There was an interesting exchange on "The Rachel Maddow Show" (sorry, I still haven't figured out the whole link thing yet): J. D. Hayworth (who I'll grudingly give credit to for appearing on a decidedly liberal show)**Aside: I can't be the only one who's noticed how few Republicans show up on Maddow (granted, I'm guessing Olbermann is like me and couldn't give a shit what they think and thus they never appear on his show) yet how many--even hardcore liberals--Dems show up on on Faux News--we've actually got cojones, for fuck's sake!**who is running a far right challenge to John McCain (like we give a shit: two mother fuckers who'll have their noses far up the asses of corporate elite and fuck over the rest of us) was debating with Ms. Maddow over what the court ruling that allowed gay marriage in Massachusetts said. Mr. Hayworth claimed the ruling said marriage was defined as a state of intimacy. Ms. Maddow said he was mistaken. Mr. Hayworth then said, they'd "just have to disagree." Um, no--either that wording is in the ruling or it is not (it isn't). Mr. Hayworth's contention, when I was but a wee lad, would be called "lying." Now it's called a "disagreement."
Words.
I also saw a snippet of Rush Limbaugh in which he called those of us with a liberal bent, "...the Democrat Party." No, you fucking idiot, it's the Democratic party. We are smart enough to use proper English--therefore, we do not call you the Republic party. At one time, this would have been called "misleading people." Now he's "playing to his audience."
Words.
The company I work for is instituting a new policy which is not going to make many of our employees very happy. As we pass along this policy**Aside--note how the peons have to communicate this new policy: the kings sit in their castles and issue their edicts. Note to executives: they're still going to blame the corporate office.**we have been told that we have to understand it's "...the wants of the employees versus the needs of the company." Get it? The greedy, overly pampered employees "wants" versus the poor, pitiful, put upon company's "needs." Once upon a time, this would have been called "bullshit." Now it's "being a team player."
Words.
Peace,
emaycee
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I always figured that Maddow had Republicans because she's intelligent, calm, and collected enough to debate them. And not to insult Olbermann, but he's more...passionate is the word we'll use. He strikes me as someone who would get flustered. Not to say he's not capable, but that he lacks the patience.
ReplyDeleteI can understand both of them, as I am probably more like Olbermann, but I strive to be more like Maddow. I appreciate the passionate, impatient liberal. But I think we need a few people to sit back and use logic and reason to debunk the shit spewing from the right.
I saw the interview too, and I was also horrified by the idea that what's in the Mass. SSM ruling is something to "agree to disagree on" rather that it is in there or it is not. I'm actually learning to live with idiots saying same-sex marriage will translate to having sex with horses, no matter how retarded. BUT I just can't abide someone saying something is written somewhere when a two-second search can show it's a lie. That makes it a lie. I don't know how to change that but it infuriates me as well.
ReplyDelete