Brad Wardell's views about technology, politics, religion, world affairs, and all sorts of politically incorrect topics.
Published on September 5, 2008 By Draginol In Republican

I've written about this many times in the past but one of the more off putting features of American liberals is their smugness.  If you disagree with them it is only because you are either ignorant or evil. This tends to result in them losing elections. Often.

I just read a very interesting blog about this that I thought I'd share here:

This conceit of liberals -- which sometimes I think is all that sustains them, and all that keeps them liberals in the first place -- that liberals have some sort of a monopoly on brains, wit, taste, and, yes, even basic humanity will be their undoing. It always is. They keep making the same mistakes over and over and over and over again, and we're the dumb ones.

They, the ones who have made the same ten mistakes every single election since 1968, are the smart ones. Right?

Let's check the list: Demean an opponent who you really ought to suspect might be rather intelligent as an ignorant boob, bordering on a genuine diagnosable moron, to such a degree that when the candidate speaks and reveals himself as reasonably intelligent, he actually seems to be nearly a genius.

Demean those who don't live in "cosmopolitan" cities as bumpkins who have nothing to contribute to politics or culture -- not their own ideas, their own aspirations, their own fears, their own traditions -- except for the votes they're expected to cast for the Democratic elites who scorn them.

And all the rest of it.

Now, after the fact, the left is convulsing and gnashing their teeth. How could we have allowed ourselves to so demean Sarah Palin as to turn her home-run speech into a genuine star-making speech by lowering expectations so much through our derision!?!

How could you have done that, you ask. That's not the right question. The right question is Is it even possible for you to avoid doing that?, because you do every. Single. God. Damn. Election. Cycle.

It works in my favor, and yet I'm still horrified to see you doing it every time.

Have you ever done anything else? Are you capable of doing anything differently? Even as conservatives snicker at you and tell you to your smug fat faces that you're making a gross strategic error, you continue doing so just the same!

We don't even bother to hide our snickering at you any longer. We don't bother to conceal this basic error from you -- we simply declare it. We don't have to hide this, we don't have to try to avoid tipping you off that you're making this mistake for the thirtieth time, because we know you won't listen anyway!

That's the truly delightful thing about this. We don't have to scheme with each other and say, "Quiet down, don't give the game away," when a fellow conservative points the error out. It doesn't matter! We can scream this from the rooftops for all the good it does you.

It's like we're fighting a war and we don't even have to bother coding our messages to the troops because we know there's no chance at all you'll even bother to pause to read our communications. "Don't bother us with your silly orders and tactics and strategies," you tell us, "We can figure out how to beat you silly people well enough on our own without any of your stupid-brained help."

You can? You sure about that? Well, whatever, buddy. If you think so. Seems to me you guys are 3-4 since 1994 -- a losing record -- but if you guys want to keep following the same game plan, be my guest.

Ultimately the liberals' sin is their smugness. Not even so much because most people recoil from the assumption of superiority, both intellectual and moral, by those who have accomplished nothing exceptional in life except for reliably voting and "thinking" liberal, as if casting a vote the "correct" way slaps 30 points on to your IQs and counts for 100 hours of community service and child mentoring.

No, the main problem with that smugness, that belief that you're sooo very fucking clever, is that you're actually not particularly clever at all, and the great gap between your personal estimation of your intelligence and the actual real-world measure of it is wide enough to stumble into and take a painful fall. Perhaps if you weren't so very convinced of your own innate entitlement to rule, you'd spend less time seething at a public unwilling to concede that rule to you, and less time trying to trick the public into voting for you by concealing your true beliefs, and more time trying to figure out what the public actually wants in its government, and how to provide with them with that.

You know the big difference between conservatives and liberals in terms of political acumen? You guys never see this stuff coming, because you're so convinced of your innate right to control other people's lives. You convince ourselves you're always the smartest guys in the room, and anyone who disagrees with you must either be so stupid or so luminescently evil they could never prevail in a campaign.

The Ronald Reagans and Sarah Palins surprise you, because you just can't even conceive of them. Your entire sense of self-worth depends on the proposition Liberal = Smart, Good, Conservatives = Stupid, Bad, so you can't imagine clever, good people opposing you.

