney misdeed: which is a long way of giving the lie to her absurd proposition that conservatives EVER either “criticized” Dubya’s homicidal lunacy or “maintained their integrity,” unless by “integrity” Ms. Rubin means sycophantic, jingoistic denial of reality in favor of toeing the Party Line and genuflecting at the Alter [sic] of Limbaugh.
Here’s the sweet, loving headline for Ms. Rubin’s act of character and reality assassination: Obama is killing the Democratic Party. (Really? Puhleeze.)
If the dunce cap fits, wear it.
What is surprising and even astonishing, however, is not that Ms. Rubin mints this ordure faster than a feedlot heifer with diarrhea; no, what is astonishing is that a major United States newspaper would allow this blatant Goebbelsesque “big lie” propaganda to run unchallenged, unquestioned, uncorrected, and, seemingly untethered from the credibility that newspapers require as the backbone of their existence.
She’s not alone, of course, and singling her out for derision would seem unfair, since she’s merely being conservative conformist. Which is WHY the shame must devolve not on the mendacious Ms. Rubin, but, rather, on her employers, who OUGHT to know better and choose not to.
A paper that once brought a president’s crimes to light
No wonder print media is dying.
So: am I being “mean” by calling Ms. Rubin an idiot?
Or am I being kind by merely confining my characterization to the relatively mild term for what she’s trying to foist off on the uneducated, ill-informed and, seemingly, brain-dead?
Shame on the Washington Post, for which I once wrote in less demonic editorial climes.
It would be a shameful act to write for them now. And Ms. Rubin writes for them now.