At the
Mahablog, Barbara O'Brien launches in on a discussion about what it is to be a human being. For a moment there, she almost sounded like a reasonable and intelligent human being. Then, like the Incredible Hulk, she turns into her green monster mode.
 |
| Don't make him mad. |
Actually, I can certainly see how people can be defined by their "network", so to speak. My view is like the ying-yang thing: people are not the group, people are individuals. But "no man is an island" either. It's a duality thing to me. She seems to think that the group is what defines the person, and that's what leads into a discussion about social issues that left me shaking my head. It is as if she rejects who she is, what she had just defined in the above paragraphs. An incredible hulk thing happens: she identifies with her group as a liberal and starts turning green.
Here's what she's getting into full blown green monster mode:
..explains why so many whites eagerly anticipate black violent reactions to such events as the George Zimmerman or Darren Wilson verdict, because Those People Act That Way. Of course, when whites form violent mobs they think it’s justified, so it’s okay.
When did white people form mobs and then say it was okay to commit any violence? Also, when "those people" do act that way, why is it wrong to point it out? Green monster mode, I tell you. When the green monster mode gets started, self control goes out the window. She just can't help it.
Also, I challenge where she says that "whites eagerly anticipate black violent reactions." Frankly, I'd be happy if they'd stop it with that crap. I can tell you that I sure as hell don't eagerly anticipate it. I suspect that a lot of white folks would just as soon that that didn't happen either. As a matter of fact, I am really getting sick and tired of a lot of blacks out there who seem to think that events like in Ferguson gives them a license to loot and destroy. If anybody is "eagerly anticipating" any black violence, it's got to be those liberals like O'Brien.
The "war on women" trope falls along the same lines. It really is getting ridiculous when women seem to be more and more dominant in this society, yet somehow these same women consider themselves as victims. The pendulum has swung and it hasn't been swinging the white man's way for a long time now. I can recall how things have changed between the sexes, and it all started in the sixties. There was this TV show called "The Newlywed Game". The show's host, Bob Eubanks pointed out how the men and women on his show changed during the time it ran on the air in the sixties and seventies. The women pretty much came to dominate the men. It didn't use to be that way when the show first began, as he observed. In my own experience, whatever Dad said was it and it was final. Mom pretty much let him run things. The old way was better.
Oh, and the religious complaint! That one is rich in irony. If it weren't for public schools proselytizing for the secular humanist religion, the liberals wouldn't have much of a following. They use public funds to further their agenda by indoctrinating kids into leftist thinking that sure as hell doesn't like religion very much at all, unless of course, it is
their religion.
She concludes by saying this is why people are jerks. No, the jerks are the ones who listen to this garbage and believe it. Jerks let other people do their thinking for them. That's why liberals don't want anybody to contradict them, they have to fall into line like the jerks they wish everybody would be. Everybody has to think the same way. It disturbs the "hive mind" to have anybody thinking for themselves.
