Time magazine

Time

For a legion of bloggers, what's so delectable about these stories is the apparent hypocrisy, the dissonance between the outwardly conservative politics of these men and their private same-sex behavior. But while these guys may be liars--Craig's "wide stance" inanity has already entered the world-historical lexicon of political b.s.--it's not clear that they are conniving hypocrites.



Hypocrisy is among the most universal and well-studied of psychological phenomena, and the research suggests that Craig, Haggard and the others may be guilty not so much of moral hypocrisy as moral weakness. The distinction may sound trivial at first, but as a society, we tend to forgive the weak and shun the hypocritical.

Assume for a moment that Craig and Haggard actually believed what they said--that homosexuality is sin. They spent most of their lives fighting for the conservative cause. But in Craig's case, the Idaho Statesman has published allegations that there were at least three other slipups involving men, beginning in 1967. What if, like the radio host who gets fat but commits to losing weight, the moralizers were trying through their "pro-family" endeavors to expiate their lustful sins?

If you go around saying homosexuality is immoral and a sin while you're secretly engaging in homosexual activity then you are a hypocrite!

NOT RUN FOR SENATOR????!!!

NOT DEMONIZED HOMOSEXUALS AT EVERY FUCKING OPPORTUNITY FOR 40 YEARS !!!!!??

You may think they are wrong about homosexuality (I do), but that doesn't make them hypocrites.

1 : a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion

2 : a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings

Time

valued

for

Ladies and gentleman, I have just read the stupidest article ever written. It was awful. So awful I can hardly think; in fact, I think I just lost 5 IQ points... which still puts me 130 ahead of the author of the shittiest, most servile, most idiotic article ever written. His name is John Cloud and he masquerades as a journalist for. He has apparently managed to learn how to read and write, but I have no idea how given his feeble mental faculties.Many of you may have already read this article, but I just found it today as I was catching up on some reading. Here I am, flipping throughand I see a story called "The Psychology of Hypocrisy" which is about the recent Republican sex scandals, including Larry "Wide Stance" Craig , the homo-hating Senator from Idaho.Cloud takes them to task, right? He presents an in-depth analysis of how the perverted mind of sanctimonious fucks like Larry Craig works, right?No. The "article" is a six paragraph defense of hypocrites like Craig. Cloud claims -- with a straight face -- that poor Craig is a victim! A victim of his own "moral weakness" and not a hypocrite at all!The real bad guys -- of course -- are the evil bloggers and their readers who have tormented poor Larry and his "friends".It's "not clear"? It's not fucking clear that they're hypocrites?! If you're deaf, dumb, blind and live on Mars it might not be clear, but if you have half a fucking brain you know they're hypocrites! Shit, even the Republicans know that, but Mr. John Cloud is far stupider than a Republican. He's a Vichy Democrat; you know the kind: The Hillary-voting kind who would let Bush attack Iran with no justification whatsoever. Republicans may be evil, but at least I can respect them; the Vichy Democrats are contemptible, spineless weasels who aren't worth a pint of warm piss.Trivial? No, the distinction is utterly fallacious and disingenuous. It makes me think he knows he's full of shit.John Cloud is the perfect example of a sell-out journalist hack. He afflicts the afflicted and comforts the comfortable because he's a boot-licking shill for his corporate masters and has no soul left. Real journalists do the reverse, of course, but I'm not expecting that much from Mr. Cloud. Just a lucid thought or two would impress me at this point.Let me explain this to Mr. Cloud as succinctly as possible since we might be looking at a buffer-overflow if I use to many big words:End of story. How hard is this to understand?I certainly agree that people should be forgiven for most moral failures, but this is not just a "slipup." Maybe Cloud "accidentally" fucks other men in the ass so he and Craig are kindred, klutzy spirits, but most of us do not have that problem (throughout the article Cloud implies homosexuality is indeed a moral failure). But it's clear that this is a pattern in Larry Craig's life, going back, at least to 1967.Here's a thought: If you have a "moral failing" that leads you to accidentally get blowjobs from other men, maybe you shouldn't get on a stage and tell people that homosexuality is sinful behavior that only degenerates and Democrats engage in! Maybe if Larry Craig didn't want to be a hypocrite he could have, I dunno,Maybe he could have (just a thought here)...Just a thought. Clearly, it's one that John Cloud didn't think of while he was standing in line at men's room outside of Larry Craig's office. Maybe this is all a closeted homosexual thing and cognitive dissonance has set in, but I kind of doubt it. I think it's more likely that John Cloud is an intellectual whore and his opinions are up for auction to the highest bidder. But even that is charitable. Worst case: the guy really is as stupid as I've been saying.No, John, they are hypocrites, and no amount of waffling on your part will disguise that. In fact, they are textbook hypocrites.Hey, I know! Why don't I consult a "dictionary" (it's a book where words are defined, Mr. Cloud). Here's Merriam-Webster's definition of hypocrite:Hmmm.... "false appearance of virtue" ... does that sound like Mr. Larry "wide stance" Craig?Craig never said anything like, "Homosexuality is wrong and immoral, but I am not a perfect man. Indeed, sometimes I like to head down to public bathrooms near my house and solicit gay men for sex." Nope, Larry Craig always implied that he was a paragon of (hetero) virtue. How else do you get elected Senator in a red state?Clearly, the man has acted in contradiction to his stated beliefs. It's right there in black & white, but John Cloud is intent on casting a cloud of confusion over the matter when this is probably one of the most clear-cut, bald-faced acts of hypocrisy (that we know about) in modern politics. Only Mark Foley can hold a candle to Larry Craigs hypocrisy.Is there anybody out there who isn't convinced that what I've described is hypocrisy? Is there anybody out there who actually agrees with John Cloud that poor Larry and Mark are victims of a cruel and fickle public?How is it that I, a lowly, potty-mouthed, mudslinging blogger was able to tear into this article with such ease? No doubt others have already done the same; how did Cloud's piece of shit article get past his editor? Do they not have dictionaries atheadquarters? Budget cutbacks, perhaps?It makes me wonder if stupidity is actuallyin the mainstream press because stupid people will never investigate how the Corporate Oligarchy really works. Everybody knows what goes on in Washington... Or do we? Without better reporters than John Cloud the Clown we'll never know for sure.So what of Mr. Cloud, then? How did this idiot manage to write the stupidest article ever written? Was it training? Nature? Nurture? Luck?Who cares; the man is a fucking moron. What amazes me is that this guy is a journalist at a mainstream publication and they haven't canned his ass yet. How fucking stupid can you be and still keep your job? Near as I can tell John Cloud has only one person in serious contention with him for that award and his name is George.Then again, maybe both of them were chosentheir stupidity, rather than in spite of it. I guess, in both cases, the joke is on us: The morons are in control and livin' the good life while the rest of us suffer like fools under their mindless tyrrany.Life's not just unfair ... it's fucking stupid. Maliciously so.

Labels: Bush, corporatism, hypocrisy, idiots, MSM, oligarchy, rant, sex, stupidity