Bark & Tofu

Comedian Rush Limbaugh attacks Michelle Obama and her kids for having been spotted recently at a restaurant in Vale, Colorado eating… ribs!!! I mean, really… could the despicable liberal hypocrisy of the First Lady get any more egregious than that?

Of course this is a completely ridiculous argument that’s stuffed with patent falsehoods, but it’s a classic example of how things get totally “dumbed down” and grotesquely distorted in the evil funhouse mirror of American political rhetoric.

The sad part is that MILLIONS of Rush’s listeners will seriously take away the idea from this absurd narrative that relentlessly controlling “liberals” are “demanding and requiring that everyone eat cardboard and tofu” while they themselves hypocritically chow down on sumptuous, calorie-rich meals at luxurious eateries in exotic winter vacation get-aways…

Keep in mind that this is just 3 minutes of a show lasting several hours that’s broadcast to millions of listeners across the land, five days a week. Is it any wonder that so many “conservatives” might eventually wind up thinking that something as innocent as the earnest promotion of moderate food consumption and “healthy eating options” is basically equivalent to Arbeit Macht Frei?


40 Replies to “Bark & Tofu”

  1. The first three words of your bombast was enough to write you off as nothing more than a liberal puppet; a sad, sorry wittle wiberal.

    Comedian Rush Limbaugh…


    Please stop plagiarizing Keith Olbermann. It’s rather nauseating.

  2. Terrance: Isn’t that the excuse that’s always made by their loyal apologists whenever Rush, Coulter and that ilk make racist, demeaning remarks or slander people that “conservatives” love to hate? “It’s just a joke” they say.

    Seeing as they apparently make quite a LOT of “jokes” like that, it seems only fitting to describe them as comedians…

  3. Well.. really, isn’t that the main staple of any political party these days? Doing a little misdirection to aim our attention at “the other guy” to reduce, ultimately, our own accountability?

    You know.. like Quebec attacking the rest of Canada for not supporting their manifest destiny, while ignoring the very real mess they have made in their own Province.

    Doesn’t make it right.. but, apparently, it’s “how it’s done” these days.

  4. Sounds much like the premise of the book I’m reading at the moment: Matt Taibbi’s “The Great Derangement”. I just started dipping into it today, but it’s great so far.

  5. Sir redtory,

    What “demeaning and racist remarks” are you speaking of? And after you provide examples, we can go tit-for-tat; there are enough demeaning, racist, and sexist remarks drooling out of liberals these days to keep us busy for a month.

    In any event, your attempt to rationalize your plagiarism is amusing. I do have some advice, however, for future posts: If you are unable to formulate an original idea – and it appears as though you are…unable – at least steal them from intelligent, respected individuals rather than jobless buffoons like Olbermann.

    Anyway, I’ve had fun. But I prefer to frequent blogs which contain substance; shallowness is not a trait I hold in high regard, Sir Red, Mr. English himself.

    For He Is An Englishman…

    By the way, I’m Irish-Catholic. Brits Go Home!

  6. Ah nothing like a bit of stilted prose and a meandering point combined with a touch of anti-anglo bigotry to pull the smokescreen away.

    Speaking of plagiarism it sounds like Terrance has been taking a page or two from Lost in Space’s Dr Smith.

    The pain… the pain.

  7. Sorry Terrance, but simply using Olbermann’s description (that I fully concur with) hardly qualifies as “plagiarism”.

    Nice try.

    Now go frequent a blog with substance. Apparently you’re in need of a fill-up in that regard.

  8. I’m sorry, but an example of liberal intelligence…Even though I’m Anglo, I’m “anti-Anglo…”



    You’re a somewhat intelligent person. You don’t need morons like sapp (irony, because he is one) around here.

    LOL. Peace.

  9. Well Terrence,

    My background is Anglo Irish. I can trace my ancestry to 1300 in Britain and 1600 in Ireland. I still have relatives in both countries that I talk to regularily. I have perspective from both sides of map. So yes you are a bigot.

    The argument which you state is a person of anglo descent cannot be a bigot against anglos because he is one. That is just weak Terrence. You have shown many examples of bigotry towards others.

    But keep it up Terrence. It really is revealing to who actually has the intelligence deficit.

    Nice pic of Ronnie there. Think he remembered having the hat on when it was taken?