You go into every election thinking the score is already 24-0 in your favor -- after all, you have nothing but vicious, racist, gay-bashing hobo-killing morons in your way. How can you, the Moral and Intellectual Elect of the Earth, possibly fail?

And yet you do. More frequently than you win.

Eh. I don't know why I'm bothering to tell you this. As you've demonstrated in every past election, you're not going to listen anyhow.

Ya fuckin' dunces.

Oh, and... Good job so demeaning her you half-convinced the public she was a drooling imbecile and yee-haw hollerin' bumpkin who'd embarrass herself on stage.

Sure, sure. Smart move.

A former beauty queen -- who could have imagined she might be comfortable in front of a large, critical crowd, and might in fact even thrive in the spotlight?

A former television sportscaster -- who would have predicted she'd have some poise and savvy playing to a camera?

Amen. I have run into this in discussions with family and friends when politics come up. I try to avoid talking politics because, like many of you reading this, I keep up with it very closely, I'm pretty knowledgeable on the topic.

Most people, left or right, aren't that up on the issues. Yet, despite their lack of relative knowledge on the issues, they will presume to be more enlightened or educated simply because they hold left wing views.


Comments (Page 2)
6 Pages1 2 3 4  Last
on Sep 06, 2008

Seems to me you are really not all that knowledgable on politics. You simply repeat the same spin that the politicians of one party put on another. To truly understand politics is to understand both sides of the issues because they affect people in different ways. Take a good look then you might notice there are both liberal and conservative elitist, both liberal and conservatives who demean others that have opposing views, intelligent people in both camps and dumb-asses on both sides of the fence.

Nice that a liberal steps forward to prove Brad's point.

Being Brad's wife, I can assure you that he is very knowledgeable of both liberal and conservative political philosophies. Our bookshelves are filled with the books from authors from both sides.  Given that he designed The Political Machine and wrote the issue neutral descriptions, did the research on the issues I think your comment that Brad doesn't know much on politics bespeaks the liberal attitude that those who don't agree with them just don't know anything. You may not agree with his views, but he definitely knows his stuff.

And yes, his family is mostly left of center.

on Sep 06, 2008

Everyone believe's they're right and anyone who thinks differently is wrong. Hell, some poeple actually believe that anyone who isn't rich is stupid, lazy, or both. Elitism is everywhere and for the most part it just demonstrates ego as opposed to reality.

on Sep 07, 2008

Why is it when a lefty states something it a "hard cold fact, yet when a righty says the same thing it's called "spin"?

 

Totally untrue...Both sides spin every issue. And there are people in both camps that think their side contains the hard cold facts.

on Sep 07, 2008

Being Brad's wife, I can assure you that he is very knowledgeable of both liberal and conservative political philosophies.

 

Then why does he make posts that imply the same stereotypes that are simply the same drivel used by political pundits? The crap that comes out of the mouths of radio and tv pundits is not politics its entertainment at best something akin to that performed by circus clowns.

on Sep 07, 2008

Brad,

I've personally experienced both left and right people have those characteristics in the article you quote.  I've noticed both parties having their own characters that have that annoying unjustified confidence in their own correctness.

 

I mean, obviously, you're a bright guy to build up a pretty successful company.  So I think it's simply really easy to project personal experiences into some kind of universal truth.  Maybe you just happen to have more personal experience with leftists having that type of smugness?  I'm guilty of the same thing and it's really hard for me to force myself to step outside myself and notice that I'm doing that kind of projecting. 

 

Seriously, I'm not saying that to be uber-PC...I really haven't noticed just one side having representatives that are annoyingly sure in their own minds of the correctness of their views and the other side just doesn't 'get it'.

 

I've seen people from both parties say somethign or carry themselves in a way that makes me shake my head and decide to just get back to building my super cool robotech minatures.

 

-Rattasak

on Sep 07, 2008

Everyone believe's they're right and anyone who thinks differently is wrong. Hell, some poeple actually believe that anyone who isn't rich is stupid, lazy, or both. Elitism is everywhere and for the most part it just demonstrates ego as opposed to reality.

