Monday, December 6, 2010

Lessons in Wingnutology - Negotiating with the Terrorists or the Communists

Which is it - or perhaps is it neither?

Is negotiating with the GOP like negotiating with Terrorists or Communists or Worse if there could be such a thing?  

The Middle Class Tax Cuts are set to expire, yet the GOP is blocking an extension of a tax cut extension which will affect100% of all voters - in a bad economy. There is no compromise. According to the GOP, taxes must be permanently cut for Millionaires or no one else shall receive any. Those are the conditions. The Middle Class, in a sense, is a hostage, a bargaining chip, held for ransom.

Here is how one frustrated but sympathetic Lamestream Media Figure Puts it:
"[M]y problem with the Republican Party right now, including Paul, is that if you offered them 80-20, they say no. If you offered them 90-10, they'd say no. If you offered them 99-1 they'd say no. And that's because we've substituted governance for brokerism, for rigidity that Ronald Regan didn't have."
This is an interesting question. Are they like the Terrorists or perhaps the Communists? It has been discussed in length on the Blogosphere Here, Here, and Here. And it has also been dicussed Here with regards to Chairman Paul Ryan’s rejection (referred to above) of the Deficit Commission Report:
Ryan [A Wisconsin Republican], like many conservatives, prefers to reside in an alternate universe in which the Affordable Care Act is not a budget saver but a massive drain on the federal budget (like, say, the prescription drug entitlement he supported.) The Bowles-Simpson commission examined the issue and sensibly concluded that building up the cost-saving devices in the PPACA would save money, and tearing them down would cost money. Ryan can't accept that. You can negotiate with somebody who has different preferences than you do. But negotiating with somebody who inhabits a different reality is very difficult.
This is an astute observation but incomplete answer.

Ryan, a so-called deficit hawk, refuses to take a hawkish stance on reducing the deficit. Sure he’d have to compromise some, but why not if you could get a 75-25 split or better on deficit reduction? You are a deficit hawk after all – take it, it’d be rational, right? Yes in a reality based world, you’d have to take that offer. But we are not talking about the World as it is, but rather what it could be transformed into being.
The best answer, in my opinion lies with Andrew Sullivan’s observation of the obstructionist utopianism that infects so much of the GOP these days. Yes, this is closer to the point. Ryan and many Republicans are Right Wing Utopians or Wingnutopians to be more precise.

Utopians, like Ryan, seek to create an economic and cultural paradise based upon Free Market Fundamentalism, big business, bullets, bibles and banjos. This Utopia, which is to be the next stage of history, can only exist after the Wingnuttariat (Real Americans) obtains Class Cultural Consciousness and then casts off the Chains of Moderation (modern welfare state) creating a Perfected Society built on the natural laws of the Free Market and the aforementioned big business, bullets, bibles and banjos.
For Ryan, the decision to negotiate with a doomed regime, a regime about to be swept aside by revolutionary forces (as he may see it), is a practical question. If he believes that conditions are near for a counter-revolution, he has very little incentive to negotiate. In this instance a 75-25 split in his favor is counterproductive when the alternative is to wait for the revolutionary forces of the Free and Almighty Market to sweep away the current order making way for the Creation of Wingnutopia on Earth. When this occurs Ryan will receive 100% of his preferred objectives – so why not wait a little while longer. Q.E.D. Ryan’s conduct really is quite logical, when you look at it from his perspective.

Some may observer that Soviet Leader Vladimir Ilyich Lenin faced a similar dilemma in 1919 during the Paris Peace Conference held after World War One. Faced with overtures from the Peace Conference, Lenin had to decide whether to negotiate with the doomed capitalist powers (as he saw them to be) concerning the post war world - to get what he could or play one capitalist off another, etc or to remain on the side lines and wait for the revolutionary forces of communism to sweep capitalism into the dust bin of history. If conditions for revolution were right, why negotiate. If conditions had yet to materialize, negotiation was a more attractive option. Eventually Lenin determined that the conditions for revolution were just not quite right yet (as was commonly the case in such debates from yesteryear) and he acted accordingly.

