Flame — HabitableZone

Flame » in reply to um, Buck...

re: um, Mary Anne...

One of my favorite talk show hosts is Laura Inghram (sp?). She has a bit she calls "the But-Monkey." Her definition of the word is different from the way I use it. I use it to mean fawning sycophant, a toady, and I spell it "buttmonkey."

Laura uses it to illustrate the liberal imperative to take any condemnation of anyone other than the U.S. and the West and attach a "but" to it. "Well, yes, terrorists flying planes into office buildings is terrible, BUT..." "Saddam did some bad things to his people and others, BUT..." "Well, Palestinians going into a pizza parlor and detonating a rat poisoned shrapnel bomb is wrong, BUT..." The "but" is invariably followed by one or more things that the U.S. has done that tends to excuse the first part of the phrase. It's a regular feature on her program.

I'm beginning to think that some liberals literally cannot come down on the same side as the U.S. on any issue without this verbal leavening, lest their brains explode.

I have yet to see a single case of a supposedly "balanced" and "nuanced" liberal thinker saying "Well, yes, abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib was criminal, and should be punished, BUT..." "Innocent people get killed by our bombs during a war, BUT..." When it's America, the evil is crystalline and perfect, with no possible excuse.

This is from liberals who are much more reasonable than Bowser. And sorry, but one well-written bit doesn't make up for many hostile tirades whose sole target is our nation and interests, no matter who or what is on the other side.

His complete ignorance of what's actually going on out there just adds to the frustration.

Log in or register to post.

The whole thread (160 posts)