Gideon MacLeish Gideon MacLeish

Who's More Sheepish? The Left or the Right?

Who's More Sheepish? The Left or the Right?

I have seen right wingers called sheep by the left.

I have two words for them: Harriet Myers.

See, right wingers tend to analyze and investigate the facts, not just rely on headlines or sound bites to gather their information. And, rightly or wrongly, they make their decisions based on the results of their analysis. Harriet Myers is just such a case in point.

For those of you who have been in a coma or camped out in Crawford Texas with Cindy Sheehan eating Iraqi meals, Harriet Myers was Bush's first choice for the open Supreme Court seat that Sandra Day O'Conner has been vacating. And the most vocal opposition to Myers came not from the left, but from the right. Ann Coulter wrote probably the most scathing diatribe of Myers, noting that she was not even qualified to play a Supreme Court judge on "The West Wing".

And the Myers case is not the only case in point. From wiretapping to Scooter Libby, I have heard much excellent right wing analysis that has called Bush to task for his actions. In fact, while they defend our continued presence as necessary, many among Bush's own party have begun to suggest that the initiation of the war in Iraq was possibly well advised.

The left, however, are another story. Virtually all of their talking points are regurgitated bile from some liberal think tank. They don't HAVE to speak; Al Franken can do it for him. And yet, noone seems to notice that when Howard Dean or Al Franken bash the government as being run by rich white males, they are themselves rich white males making the pronouncement. Or that when George Soros or John Kerry bash the rich, that neither has known for a single day of their lives what it was like to be uncertain about whether there would be food on the table the next day. Nor has either renounced their wealth (OK, in John Kerry's case, it's the wife's...but, I think you get my point) to give to the government to decrease the debt or to reduce poverty. They have instead engaged in shameful political manipulation of the poor among us, who follow them like sheep.

One of the individuals in our town who has been hardest hit by the social programs put in place largely by Democrats (he hasn't seen his children outside a room with a two way mirror for nearly two years), still refuses to vote for any other than a Democrat because many years ago, his daddy told him "if you always want food on your table, always vote Democrat". He has followed the tunes of the pied pipers of the left all the way into the cave. And he will probably never know what it's like to live as a free man.

12,940 views 31 replies
Reply #26 Top
as a libertarian, i'm amazed you'd condemn either man for having used their talents and initiative to benefit themselves. admittedly kerry did marry money later in life, but he doesn't control it.


I don't condemn them for using their talents and initiative to benefit themselves. Quite the contrary. I condemn them for the fact that they have multi-millions of dollars and rather than spend the money they control to help the poor, they instead use that money to push for more money to be stolen from the pocket of joe wage earner to support those programs. As I said when Rage Against the Machine was popular, I have no interest in going to see a band that sells socialism at $50 a ticket. A little conflict of interest going on there.

Hmm. As far as I can see Gideon, you either subscribe to such labels and use them, or you denounce them and don't. How can you justify having it both ways?


Whatever, furry. Can we say "forest for the trees"?
Reply #27 Top
as far as the poor following either of em like sheep, i'm thinking if that were the case, kerry would be president now.


I never said the POOR followed anyone like sheep, was referring to the tendency of the left and the right.

And, for furry's benefit, those who are NOT left or right are pretty much by definition not sheep or they would have marched lock in step with either side of the political spectrum. So this argument doesn't ignore them, it just doesn't address them.
Reply #28 Top
'And, for furry's benefit, those who are NOT left or right are pretty much by definition not sheep or they would have marched lock in step with either side of the political spectrum. So this argument doesn't ignore them, it just doesn't address them.'

If you are using the term 'sheep' as I have previously understood it, you mean that they do not think things through for themselves, but follow a flock mentality. This implies the existence of a flock - well, of two flocks I suppose, one left and one right. And yet you argue that 'Very few people that I have ever met have fallen CONSISTENTLY on either the left or the right side of the political spectrum'.

So, these people are flock animals, but the flocks are really, really small? I guess that must make these people stand out from the herd!
A little more seriously, isn't a 'political spectrum' just that? i.e. Not a beast with two wings and no abdomen, but a continuum. So why don't you entertain the notion that, for example, those who subscribe to 'Centrism' are equally ovine?
Reply #29 Top
"if you always want food on your table, always vote Democrat". He has followed the tunes of the pied pipers of the left all the way into the cave. And he will probably never know what it's like to live as a free man. Yeah, right. Like the right has no monolithic tendencies That the right questions Bush's violation of privacy or selection of Meirs, they are heroes to you, but because the left agrees they are zombies. On this website everything that's wrong in society is owing the the idiotology of the left without having the guts to admit the right has its gross share of idiots, too. If you want food on the table always vote Republican because they generously trickle down riches to the unwashed.
Reply #30 Top
"if you always want food on your table, always vote Democrat". He has followed the tunes of the pied pipers of the left all the way into the cave. And he will probably never know what it's like to live as a free man. Yeah, right. Like the right has no monolithic tendencies That the right questions Bush's violation of privacy or selection of Meirs, they are heroes to you, but because the left agrees they are zombies. On this website everything that's wrong in society is owing the the idiotology of the left without having the guts to admit the right has its gross share of idiots, too. If you want food on the table always vote Republican because they generously trickle down riches to the unwashed.


Steve, this has got to be one of the biggest piles of dung I have ever had the dispoeasure of reading! I expected better from you.
As an aside just what was wrong with Meirs?
Reply #31 Top
That the right questions Bush's violation of privacy or selection of Meirs, they are heroes to you, but because the left agrees they are zombies.


Never said the right were heroes to me. Just that I have seen fewer sheepish tendencies among the right. Added to that, there's a greater degree of intellectual honesty in the right's agenda than their is among the left, in my extremely arrogant opinion.