What many do not realize, is that this is the situation that Chairman Ryan and many Republicans see themselves in today. And many appear, Ryan included, to have made the decision that the Revolution of the Wingnuttariat is near. With this being the case, there is no need to negotiate on matters affecting the Free Market such as Taxation and Government Spending. The Revolutionary forces of the Market will settle those questions in due time – so why not wait a little longer.

Thursday, September 9, 2010

On Waterboarding and Wingnutology – Translating Wingnutspeak to English

Everyone knows that drowning and reviving and drowning and reviving a prisoner, ad infinitum, is torture. At least pretty much every American agreed that it was before pictures of Abu Ghraib hit the internet. After this occurred, all of a sudden Americans supporting the Political Party in Power reversed course and abandoned their opposition to torture, and instead offered an ignoble defense of the vile practice.

However, despite the passionate defense of Waterboarding, it is still hard to follow the logic behind the defense of Waterboarding by various GOP operatives. What follows is my attempt to interpret this Wingnutspeak into English. Here goes.

Presumably Right Wingers believe that the Government has the requisite expertise to administer the Waterboarding in a SAFE non-lethal manner. While Waterboarding is torture when committed by some (the goddamned commies for instance), it ain’t when we do it, according to these Wingers. Presumably this belief is based upon the superior expertise, procedures, and institutional knowledge of the US Government.

Accordingly, to waterboard somebody SAFELY, one would have to believe in the existence of a “Waterboarding Program.” Waterboarding on an ad hoc basis would not provide the consistency of results (information) desired by torture advocates. Therefore a formal “Waterboarding Program” would be required.

Such a “Waterboarding Program” would have to consist of at least the following:

  • A long and detailed written procedure describing the steps and “safeguards” involved during the waterboarding, i.e., a “Waterboarding Manual.”

  • Extensive training on “proper” waterboarding techniques contained in the “Waterboarding Manual.”

  • Independent quality reviews of the “Waterboarding Manual” and waterboarding in practice to ensure the written procedures in the “Waterboarding Manual” are being followed and do in fact work as designed.

  • Medical Monitoring in place during the Waterboarding to monitor the victim’s pulse and all vital signs to prevent heart attack or other stress induced conditions and be able to stabilize the Victim’s condition instantaneously.

  • Doctors on hand during the Waterboarding in case something goes wrong because you don't want too many people to die.

Further Right Wing Torture advocates must also believe that the Government can do all these things and still be able to effectively interrogate the victim so that he does not say whatever it is that he thinks he needs to say to stop the Waterboarding. And before the government waterboarded anyone, you must also believe that it has:

  • Stone Cold Actionable Intelligence that the alleged terrorist is in fact a dangerous terrorist with actionable information.

As to this last element of the Waterboarding program, one must believe that only dangerous known terrorists with actionable intelligence would be waterboarded. However, unfortunately prominent Right WIngers have been calling for a much more intensive use of waterboarding – extending the “Waterboarding Program” to suspected “terrorists” and known low-level terrorists without ticking time bomb intelligence. In this instance the “Waterboarding Program” would need to include:

  • A method to compensate those who were incorrectly suspected of terrorism and Waterboarded anyway.

It would seem that a believer in waterboarding must maintain a great deal of faith in all the elements of the "Waterboarding Program" to safeguard the life of the terrorist (or suspected terrorist) while avoiding the Constitution's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment and complying with international conventions against torture.

This faith in Government's ability to Waterboard People SAFELY is truly remarkable when you think about it. More so when you realize, that Right Wingers have absolutely no faith in the Government to merely administer the Clean Air Act much less implement Health Insurance Reform in this country without trampling of the Property Rights (to pollute at will or a mandate health insurance at a fair price for all) of the people. These Right Wingers (and other Waterboarding enthusiasts), however must have absolute faith in the Government and the Bureaucrats that make it function (in this situation) to accomplish all these things because we are talking about the most sacrosanct right – of liberty of self.

