Friday, August 19, 2005

Slampo Hits Another Home Run

The hand-wringing liberals at the NYT and the Chron are no match for Slampo, who dissects the latest NYT/Chron offering on illegal immigration and “beer-swilling good old boys” by NYTwit David Brooks.

To put it mildly, Slampo is a superb writer and a first-rate thinker, and there are none among the NYTwit southpaws who can stand up to him at the plate.

(We shall, herein and henceforth on these pages from this day forward refer to many of the NYT/Chron Stable Boys as the “NYTwits” and other variations, as in, above, “NYTwit southpaws.” )

… But Bunts on a Pair of ScrewBalls ? :^D :^D :^D

In passing, though, I must note that in part II of the same post, heavy-hitter Slampo also objects to Chris Hitchens (the pro-War leftist who once said on national television in a debate with leftist students, with the sort of common-sense Churchillian candor that is usually in short supply at such forums, “ I think it is disingenuous to say that oil is not worth fighting for, in fact, if anything is worth fighting for it is the free flow of oil…”) taking Cindy Sheehan to task for the usual ‘anti-Joo, anti-Israel’ stuff that has been part and parcel of the American Left’s catechism since Uncle Joe Stalin decided he wanted a piece of the post-WWII Arab oil supply, too.

This ‘anti-Joo, antiIsrael” stuff from the left is surprising, is it not, since much of the American Left has always been composed of Jewish leftist intellectualloids,* but hey, when it comes to the US and Western Freedom or Comrade Marx and the Commie Utopia, an intellectualloid has got to make a choice, just like the Rosenbergs, when they gave Uncle Joe the plans for the atom bomb even though Uncle Joe had carried out bloody pograms of repression and murder against Jews in the Soviet Union.

Slampo says that Sheehan has a right to say her piece without having David DuKKKe “rubbed all over her” ( as many of you are aware by now, DuKKKe has been
publicly supporting her protest in part for it’s ‘anti-Joo, anti-Israel’ angle), and I have a feeling Slampo’s comments are also one part pure Gallantry on Slampo’s part, who writes of Hitchens:

“While she may not be entitled to the “ultimate” moral authority the New York Times’ Maureen Dowd would grant her, she’s probably deserving of a tad more than, say, Hitchens, the British ex-pat whose great sacrifices for the war he’s backed from the beginning include … well, let’s just say his profile as a well-compensated public intellectual has risen tremendously since the war began, and in the meantime, judging by what we saw on C-SPAN, he doesn’t appear to have missed too many meals.”

However, we also note that Sheehan’s immersion in the leftist catechism is now a matter of public record, and the record includes her remarks about ‘the Joos and Isreal,’ all of it standard Moonbat fare.

Whatever right she has to say her piece without having David DuKKKe rubbed all over her, and whatever sliver of “moral authority” some may grant to her ---

--- it’s also very likely that if Israel and it’s children were being rounded up and slaughtered by their Arab enemies, this is one mother who wouldn’t want the west to lift a finger to stop it, and would likely join her Moonbat friends in protesting “US Imperialism” and “Western Interference” when we did interfere.

Not that she hates the ‘Joos and Israel’ or wants them annihilated, as many of her comrades on the American left do.

But don’t you see, it’s just wrong for us to interfere?

* “Intellectualloids”, a term coined by American Spectator founder R. Emmett Tyrrel for the New Left “intellectuals,” or as in Tom Wolfe, the trendy set known for holding all the latest in anti-American, anti-Western, pro-totalitarian, pro-“diversity,” Politically Correct opinions.


Post a Comment

<< Home