Some political philosophies are more prone to elitism than others. 

on Sep 07, 2008

Then why does he make posts that imply the same stereotypes that are simply the same drivel used by political pundits? The crap that comes out of the mouths of radio and tv pundits is not politics its entertainment at best something akin to that performed by circus clowns.

Sometimes...often times, stereotypes are true.  Moreover, if I have a different opinion than you, it does not, by definition, mean I don't know what I'm talking about.

on Sep 07, 2008

I mean, obviously, you're a bright guy to build up a pretty successful company. So I think it's simply really easy to project personal experiences into some kind of universal truth. Maybe you just happen to have more personal experience with leftists having that type of smugness? I'm guilty of the same thing and it's really hard for me to force myself to step outside myself and notice that I'm doing that kind of projecting.

Let me ask you this - how many times was the Democratic convention interupted by a right-winger attempting to disrupt it versus the Republican one?

In 2004, Bush's speech was interupted by a left-wing disrupter who snuck in.  In 2008, both Palin's and McCain's speeches were either nearly interupted or were interupted by left-wing disrupters. 

We hear all about Palin's 17 year old daughter getting pregnant. Meanwhile, Biden's son gets indicted on fraud and there's barelya mention of this even though it's happening right now.

By contrast, not since 1968 have the Democrats had problems from significant political agitators and that's because after 1968 they essentially joined the left wing movement themselves.

Why is it, whether it be on a college campus or a political meeting that conservatives are much more likely to be assaulted for their political opinions than liberals?  How many times has Michael Moore been assaulted on stage for giving a speech versus Ann Coulter?

When Bush was re-elected, we heard plenty about how stupid the American people are.  We heard about "Jesus Land".  And every Republican, whether it be Bush I or Bush II or Reagan or Ford or Eisenhower on down is always considered to be "stupid".

This isn't an issue of "projection". This is an issue of that is pretty obvious. 

As the article makes abundantly clear (which I didn't write) is that each election, liberals blow it by insulting the vast chunks of our population that don't share their political ideology.

Don't believe in human created global warming? You must be dumb or ignorant or brain washed.

Think everyone, including the rich should have their taxes cut? You must be stupid or just selfish.

Supported the invasion of Iraq? You must be an idiot or are some sort of chicken hawk.

Where is the right wing version of Democratic Underground or Smirking Chimp or Moveon.org?

Just compare the nastiness that Palin has gone through in a week with the treatment Obama has gone through. 

 

on Sep 07, 2008

We hear all about Palin's 17 year old daughter getting pregnant. Meanwhile, Biden's son gets indicted on fraud and there's barelya mention of this even though it's happening right now.

Yes, and dubbya knowingly lied in order to start a war that killed thousands and shredded your constitution to the point that he's basically a "unitary executive", what with warrantless domestic surveillance and now torture being back in vogue. And he said that if anyone in his administration was found to be involved in the outing of an undercover CIA agent that they would face the full force of the law. And then when that happened, he pardoned the fella right away. And what price did he pay? Articles of impeachment have been filed against him but will go nowhere. Clinton got a BJ and damn near got thrown out.

How many times has Michael Moore been assaulted on stage for giving a speech versus Ann Coulter?

How many times has Michael Moore advocated killing one's own countrymen, or invading muslim countries so that we can "kill their leaders and force them to convert to christianity"?

And every Republican, whether it be Bush I or Bush II or Reagan or Ford or Eisenhower on down is always considered to be "stupid".

Says who?? Eisenhower is one of my favorite U.S Presidents. Actually, if it weren't for that little business in which he okay'ed the coup in Iran (the after effects we're still living with today) he might just in fact be my # 1 pick. His speech on the Military-Industrial complex was prescient, and if he were here today I think he'd kick dubbya's ass in a heartbeat!

George Bush 1 is another of my favs. He was smart enough to understand that an alliance with Russia was far more important than an alliance with smaller eastern european nations, and so, he stayed true to his word and didn't expand NATO eastward after the fall of communism. GB the 2nd, however, seems to think that the world is a game of risk and has given up that alliance in order to get meagre territorial gains and place troops and weapons on the border with Russia, which is not a smart move by any stretch of the imagination!

As the article makes abundantly clear (which I didn't write) is that each election, liberals blow it by insulting the vast chunks of our population that don't share their political ideology.