Anyway, when you hear a Right Winger state that Waterboarding isn’t torture if we do it – this is probably why.

Wednesday, August 25, 2010

Wingnut Dictionary – Bon Jovi Islam

Word of the Day:


[bawn\ jōh-vee\ is-lahm]


(1) term describing school of thought which holds that that there that there is a thriving peaceful, moderate Islam to which the vast majority of Muslims adheres. (2) expression of sarcasm by far right wingnuts meant to show the opposite is correct, i.e, a thriving, peaceful, moderate Islam is not likely to exist.

Used in Wingnutspeak:

Goddamn that Joe Lieberman! He thinks there is an enormous difference in the Islam practiced by the majority of Muslims and the terrorist political ideology that exploited this religion seeking to provoke a clash of civilizations. This belief is nothing more than hopeful wishful thinking. The hope that there is a thriving peaceful, moderate Islam to which the vast majority of Muslims adheres, is nothing more than Bon Jovi Islam i.e., we're halfway there and livin’ on a prayer. Damn that Joe Lieberman for his belief in Bon Jovi Islam! G a w d d a m m i t ! ! !

[h/t] Andy McCarthy, the craziest MoFo at The Corner

Wednesday, August 18, 2010

Wingnut Dictionary - Homoconflict

Translating Wingnutspeak into American English – Your Word of the Day:


Pronunciation: hō-mō-kän-flikt


According to Wingnutopian Ideology Homoconflict (a) occurs as a result of showing tolerance, acceptance, indifference or support toward gay folks; (b) can occur as a result of insufficient hostility shown toward the extension of civil rights to gay folks; (c) forms a dissonance between hostility and acceptance toward civil rights for gay folks (such an individual would suffer from homoconflict); (d)serves as a counter-revolutionary force impeding the natural occurrence of class cultural consciousness within the Wingnuttariat.

Used in a Sentence:

Damn that Ann Coutler! How dare she give a speech to the homosexual Republican group GOProud that promotes same-sex marriage and military service for open homosexuals. Damn her to Heck. We now must ban her from speaking at any of our conservative events due to her Homoconflict and the risk that her ideas may infect others and impede real Americans from achieving class-cultural consciousness. Gawdammit!

Context within Wingnutopian culture:

Within Wingnutopian Culture there is a split over the danger caused by homoconflict.

Some Wingnutopians believe that Homoconflict is a counterrevolutionary force which impedes the freedom of mankind and the Revolution of the Wingnuttariat. This occurs as the presence of Homoconflict impedes the Wingnuttariat (i.e., Real Americans) from achieving class cultural consciousness which many Wingnutopians believe is a condition precedent for the Revolution of the Wingnuttariat. During which it is believed, the Winguttariat will rise up and throw off the chains of moderation, implement pure Free Market Fundamentalism and create a right wing utopian society based upon big business, bullets, bayonets and (certain parts of) the bible. This revolution will lead to a perfected society and ultimately to the Freedom of Mankind.

Other Wingnutopians view homoconflict differently. These Wingnutopians believe that the act of showing tolerance, acceptance, indifference or support toward gay folks equates to efforts to extend civil marriage rights, open service in the military and, according to one Wingutopian, “the idea that sodomy [i]s just an alternate lifestyle.” In the worse case, these thinkers believe that Homoconflict increases the likelihood of legalized same-sex marriage rights which would, according to this school of thought, cause the Lord Almighty to destroy the Earth.

