Drudge linked to a story in Politico. While visiting the left side of the tracks I clicked on a story that interested me. It was “published” in The Allegiant.
The Allegiant is a far left “Progressive Socioeconomic Network” blog as its masthead proudly asserts. There, graphic caricatures àla NY Times Book Review show Barack O and the grandly titled editor-in-chief Vincent Briatore.
Though tempting to use the name of the rag as proof to its dedicated unwavering allegiance to Obladee that would be dishonest on my part. The “About Us” goes to considerable length explaining the significance of its name. (Is this a typically leftist fascination, or is it merely the sign of one who is so enamored with his wit that he wants us to be sure we “get it”? Perhaps indeed the latter is true given the nature of the article that initially got my attention.) No, it is not a frank statement of dogmatic servility, though it is, “About Us” tells us that this is to be an effort to reclaim the patriotic symbols that for some reason or another the right wing ignoramuses (that would be me) have co-opted.
“I believe we as a nation have begun to associate these images with conservative republican propaganda and I’m not the only one who has noticed. This association is exactly what makes the intro to the Colbert Report so hilarious. Colbert satirically displays conservatives’ exploitation of patriotic symbols. He flies in on the American flag and a bald eagle swoops down to begin the show.”
Yes, Briatore is enamored with his own wit and wants us to know he is one of the hipsters who “gets” Colbert’s satire. Wow. As if ….
The Allegiant’s “About Us” is one-stop shopping for the entire gamut of Leftist vanities.
“Patriotism is not partisan. One political party isn’t more American than the other.” Why is that necessarily true? Why must we accept that proposition as self-evident? “Patriotism is not the blind following of the status quo.” No, but neither is one necessarily a Patriot who demands the total transformation of America. Beware girlfriends who “love you” but want to change just a few things about you. It’s the “buts” that bite.
The Left also typically believes the reverse is true: “Partisanism is not patriotic.”
The appeal to bury “partisan” interests in favor of The Common Interest is always made by those who presume to divine the true common interest of a nation of 300 + million Americans. A lofty impression of one’s own intellect, knowledge and motives is required for such a grand self-importance. And that is the key to the Leftists’ mind.
That sense of superiority is admirably portrayed at The Allegiant. “In fact, the very foundation of our country is that of dissent and secession from oppressive rule.” Yes, Mr. Briatore give yourself a star for American History! However, the implication that The Left follows in the tradition of men like Jefferson, Adams, Washington, Hamilton, Madison et al. is beyond ludicrous. The Left’s definition of “Oppression” can mean anything from counting ketchup as a vegetable in the school lunch program to the audacity that CEO’s of corporations larger than many nation-states are paid salaries higher than those paid in the public sector. It is racist Oppression if the number of “minority” rocket scientists is less than its demographic percentage would predict. However it is not if the number of Jewish NBA players fails to hit its demographic ratio. And disarming the majority American-Americans is not oppressive in the least! Was it the Left, was it Occupy This! That was given a rectal exam by the IRS? Nope. Is it the Rainbow GLBT-crowd that is labeled as potential terrorists? Nope, that would be the Tea Party! One of the traits of The Left is their tendency to change the common definitions of words. “Oppression” to them means any person or idea opposed to redistributive change. Since WW2 the United States has been governed by a series of presidents who despite rhetorical differences and varied “optics” have all furthered Statist Redistributive evolution. The brave idealistic Leftist will don his armor to do battle with those “cowards” who stand up against the overweening State. How such craven behavior is cast as idealistic is beyond me! Is Briatore seriously comparing himself and his ilk to those who in fact did and do fight long odds against real power? The arrogance of ignorance never fails to astound!
“One of the rights given to us in the first amendment is the right to “petition the government for a redress of grievances.” What could be more patriotic than exercising the very rights that make our nation great?” How sophomoric! How inane! He is like the wise ass young “genius” that spouts arguments based on flawed premises and counters criticism with self-righteous calls for Freedom of Speech! No one is arguing that the Left may not avail themselves of all the rights recognized by the Constitution. However, though their right to petition is unquestioned, the actual content of their grievance might preclude their being labeled patriots by most of us of normal mind. Does the author really believe that dissent itself is patriotic? Any and all dissent?
“About Us” concludes with a trumpeting fanfare: “A billboard in Florida read, “America: love it or get out!” It seems this is a growing sentiment for many Americans. I argue that a true love for America is not found in bumper stickers of red stripes and blue stars, it’s not handing over your individual rights in the name of security, or refusing to acknowledge any weakness in our government. True patriotism is not only the love of our country but the courage to exercise the rights that will enable our nation to persevere.”
Of the many, many problems with this load of … words I will only point out that any observer would notice that the stars are white on a blue background and blue stars are not present.
Strange, his people are the government! The ones questioning its power and direction are the very same folks he accuses of being basically dumbasses!
The article headline in Politico that led to The Allegiant was “I HAVE SEEN MY HAT: Six Inappropriate Children’s’ Books” by hswhite.
I was attracted by the common Leftist construction of “TITLE: subtitle” which they associate with Intilektchual prowess. “Inappropriate” too, is a word that often gets my cackles up. “Inappropriate to whom?” as Ayn Rand might have quipped if she were a quipper.
In and of itself the article is not political. However, the Leftist nature is seen in what turns out to be the ironic use of “Inappropriate”. The Well-Indoctucated college grad is a house of mirrors. Ironic sarcastic mirrors glibly make ironic references to each other. And since it is socially fatal to miss a level of irony and be seen as a Pre-Post Modernist one must be on guard at all times to keep up. And worse is that one must never let on that they fear being lame. That would be lame! So uncool!
“Without further ado, here is a list of some amazing inappropriate children’s books. Click on a title and you’ll be taken to visuals highlighting their glory…”
The author concludes after describing some horrible children’s books with “So… would I read all of these books to my 3-year-old niece? Totally. Life is short and hard to handle (as are most young children) and it’s never too early to begin helping them develop a sense of humor.” So the upshot is that “inappropriate” means “appropriate” for budding young future Leftist. It is never too soon to develop a knack for mocking that which the Modern Age held dearly.
The Allegiant I believe will be a fun site to visit from time to time when I get bored stepping on ants.