On this one I agree with you 100 % However, you'd be better off using the word "democrats" here instead of liberals as the two aren't the same thing!

Supported the invasion of Iraq? You must be an idiot or are some sort of chicken hawk.

I supported the invasion of Iraq. I was fool enough to believe dubbya's speech about mushroom clouds and chemical weapons and remote controlled drone aircraft that Iraq was planning on using to deliver all those nasty WMD's to wipe us all out!

Where is the right wing version of Democratic Underground or Smirking Chimp or Moveon.org?

hee hee! Well, http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/*/index comes to mind right off the top of my head. http://blog.heritage.org/ is also another good one. There's lots out there which I'd be more than happy to come back with if you'd like!

Just compare the nastiness that Palin has gone through in a week with the treatment Obama has gone through.

I agree with you that Palin shouldn't have been smeared. No one, actually, should be smeared at all and there is no defense for it at all. However, Republicans are just as guilty. I seem to remember during the last election a bunch of Republicans wore purple band-aids to make fun of Kerry's purple hearts that he received after being wounded in combat.

on Sep 07, 2008

Sometimes...often times, stereotypes are true

But for every left winger who snuck into an rnc convention to disrupt it...there are millions who dont and woulndn't

And for every right winger that has blown up an abortion clinic there are millions who dont and wouldn't.

 

Some people fit certain stereotypes and other don't.  Personally I would say most dont particularly when it comes to political stereotyping. The most liberal people and conservative people that I personally know don't even come close to fitting in the political stereotypes that the pudits have created.

 

 

on Sep 07, 2008

That's thing Brad, those responses you put that some liberals have I've never heard in debate I've had with them on those kind of issues.  I'm not nearly convinced that human induced global warming is real and instead might just be a natural cycle of the earth's climate.  I've seen the data from NOAA and the time frame they're using is such a miniscule amount relative to the scale of what they're trying to project out to (different use of projection here) that I'm not convinced.  But I've never had any liberal call me an idiot or dumb. 

 

I usually avoid solely political blogs nowadays so I can't really cite either the extreme leftish or rightish sites out there.  (The last time I did keep up with those types of blogs was on the order of  years ago and I was dissatisfied with either the amount of namecalling or smug condescending tone from both party lines that I quit reading them)  I see it as much like how most people are good, but the few that are bad make the most noise or get the most attention so it seems out of proportion.  In that I notice that the amount of insane or annoying leftists or rightests are there are miniscule compared to the people closer to the mean.  Just that the extremists get the most air time or strive to get the most air time so they end up giving a bad image to the more reasonable folks.  At least that's been my experience.  I've got into arguments with what I would call extremists (in more or less even amounts left and right) and usually just cut off the conversation b/c it's not worth the effort on my part since I see it being a fruitless venture.  (extremists in my view in that I usually try citing facts and my interpretations of those facts and usually get called a retard in retaliation).

on Sep 07, 2008

Intelligence is a value, remember the positive thinking movement. Imagine a person walking around thinking he's a dumbass. He's not likely going to amount to anything, because as the old saying goes... You've got to BELIEVE in yourself!!!


I admire the intellect, and believe you should be proud of that. Perhaps the truest mark of what traits I admire in others is my favorite characters on television... Alan Shore of Boston Legal, House of House MD, and Horatio Cane of CSI Miami. Moralistic intellectuals of integrity working hard to see through what is right.

What annoys me is not smugness, but hypocrazy. People who preach family values yet solicit gay sex in the bathroom. Amoung other things, red necks who claim to have family values while doing their sister. We're all familiar with the various types of lowlives in our society. But one thing that absolute annoys me is lowlives who claim to have "values" when they don't. Family values was a sham from the very beginning.

What's interesting, is that personal responcibility is a big issue, and one simply has to note teenage pregnancy as an issue in this campaign. When conservatives criticize teenage pregancy it's good, but when liberals do, they are smug. Right... Teenage pregnancy is bad, it was 20 years ago, it still is today, but somehow Sarah Palin is exonerated for bad parenting... Right... Where's the personal responcibility, the accountibility.