(h/t) Wing Nut Daily

Monday, August 16, 2010

Wingnut Dictionary - Word of the Day:

Within Tea Party Sect of the GOP the term “Regularize” (a) can be used as a synonym for the word “amnesty” in the context of providing a path to citizenship (i.e., amnesty) for illegal immigrants working in the United States; (b) can refer to the involuntary “Teabagging” of an elected official through defeat in a GOP Primary or in the general election.
Used in a sentence:
(1) "To put an end to amnesty once and for all, to secure our borders, to end any of this misguided talk about open borders, it is time to 'regularize' the status of John McCain. Send him back here to be a citizen among us," (2) “John McCain was sending out letters earlier this spring offering the boilerplate denial, saying 'Well you know I oppose amnesty.' And then in the next paragraph saying 'we must grant concessions to these people and regularize their status.' That's the new term [for amnesty]."
Heck, I think JD Hayworth has a point here, not about the undocumented workers but about J-Mac. I’d love to see McCain “regularized” this November. I don’t think JD has got what it takes to get the job done in the primary. But if he’s man enough he can help “regularize” McCain this November.

(h/t) J.D. Hayworth (R-AZ)


Friday, August 6, 2010

Translating Wingnutspeak to English: The Kurtz Fallacy

Word of the Day:
The Kurtz Fallacy:
Quote of the Day:
I was particularly amused by the argument that Obama has never openly advocated socialism in his various publications. One key difference between American and European socialists is that the American variety resorts far more often to deliberate stealth.
Stanley Kurtz, NRO Guy on why the President is a socialist.
This one line, a Freudian Slip, if you will, sums up the Wingnutopian position quite nicely. As such as Kurtz can say: “Obama is a socialist; that other guy over there is a socialist and all of those people are socialists. Sure they never advocate ‘socialism’ but that is because they are TRICKY.”

That is the argument in a Nutshell.

Imagine if we were to turn this argument around and say “The former half term republican governor of a large western state is a Fascist. Sure she never has advocated Lebensraum, racial supremacy and world domination, but that is because she is TRICKY.”

The next line of reasoning goes like this:
Your conclusion does not seem right. Socialists pretty much have to believe in X, Y, and Z. Those guys you called Socialists don’t believe in X, Y and Z. How can they be socialists then?
Kurtz’s Wingnutopian response is like this:
“That is correct. Some socialists believe in X, Y and Z. However Socialists can also believe in things that I define as Socialism and thus, the President and that guy and those other people are Socialists because I define them as being such.”
You can’t make this up.

This is the Kurtz Fallacy. If Socialism requires the presence of sufficient levels of X, Y, and Z. The absence of sufficient levels of X, Y, and Z does not preclude the presence of Socialism if Kurtz says so.

Monday, May 3, 2010

Wingnut Dictionary - Free Market Fundamentalism

Word of the Day:

Free Market Fundamentalism (noun)

[free mar·ket fun·da·men·tal·ism]

frē\ mär-kət\ fən-də-mən-tə-ˌli-zəm]


Free Market Fundamentalism: (1) An ideology which holds that the Free-Market is all knowing, self correcting and virtuous. (2) The unshakable belief that unfettered markets maximize individual freedom, that they are the only means to economic growth and that society should adhere to their specific ideas of societal progress (as settled by the Free Unfettered Market). (3) The belief that markets tend towards a natural equilibrium, and that the best interests in a given society are achieved only by allowing its participants to pursue their own financial self-interest with no or little restraint or regulatory oversight. (4) To free market fundamentalists, rounding off the rougher edges of the effects of the free market through regulation is a blasphemy. The prospect of Regulating of the Free Hand of the market is as arrogant as trying to control the invisible hand of God.

Free Market Fundamentalism is firmly embedded within the Wingnutopian Movement. It forms one pillar of the trinity of this Ideology along with Bullets and Bibles.

Significance within Wingnutopian Ideology:

An example of can be found in this quote by Mark Steyn, known as a Karl Marx-like figure of the Wingnutopian Movement:

"The U.S. income tax is becoming the 21st-century equivalent of the "jizya" - the punitive tax levied by Muslim states on their non-Muslim citizens: In return for funding the Islamic imperium, the infidels were permitted to carry on practicing their faith. Likewise, under the American jizya, in return for funding Big Government, the nonbelievers are permitted to carry on practicing their faith in capitalism, small business, economic activity and the other primitive belief systems to which they cling so touchingly,"

Here Steyn lays out the dilemma faced by many Wingnutopians – what to do about a regulated market. Or more succinctly, how do you practice your faith when, Allah forbid, Market Regulation and tax increases appear to be inevitable.

