25 Terrible Persons

Written by Michael Finley
Published December 28, 2002

I'm not ordinarily fond of making fun of conservatives, because I know that I am one in some ways.

But I am all in favor of making fun of ideological bullies, which is what Pandagon does in his current list of 25 awful (and conservative) persons.

It's funny, in a nasty sort of way.

Here is my addendum, based on a news show I heard yesterday:

I would cast a vote for Orrin Hatch, who is making the talk show rounds this week promoting his contrarian autobiography Square Peg: Confessions of a Citizen Senator.

ON NPR yesterday he claimed all kinds of liberals as friends, then slashed them with a sharpened hoe. He embraced Ted Kennedy as a co-legislator, then scored him for his supposed vanity in setting the Rx drug bill provision higher than Clinton's.

(Which might be true, I don't know — it is Hatch's palsy-walsy betrayal that bugs me.)

Defending Utah Mormonism, he allowed as how he was glad Pittsburgh was a Catholic city and blessed by its religious leadership, which was a good thing, because it was the most corrupt city on the planet.

Always playing "nice guy," always twisting the knife.

Keep reading for information and comments on this article, and add some feedback of your own!
25 Terrible Persons
Published: December 28, 2002
Type:
Section: Books
Writer: Michael Finley
Michael Finley's BC Writer page
Michael Finley's personal site
Spread the Word
Like this article?
Email this
Submit to del.icio.us Save to del.icio.us
RSS Feeds
All RSS Feeds (240+)
Comments on this article
BC articles by Michael Finley
All Books Articles
All BC articles
All BC Comments

Comments

#1 — December 28, 2002 @ 11:59AM — Bill Sherman [URL]

Was gonna take issue with your notation of 25 conservatives, because Pandagon calls his list the "Top Twenty" - but then I realized that the writer blended several names into two items and divided the number one spot into one-a and one-b. (Don't think early drafts of that posting did this, incidentally.) A ripely vicious rant, thought I, though the guy indulges in one too many fat jokes for my taste. . .

#2 — December 28, 2002 @ 13:44PM — Mike Finley [URL]

You should stood your ground, you had me dead to rights. I read another such list somewhere earlier this week, like it, it lampooned figured mostly media figures on the right.

You're right, we sometimes pick on the wrong things -- like calling Bush dumb when the greater problems are that he is rigid, and beholden, and suffers from entitlement syndrome.

And, of course, it is too easily reversed -- the left has no shortage of flaming a-holes.

I also feel that lists, esp. long ones, lose power after the first handful. Even if the vituperation increases, the reader's appetite for it does not. At leadt, mine doesn't.

#3 — December 28, 2002 @ 17:08PM — Eric Olsen

Being that I am in holiday mode I don't want to have to work very hard on this, but if the fact that someone is "conservative" (based upon what I am not sure) makes them inherently "terrible," then this list reflects more upon he writer than upon those written about. If you are going to name the terrible, then why restrict by some abstract political ideology? Terrible is terrible, and the left has more than its share.

As to Bush, I didn't vote for him and might not again, but he is anything other than "rigid." How can someone who changed the entire course of his regime on a dime on 9/11, flying directly in he face of "conservative" - ie status quo - State Department orthodoxy, be called "rigid"?

#4 — December 28, 2002 @ 17:37PM — Bill Sherman [URL]

It strikes me that Pandagon has less to say about his list's ideological tendencies than he does this group's propensity for intellectual dishonestly, lying and slander. That's something neither left nor right is immuned to, of course, but it's sure feels like there's been an inordinate amount of this crap from the likes of Ann Coulter, Peggy Noonan, et al.

#5 — December 28, 2002 @ 19:00PM — Jason Fitch

I couldn't agree more! I hate hate hate Ann Coulter and Sean Hannity. They both make me soooo angry. I can't even understand how anybody listens to or reads anything either one of them says with out ripping out their own hair and screaming "This is such bullshit!!!!!" at the top of their lungs.

#6 — December 29, 2002 @ 01:50AM — Mike Finley [URL]

Rigidity = the inability to grow and learn. I have been paying attention to this guy for 15 years, and I have yet to hear him ever apologize for anything, whther it is sanctioning racist universities, telling incredible untruths to the American people about his tax cuts, even an apology for being a convicted felon, or for being AWOL from the Alabama Air Guard for two years. Flexibility is not his strong suit.

He is psychically unable to say the very human words, "I'm sorry," or "That was wrong." he gives Lott the secret shaft, but has he apologized for nominating Lott-alikes to the federal courts? Clearly, like Lott, and like many conservatives, he privately fawns over the racist right -- but where is the action to remedy this injustice?

We'll never see it, because that's the kind of man he is -- rigid. If the whole world opposes him on a point, he just gets more resistant. It's hard to imagine that in a good president, a president of all the people.

He is a will-to-power politician, America's first great one. Other countries -- Italy, Germany, Russia, Japan -- know where that leads. But it's still quite new to us.

But this is beyond the scope of Pandagon's pastiche. Pandagon barely mentions the president at all.

Want comments emailed to you? No spam, promise! Address:

Add your comment, speak your mind

(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/2420)

Personal attacks are not allowed. Please read our comment policy.





Remember Name/URL?

Please preview your comment!

Fresh
Articles
Fresh
Comments