Sunday, April 19, 2009

Navel-grazing, Dept.

Navel-Grazing, Dept.

There's something ineluctably sad about an ill-kept blog. It's not unlike chez sobsister, actually. Paint chipping on the fa├žade, one brick loose from the front steps, mailbox could use replacing...

I haven't been posting here much. Lack of time + lack of inspiration = radio silence. The fact of the matter is--and, here, I'm taking a huge leap of faith that this sort of self-indulgent meta-post is even vaguely interesting to anyone outside my head--that after a point, LOLXtians and LOLNeocons isn't all that interesting to write. There are so many stories out there on which I could be ladling snark that simply recapitulate an unvarying theme.

Last month, for example, B-b-b-Benny and the Peds announced that condoms weren't really the answer in fighting AIDS in Africa. Sure, I could've called him a benighted dogmatist nancy-boy flouncing about in Mommy's caftan while condemning tens, no, hundreds of thousands to death, to unwanted pregnancy and an unbreakable cycle of poverty, simply to bolster his completely made-up belief that, somehow, taking responsibility for, and control of, one's reproductive process is a raspberry in the face of the Invisible Bearded Man in the Sky. But I didn't. I mean, I've come to realize with the passage of time that the Catholic Church regularly says astonishingly ill-advised things that fly like a piazza of spooked pigeons smack in the face of, oh, I don't know, common sense, science, logic. To point out the crass stupidity of the Vatican's pronouncement at each occasion would be like riffling through publicity shots of the Olsen twins and noting again and again and again that they sure could use a fucking sandwich.

Same with the conservatives and, to be precise, the right-wing media in this country. Late last month, twat con Laura Ingraham (isn't that always held on the first Sunday in July? Twat Con '09! with appearances by Monica Goodling, Michelle Malkin and Dana Perino! plus GOP cosplay!) dissed almost-First Daughter Meghan McCain (for criticizing Troll Quean Ann Coulter) by calling her fat. Sure, I could've noted that it's amazing that Laura Ingraham can host a radio show, given that she talks entirely through her ass, or that a neocon lawyer converting to Catholicism has just hit the bullshit rationalization trifecta. But I didn't. The fact of the matter is that the 24-hour news cycle, declining educational achievement and dwindling intellectual engagement nationwide, and booming fast food and pharmaceutical intake has created a roiling subclass of triple-chinned cretin zombies who pay to be told what to think by a gold-clad phalanx of screaming hucksters who grab the addled gomers by the nose to pour know-nothing elixir down their gullets. To point out the witless, intellectually dishonest copromathy that is this circus is like identifying sociopathic nuns in the parochial school system. After a while, your arm gets tired.

So, your sobsister continues to look for veins to mine. One possibility: people whose surnames sound like naughty body parts. Watch for it!

3 comments:

googlegurl said...

*waiting with baited breath*

Lisa Krempasky said...

I always find it amusing when liberal bloggers go after conservatives for name calling by calling them names.

Shows basic truths of liberal views:

1. The rules only apply to the other guy.

2. Libs get to start 3 rungs up the ladder with the log in their eye.

3. Libs are far more nasty than conservatives.

4. If 2 wrongs don't make a right try 3.

the sobsister said...

My dear Ms. Krempasky,

While I am gratified to have served as a source of even transitory amusement, I fear you mischaracterize the situation. In the case of the connie I "defamed," I wuz only shooting second. But let's step back a skootch: had the person in question been civil and reasoned in her discourse, how many column inches would she have gotten? (Hint: 0) That might be the bigger problem for someone on the media treadmill.

And, parenthetically, I would say that libs, in general, are not nastier than cons. I just happen to be kind of an asshole.

But thanks for visiting and taking the time to write. I'd say the "nasty libs" argument is not your strongest suit, given the extent to which the right-wing media has debased discourse in the marketplace of ideas, e.g., I can name a half-dozen conservative pundits who sound like vicious pricks; how many libs can you stack against them? At any rate, it's good to hear from you.