Under this view, Steyn points out that Wingnutopians are forced to become a distinct counter-culture within American society, obeying the laws and becoming good citizens, but unable to fully know freedom because they are unable to practice Free Market Fundamentalism.

Tuesday, March 16, 2010

Definition of Earmarxism

From the Wingnut Dictionary here is the Translation of the day from Wingnut-speak to English:
Earmarxism or Earmarxist (noun)
[eer-mahrk-siz-uhm, ɪər’märk'sĭz'əm] [eer-mahrk-sist, ɪər’märk'sĭst]

(A) A term within the political ideology of Free Market Fundamentalism describing excessive zeal of congressional appropriators to allocate federal tax dollars to specially identified public works and/or pet projects. (B) sometimes refers to an addiction to political pork barrel spending or runaway spending that according to the Earmarxist is always somebody else’s fault. (C) A term used by the Conserva-gencia to rally the Wingnuttariat against the spending of tax dollars for the public good. (D) An “Earmarxist” is an adherent of “Earmarxism.”
Example of Use in Wingnut-speak:
Senator Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) is an Earmarxist. He believes in Earmarxism i.e., that one taxpayer’s dollar is another lawmaker’s party favor. According to Senator Inhofe, the power of the purse resides with Congress so the problem with earmarks is not congressional earmarks but rather so-called presidential earmarking. These are earmarks perpetrated by “unelected bureaucrats” throughout the federal government who recklessly throw money away with no supervision or accountability after being given the authority to do so in congressional appropriations approved by people such as Senator Inhofe.

With one hand, Senator Inhofe scolds the executive branch for spending money on projects he approved, while with the other he writes and approves billions in earmarked spending. For example, when given a chance after Hurricane Katrina to divert funding from the wasteful Bridge to Nowhere in Alaska to the devastated Twin Spans Bridge in New Orleans, Sen. Inhofe sided with the $230 million Bridge to Nowhere and the 50 inhabitants on the island it would serve.
H/T: RedState Blog

Monday, March 15, 2010

Cultural Marxism has come to Texas

More Cultural Marxism hits the right:

“Let’s face it, capitalism does have a negative connotation…. You know, ‘capitalist pig!’”
~ Terri Leo of the Texas Board of Education addressing the decision to censor the word “Capitalism” in high school textbooks and replace it with the term “Free Enterprise System.”

Apparently it is politically incorrect to say capitalism now. Wingnutopians have declared that we must now rename “Capitalism” as “The Free Enterprise System” due to its supposed negative connotations. This Wingnutopian thinker may have missed the Memo but Communism collapsed in 1989, leaving Capitalism as the prevailing economic system. Any Soviet "Capitalist Pig" slur seems relegated to the dust bin of history.

The next logical step is for Wingnutoptians on the Texas Board of Education to publish a speech code so that Teachers will be better able to indoctrinate the youngsters with newly approved politically correct doctrine. Alternately perhaps the Texas Board of Education could establish Re-education Programs for teachers where teachers can re-learn American History based upon Wingnutopian precepts.

For instance, most Americans were taught that Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence was one of the founding fathers of the American Republic. However in Texas, the Board of Education has corrected this error. New textbooks in Texas will now replace Mr. Jefferson’s writings with the writings St. Thomas Aquinas, John Calvin and William Blackstone as inspirational and founding documents of the American Republic.

Of course this hostility to the Declaration of Independence is not altogether a surprise. We have seen it before. The last time the Declaration of Independence was reputed dates back to 1861 around the founding of another nutty Dystopia - the Confederate States of America.

Notably Alexander H. Stephens the Vice President of the so-called Confederate States of America, expressly declared that the founding of the CSA was ”founded upon exactly the opposite idea” of the Declaration of Independence. Hostility to the founding documents are not new. Today we see a new generation of Conservative Utopians, i.e., Wingnutopians following down the path of their Dystopian Brethren of yesteryear.

