Friday, January 14, 2011

More Palin Pogrom

Today remains Thursday, 13 January 2011.

“Let me make one thing perfectly clear”. As another famous American anti-Semite was wont to say.

Case 1. “Aryans” (a non-existent racist fantasy type) murder Jews for centuries. Who are the victims, according to the Nazis? The Aryans. Who are the victimizers, according to the Nazis? The Jews.

Case 2. A mentally-ill person attempts to kill a Jewish member of Congress. Sarah Palin is criticized in the news media for her rhetoric and values of hate and violence. Who is the victim, according to Sarah Palin? Sarah Palin is the victim. Who is the victimizer, according to Sarah Palin? The news media, who commit a “blood libel” against Sarah Palin.

Compare and contrast.


Anonymous what's that mean? said...

HH said:
"Kindly spare the two-bit, juvenile anti-intellectualism of “50 cent” words”. “Pogrom” should be familiar from high school."

Sorry, but "pogrom" was NOT familiar from high school. HH must have gone to a highschool with more rigorous academics than the one I attended.

I object to your word usage and you come back with an assertion that I neglected my academic training. I did not. Besides, how may of us have retained everything they were exposed to in their schooling?

Turn down the elitist rhetoric. You lose credibility with those of your readers who believe you have some.

8:30 AM  
Blogger HH said...

Define "elitst".

6:32 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm a recently retired high school English teacher in a small Oklahoma town. High school students know the word pogrom.

8:58 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

“What we cannot do is use this tragedy as one more occasion to turn on one another.” And “let’s make sure our debate is worthy of those we have lost” - President Barak Obama.

Yes, it appears that most reasonable, thoughtful voices have called for toning down the rhetoric, and that many have heeded those calls for more “civil” debate. There are still those, however, who continue to assert their right to be angry, outraged, full of vitriol, and to ratchet up the name-calling and justify it as “truth-telling.”

HH’s entry for 10 January is a case in point. After prefacing his remarks with an “apology” for the “seeming” vulgarity to follow, HH asserts that “the Right and the GOP were always waving in our face that they only had the Big, Swingin’Dicks, and the liberals and Democrats were the Party of Pussies.” He continues, with “Why have the Right and GOP suddenly gone so limp in the wrist, so flaccid in the crotch?”

So… “limp in the wrist” - you mean like “wussies”, pussies, light-in-the-loafers, nancy-boys, girlie-men, queers, faggots, and fags?? So the GOP was the party of Big Swingin’ Dicks and now they’re “limp in the wrist”, “flaccid in the crotch” faggots? That’s some serious homophobic bigotry, HH. That’s the worst thing you can think of to call the GOP - limp-wristed faggots and queers? More of the same coarse, vulgar, tripe and drivel that passes for comment or analysis.

Maybe HH and Sarah Palin can stand on the same street corner and yell insults (“truth-telling”) at one another (HH - homophobic bigot; Sarah Palin - Anti-Semite). Then, all the serious problems and issues we face as a country would surely be resolved.

12:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"what's that mean?" asks that HH turn down the "elitist rhetoric". Rather than respond, HH asks for the definition of "elitst" (sic). It is clear that "what's that mean?" may have trouble expressing himself -- what he clearly means is "stop with the unmerited snobbery and the pseudo-intellectual barbs and bullying."

6:49 PM  
Anonymous what's that mean? said...

Dear Anonymous #3:
Yes, I have trouble expressing precisely what I mean sometimes. Your clarification was accurate. Thanks for the assistance.

8:59 AM  
Anonymous Anon 3 said...

to "what's that mean?" - You're welcome. You speak for many of us.

1:53 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home