Personal responcibility IS a family value, and I'll go up against the poor ethics of rap music just as much as I'll criticize homophobic red necks in the blue hills of the mountains who like to do their sister. There's a lot of people out there with bad values. As Horatio Cane said aptly, the world is FULL of dissapointment.

This article neglects one thing, the demographic is changing, there's a lot more college students now, and we like smart people. College students are what brought an end to Hilary Clinton's campaign, because she just couldn't get a lock on their vote. Although she did manage to do well amoung people who are to afraid of the idea of a *cough* black president. And I personally have a few of these people in my family (fortunately, not my immediate family), so I can attest to the fact that there are real people out there who think like that. And it's a damn shame. If you want proof of this, note the unusual voting patterns of West Virginia and Kentucky... some counties Obama only got 5% of the vote, and in some of these places, you'd swear they came right out of the 18th century. CNN did a tour of a small rural town in Kentucky, and it was a wierd scary place, it looked like a pre-industrial age town straight out of the civil war. And guess what, some of those people are still living in the mindset of the civil war. (Remember George Wallace, gee, I wonder who's getting the George Wallace votes these days) There's still a fair number of people out there who oppose the civil rights movement, although as nation, we've evolved beyond that era, so they don't get air time anymore... Well, with the possible exception of Michael Savage.

What you'll find is that with me, I'm a liberal, with staunch conservative values. I believe in personal responcibility, family values, ethics, morals, going to school, self improvement, and I think that we should flaunt those things as we are PROUD of them. Should someone diminish the importance of their Harvard/Ivy League education or the fact that they were damn good in Law school. By the way, Legislators write laws, and Presidents sign them, so I'd think that someone finishing near the top of class in Law school would make an excellent candidate to say, I dunno... Sign bills in LAW... To wit.


I know, as I'm going to school, each class I get a damn good grade in makes me proud. It's important to have values, morality and integrity. At work, I work hard to uphold my self-image.


Some call it smugness, others call it confidence. And as someone once told me, people can be very intimidated by confidence. Ever watch Barack Obama, the perfect poise, as if he's spent years projecting his body language, with perfect speech deliveries, on point, delivered with sincerity every time. The perfect smile, the infallable values of a hard working former middle class man who arose through hard work and dedication. Obama is the epitome of conservative values... hard work, personal responcibility, integrity, values, etc. He knows how to deliver a speech, why, because he practiced. Delivery is important, the ability to stand with poise is important. And you bet, that speaking ability will come in handy, whenever the need to meet with a foreign leader is important, because we will need a damn good negoitator. Oh, did I mention I'm a fan of the Donald as well... You should see the things he had to say about George Bush and negoitation. Donald Trump is a smart guy, I admire that in people.


The problem with Republicans, is that unfortunately for them, the last one isn't the brightest of the bunch, and McCain's no Einstein either. It's just that the Republican party tends to attract trigger happy hawks who want to invade countries more than it attracts people who are proponents of SOUND policies with carefully thoughtout implications. For that, you have the democrats.

Right now, with Fannie and Co. proving that not only can governments be corrupt and make bad choices, but so can major economic institutions. You see, that's why we have regulations, to create a stable economic environment so that major economic institutions don't make bad... (no, scratch that) inept choices.

You see regulations use the principle of "an ounce of prevention is a pound of cure". Without laws, there is nothing but chaos, as people lack the personal responcibility to avoid the temptation to make risky choices that have a chance of a reward. We should have a system based on responcibility.

Personally, I think people admire bad traits in other people anyways, but intelligence is not one of them. I mean, serial killers actually have fans... Mmm. Then again, I am not a fan of serial killers, or rapists, or even speeders. Personally, I'm going to get a bumper sticker that says "To speeders, either pass me or relax and enjoy the ride, cause I'm not breaking the law for you". Moral confidence is never a bad thing. I invented sarcastic self-righteousness. A kind of unique fusion of two characters, House and Horatio Cane.


Note, I do not endorse serial killers, rap music, criminals, politicians soliciting gay sex in bathrooms, priests fondling little boys, red necks screwing their sister or any other amoral behavior. Welcome to the real moral values. It's called behaving like a dignified human being.