Monday, March 8, 2010

Conservatism is Dead – Long Live the Wingnutopian Revolution!

The chattering classes at this moment are declaring the rebirth of conservatism in the energy on the Republican ideological right, the likelihood of major Democratic losses this fall, the success of the Republican party in defining the essentially pragmatic, centrist healthcare reform bill as a product of some left-liberal social engineering project, and on and on. The op-ed pages think in terms of this rubric; cable "news" seems incapable of seeing anything but this rubric. And the creation of a cocooned, conservative, religio-political subculture, complete with a massively lucrative publishing/broadcasting/blogging service industry, reinforces this with a cultural sledge-hammer.
Republicans like Bill Kristol see "victory" ahead, have already seen "victory" in Iraq, and urge the intense and constant rallying cry of "Toujours l'audace!" […]
Conservatism, if it means anything, is a resistance to ideology and the world of ideas ideology represents, whether that ideology is a function of the left or the right.
In the mid-twentieth century conservatism revived itself by a profound critique of liberal hubris and rationalism, of liberals' belief that they really could transform the world through better government, of the new left's critique that the personal is political, and of the stifling of human nature, individualism and freedom that socialism and communism had wrought.
Today, Conservatism is dead.

What has taken its place is a right wing revolutionary movement to engineer a utopian society based upon bullets, bibles, banjos and big business - a Wingnutopia on Earth if you will. Wingnutopians often agitate under the guise of Conservatism. However, make no mistake about it, Wingnutopians are right wing, reactionary and (counter)revolutionary first and conservative only by convenience. As Sullivan notes, Conservatism is not a revolutionary ideology according to its founders in the Modern Period. It is the anti-thesis of revolutionary ideology. Therein lays the conflict between those who seek revolutionary change and those who seek to preserve the established order both under the banner of Conservatism.

As an example, take the near Economic Collapse of 2008. One would think taking measures to prevent economic collapse would be desirable. This would seem especially true for conservatives who are trying to preserve as much of the existing order as is possible. However to a Wingnutopian this is not true. In order to save the free market and Wingnutopian would let the market fail and be purified for its excesses – damn the consequences.

Sullivan is also correct when noticing the revolutionary similarities between the Neoconservative Bill Kristol, of the present period and Jacobin Georges Danton of the French Revolution. Both are/were leaders of their movements although Kristol has yet to face the guillotine (figuratively) even after his dalliances promoting Dan Quayle and George W Bush along with his shameless promotion of Sarah Palin.

The take away is this. Though there may still be conservatives in our midst, any conservative governing coalition has become extinct. What has replaced the former conservative governing coalition is a right wing revolutionary movement bent on re-ordering and perfecting Society. This is not a markedly conservative goal.

You have been warned.

Wednesday, February 17, 2010

Neo-Isolationism - Wingnut Dictionary

Word of the Day:


Definition within the Wingnutopian Movement:

(1) The opposite of using force the preferred means to achieve foreign policy goals; (2) Withdrawing American armed forces from foreign countries and refraining from using force i.e, missile strikes, around the world (especially Iran) because such actions do not meet a global test. (3) Antonym of Neo-Conservatism. Neo-Isolationism represents an absence of Neoconservative foreign policy, i.e., Aggressive Wilsonianism minus international institutional support and without regard for international conventions and treaties.

Used in everyday conversation:

President Obama won’t invade Iran or Venezuela or even Russia because he is a Neo-Isolationist. Iran is bad; Hugo Chavez is bad; and Putin is bad, as well. Therefore, Neo-isolationism is bad, too and Obama is wrong for being a Neo-Isolationist.

H/T: RedState

Monday, February 15, 2010

Cultural Marxism - Definition

Here is another in our series of translating the language of movement conservatives, who are also known as reactionary right wing utopians or Wingnutopians. In short it is our contribution to improve the political dialogue in this country by translating “Wingnutspeak” into English.


