Wednesday, May 1, 2013

Dear Rick Perlstein, You Are Propaganda

While browsing the web for articles providing some history on the FBI and agent provocateurs, I tripped upon this article by Rick Perlstein of Rolling Stone magazine. It's a elegant piece of journalism--factual, based on some investigative reporting, somewhat objective (until he suggests that it might be totally cool if the FBI used KGB tactics of entrapment to hunt down political groups he despises, instead of those with whom he sympathizes). 

Out of curiosity, I clicked on his article titled, "Why Conservatives Are Still Crazy After All These Years."

I ain't no conservative. Never have been. And I think the Republican Party has serious flaws in its general worldview and many of its policies. I find many of these policies, and the Republican politicians who represent them, to be repulsive. 

But, this shit has got to stop. 

Dear Rick Perlstein, you are not saying anything--anything at all--of substance when you whip up the hysteria of your readers by using words like, "crazies," "wing nut-ism," loony," and "whacky," to describe conservatives. Just as vacuous are your claims that they're not "reality-based," and simply using "obstructionism" to deter the general will of the people, which is, of course, known solely and entirely to you, your readers, and your dear leader, some mass-murdering asshole named Barak Obama. 

Write a goddamned argument. Stop jacking off to your own reflection with self-referencing rhetoric, like, "enlightenment liberalism." You're not enlightened because you support gun control and taxing tobacco. Neither are your friends. If anything, your article gives validity and clarity to a point made by many conservatives, libertarians, anarchists and authentic liberals such as myself: that the modern Left suffers like a cancer-riddled hospice patient from a very serious affliction called elitist bullshit. 

Oh, wait. That's right. Modern PC-Leftists can be elitist because everyone and anyone who disagrees is an "extremist, crazy, racist, loony, wing-nut, irrational, sexist, dangerous, homophobic super-duper radical extremist." Extremist. Extremist. Extremist. 

You're not saying anything. But thanks for providing me a taste of what McCarthyism must have been like for some folks when there was a "dangerous, socialist radical, communist lurking around every corner".   Oh, does that sound like Glenn Beck? Yeah, you're the same. 

And the logic of my conclusion here is no better or more enlightened than yours:

Fuck you. 


  1. So you agree that the Beatles were a Soviet mind-control plot?

  2. Right. And yet Senator John F. Kennedy thought Rock and Roll was a threat to the American way of life. Was he bat-shit crazy?

    Oh, and remember--Acid rain was going to kill us all by 1995. But now second-hand smoke is a mega-crisis killing 600 million children a day (or something).

    Anyone can flip the angle and do the same thing you did in that article: "Bill Clinton is a sex-addict. Barak Obama said he visited 57 states! The Occupy Movement is nothing but a bunch of filthy junkies who have sex in public. The Left is nutty cause it wants to pass out condoms to children. Is Rick Perlstein a Pinhead or Patriot?" Etc.

    By the way, I'm still waiting for the Global Warming apocalypse. Have been since the acid rain hysteria blew over. (But, no, those ideas aren't crazy, irrational or idiotic because...they're PC dogma.)

    I know, it's hard. God forbid you would actually write an ARGUMENT explaining why you disagree with the policies of your opponents. But you're above all that, right? Why think when you can just dismiss people because they're different from you.

    So, um, way to go, Bill O'Reilly.

    Your article reminded me of folks I know who dismiss gay marriage because, you know, why talk with those weird ball-humming faggots?

    (Now, go ahead and prove my point--again--by claiming that all "tea-baggers" are completely insane. Or whatever.) Christ.