The problem with Republicans, is that they win, and because of their lack of values, they run things badly. However if you look at history... FDR, Kennedy, Clinton, Carter (with unique exception)... FDR, having won a world war and brought an end to the depression, leaving this country as a superpower. Kennedy, dedicating this country to a major project of landing a man on the moon... A major feet. Carter, prevailed over the worst stretch of economic period in American history, caused by the Arab oil embargo, not by any Democratic policy mind you. And then we have Clinton, who actually balanced the ****** budget. Who, mind you, actually used those fiscal conservative idelogy that republicans preach so much.  I'd have to say, fiscal conservatism is not a bad idea, but it requires actually DOING something. Haha. Of the republicans I admire Eisenhower, who adopted a massive plan to upgrade the road system with interstate highways, an improvement that really improved the economy.

Reagan's big mistake is that he considered that government is the problem. I'll correct that for Reagan... Irresponcible government is the problem. Responcibility ought to be first and foremost on the mind of every president. The attitude that government is the problem has given rise to derelects running the country, because blaming the government is just an excuse to run things badly. As in "government is the problem", so I don't have to do anything and um, just fiddle while New Orleans burns.


I don't think anyone can argue against this, George W. Bush is the stupidest president ever elected. I mean, just read any of the Bushisms books, he said the most amazingly retarded things that make 5th graders look good. And we vote for idiots because we can't stomach a little smugness. Suck it up and vote for someone smart for a change. It does a nation good.

on Sep 07, 2008

Artysim

Yes, and dubbya knowingly lied in order to start a war that killed thousands and shredded your constitution to the point that he's basically a "unitary executive", what with warrantless domestic surveillance and now torture being back in vogue. 

Sigh.  This sort of discourge becomes tiresome.  There is no evidence that Bush "lied" to "start a war". None. This is an issue that has been gone over so many times that it's just old. It's about one step above the "and it's known that the CIA really killed JFK" or whatever. It's not "known". It's definitely debateable.

Similarly, you say he "shredded" the constitution. I hear this a lot. Which amendment or article of the constitution was "shredded"?

And the same thing on "torture". Very tireseome. Once upon a time, torture meant, well, torture. Now, we live in a world where being forced to stay awake a long time or water bordering is considered torture.

But you help make my point here, you state these things as if they are established facts. To disagree with your opinions is to disagree with "facts". They're not facts. They're your opinions.

 

That's thing Brad, those responses you put that some liberals have I've never heard in debate I've had with them on those kind of issues

That really says more about how many debates you've had with liberals. You don't have to look far to find this stuff.  Just peruse Digg for an afternoon in the political areas and read the comments. And Digg is hardly some extremist site.

on Sep 07, 2008

ome call it smugness, others call it confidence. And as someone once told me, people can be very intimidated by confidence. Ever watch Barack Obama, the perfect poise, as if he's spent years projecting his body language, with perfect speech deliveries, on point, delivered with sincerity every time.

No one objects to confidence.

What we object to is one side actively insulting the other side's intelligence with evidence of intelligence being purely dependent on holding the "correct" political opinion.

My favorite example is global warming. I'm a skeptic of human produced CO2 related global warming. The number of times on-line and off-line I've had my intelligence or educational background questioned simply because I'm a skeptic is innumerable.  

And the people who make claims of my low intelligence/education are people whose sole source of research is having seen "An Inconvenient Truth".  As if watching a movie makes them experts.

But as the original article indicates, the left can't really help themselves. It's part of their ideology and as a result, they manage to steal defeat out of the jaws of victory because they put off so many people.

The treatment of Palin these past few weeks has made me, someone who has sworn not to vote for McCain quite tempted simply to keep "those people" being "in power". 

on Sep 07, 2008

brad, i can't stand digg b/c it is too far left for me.  i go for the tech news and don't even open the comments or political posts anymore.  two themes I've finally come to terms with on digg is very left views and condescending atheists (both views don't bother me at all personally, but the condescending tone of both types on digg does)  i guess it just comes down to who we have personal contact with on a daily basis.  i've had a fair (not like...100s) of talks with liberals and haven't had a very significant portion happen really like mentioned in the article.  but.  i'm in texas (and not austin)...so maybe the liberals here are more reasonable than in your area (perhaps on account of there being fewer...I'm not sure).

-rattasak

6 Pages1 2 3 4  Last