Monday, March 26, 2007

No, he's a dumbass all by himself; he doesn't need any help.


Back here, commenter "eastern capitalist" takes your humble scribe to task for (allegedly) unfairly smacking around the Blogging Tories' resident mouth-breather Dr. Roy, suggesting I'm over-generalizing just a tad:

Has Roy ever suggested that he supports what [Newt Gingrich] did?

Or do the sins of all conservatives fall on each and every single person who calls themself a conservative?

A fair point, to which one can respond, first, that the good doctor doesn't seem to have a problem referring to the Newtster in a generally approving way, like here:

Newt Gingrich, Hillary Clinton Defend Pope

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, longtime foes in American politics, forcefully defended Pope Benedict XVI on Tuesday against a wave of Muslim criticism over a speech last week.

One might also point out that, given the striking similarities between these two situations, the doc hasn't bothered to draw the obvious parallels to point out how, unlike Edwards, Newt Gingrich, when the chips were down, was a completely amoral douchebag.

But, really, what it comes down to is that, given that Dr. Roy has been, from time immemorial, a potty-mouthed, ignorant, whiny little anti-liberal pissant, it's more than a little out of place for him to suddenly be terribly, terribly concerned about the health and well-being of someone he's never met.

Given that the good doctor, like the rest of his Blogging Tory circle jerk colleagues, didn't give a rat's ass about a nine-year-old Canadian boy incarcerated in a Texas detention centre, it's just a little galling to now start hearing his pretentious, sanctimonious medical advice, as if he actually gave a damn about Edwards and wasn't just trying to smear him as a hard-hearted, political machine unconcerned about his wife.

I'm sure Edwards and his family are quite capable of working this out all by themselves. The last thing they need is some mouthy, little right-wing fuckwad like Dr. Roy suddenly deciding that he's concerned about some politician's wife who has cancer.

It's a bit late for that, doc. You might want to save that advice for some of your right-wing colleagues who need it.

1 comment:

eastern capitalist said...

One might also point out that, given the striking similarities between these two situations, the doc hasn't bothered to draw the obvious parallels to point out how, unlike Edwards, Newt Gingrich, when the chips were down, was a completely amoral douchebag.

Nor did he suggest any praise beyond that NG and HC were both working together to support a person (namely the Pope), to whom I would suspect that Dr. Roy also supports.

Everytime you mention a person, do you write their full biography? the post was not about either Ms. Clinton or Mr. Gingrich. The purpose in mentioned both those persons was to show the bi-partisan support behind the Pope from two leading figures in their own party. If it was about personal morals, I would agree with you that some mentioned of Mr. Gingrich's past should have been made