Cultural Marxism


(1) Marxism translated from economic into cultural terms with an aim to subvert Western Civilization; (2) A conspiracy theory which holds that aided and abetted by obscure European Philosophers, the mass media has infected large numbers of Americans with the class consciousness of the proletariat. (3) To conspiracy theorists, Political Correctness is a form of Cultural Marxism.

Used in Everyday Conservation:

Gawddammit! It’s 2010 and America has been hijacked by a small group of obscure European Philosophers. These “Cultural Marxists” have turned hard working hard working but unsuspecting Americans into Marxists by using the mass media to promote Karl Marx’s observations of life working in English factories during the 1830s-1840s. I don’t know quite exactly how these no account foreign scoundrels turned hard-working-red-blooded-patriotic Americans into Cultural Marxists without most of these folks realizing it, but Cultural Marxism is here in the Homeland!

Examples of Cultural Marxism in the context of political correctness:

(1) It is wrong to call a protestant fundamentalist a member of the “religious right.” Protestant fundamentalists should always be referred to as “Evangelicals” or so-called “Value Voters.” (2) Newsweek Magazine has been politically incorrect by objectifying Sarah Palin by using a picture of her in her skimpy running outfit in order to sell magazines propagandize the masses; and (3) it is ALWAYS politically incorrect and sexist to infer that Sarah Palin dresses like a slutty flight attendant.

Significance within the Wingnutopian Movement:

While many in the Conserva-gencia believe that the revolution of the Winguttariat is inevitable, resulting in a Free Market Cultural Utopia, many also believe that Cultural Marxism serves as a counter-revolutionary force slowing the implementation of Free Market Fundamentalism (i.e., the Steam Roller of History).

From the example above it can be noted that instead of preparing for the revolution of the Wingnuttariat like good rightwing bloggers should be doing, some have become infected by “Cultural Marxism” and its variant “Political Correctness.” This has caused these nutters to diverge from blogging about the outrages of Big Government and virtues of the Free Market Almighty and instead advocate that the counterrevolutionary doctrine of political correctness be applied to media coverage of Sarah Palin and other right wing causes.

If successful, the media then further disseminates Cultural Marxism to the public which in turn impedes the Wingnuttariat from reaching cultural class consciousness and ultimately the Revolution of the Wingnuttariat.

(h/t): The American Conservative.

Friday, February 12, 2010

Translation of the Day - Wingnutspeak to English

Phrase of the Day:

Determinate Principles of Constitutional Interpretation


(1) A system of principles utilized to interpret difficult questions of law arising under the Constitution of the United States. (2) The schools of Originalism and Textualism (or collectively referred to as “Strict Constructionism”) are the only schools believed to contain determinate principles of Constitutional Interpretation by some. (3) A phrase used as part of a logical fallacy to draw a conclusion from premises that does not support that conclusion by assuming Not P implies Not Q on the basis that P implies Q.

Used in Every Day Conversation:

“What I haven't seen by Judge Sotomayor is an embrace of determinate principles of constitutional interpretation. Without that, there are no bounds on the judicial role -- nothing to keep one from being a judicial activist."

Big Ed Whelan NRO Regular and Legal Expert

Translation (Wingnutspeak to English):

Members of the Conserva-gencia do not believe that Justice Sotomayor possesses determinate principles of constitutional interpretation (thus is a Judicial Activist) because she is not of the Strict Constructionist School of Judicial Theory. This conclusion, that Justice Sotomayor is a potential Judicial Activist, is proven because Strict Constructionists are believed to adhere to a system of Determinate Principles of Constitutional Interpretation. Hence, because the Judge Sotomayor cannot be proven to possess so-called Determinate Principles of Constitutional Interpretation (i.e., she is not a Strict Constructionist), then she should be deemed a Judicial Activist and not qualified to serve on the Supreme Court.

In other words just a more sophisticated form of heads I win, tails you lose. Look for more such forms of Wingnutspeak to emerge as rumors of a vacancy on the High Court heat up.

We will try to provide translations as time permits.