  10. BTW Terrence, Wikipedia? That isn’t accepted as a valid source of proof anywhere.

    Ha ha using publicly edited wikis as proof. What’s next Terrence? Are you going to cite the graffiti in the alley as proof?

  11. Oh, come now sapp. You clearly misspoke, so now you’re trying to cover it up. And you’re not “Anglo Irish,” bur rather, “Anglo-Celtic.”

    Try to keep up.

    Wikipedia is a perfectly valid source assuming the relevant quote is sourced, and in this particular case, the first paragraph was relevant to the purpose of citation, and it was well-sourced. So, you fail – yet again. Although, I’m certain this isn’t a rarity for you.

    It’s interesting, however, you accuse me of bigotry, a form of hatred and contempt. I find it interesting because then you go and make light of a horrible disease, thereby insulting those afflicted and their family members. You’re a sad, petty little man.

    Peace, putz!

  12. I didnt specifically state any disease nor families. A little bit of truth twisting there Terence.

    Wikipedia isnt a valid source. Cite the originals and let others decide. Still very weak and a bit ironic with the ending insults.

    Keep trying Terence. You’re breaking through that stale prose and finding your voice.

  13. “You clearly misspoke, so now you’re trying to cover it up. And you’re not “Anglo Irish,” bur rather, “Anglo-Celtic.”

    Really? Well I guess if we want to get down to it all then my family that lives in Ireland is Irish, the ones in Britain British and Me, well Im happy to be a Canadian and if you have a problem with that I really dont care.

    Still, haggling over minor semantics and citing Wikipedia really is enough proof that you’re just another rambling teabagging windbag.

    I swear Red must have some sort of Republican catnip because he seems to have a knack in attracting the strangest of catamites.

  14. How interesting that someone who apparently doesn’t understand the use of apostrophes would criticize my writing.

    Another fine example of liberal foolishness.

    You know quite well what you were doing, sapp, with that asinine comment about the photograph. You were making fun of his infirmity, like the hateful liberal you are.

    Wikipedia is a valid source, because after all, it’s not as though I’m debating with scholars here. You people are just north of mentally retarded, for crying out loud! And because I don’t make fun of people with disabilities, I would like to help you. So, how can I help make your life a little easier?

  15. “the hateful liberal you are.”

    See here’s the problem with your argument Terrance; hypocrisy. Im not sure why this mode of debate is so common amongst conservatives.

    “a liberal puppet; a sad, sorry wittle wiberal.”

    “Brits Go Home!”

    “an example of liberal intelligence”

    “You’re a sad, petty little man.”

    “hateful liberal”

    “You people are just north of mentally retarded, for crying out loud!”

    “And because I don’t make fun of people with disabilities, I would like to help you.”

    Hmm some nice nuggets of hypocrisy. See Terrance, this is the point I am making. I am not saying that I don’t use snark; Im quite honest about it. I just don’t understand why some conservatives such as yourself are so prone to hypocrisy as a defense. You constantly take shots, make generalizations, make a few bigoted comments then accuse others of doing so.

    The problem is that many a conbot before you has tried the moral angle and failed. Just google up the comments of bocanut, Steve Reynolds or any other tinfoil troll that tried to claim to be high and mighty before they fell into the usual pattern of bluster and insults.

    So Terrance,

    Do you have the ability to break out of your teabagger mould or is it just more confounded english, recycled conservative insults, disingenuous morality topped with a lame attempt to be witty?

    The Rent is too damn High and Terrance, your English is too damn Stale!

  16. You people are just north of mentally retarded, for crying out loud! And because I don’t make fun of people with disabilities

    Brilliant Einstein. Do you even bother to read the shit that emanates from your keyboard before hitting ‘Post Comment’?

  17. I think he is just trolling because his prose leads me to believe that his level discourse seems to rise no higher than petulant whinging in the comment boxes of youtube videos. However, I suppose we cannot go without a full year with a “Guzzy-like” interlude. Anyway, Red, I want to direct to a very interesting discussion over at Dawg’s place. Sir Francis has been putting up a good defense for the anti-integrationist side. It is a fairly interesting discussion.

  18. Thank you jkg, always great to read Sir Francis in his defense of our nation. I’m not totally surprised to see Robert McClelland there arguing that integration is inevitable, typical of the zealous anti-monarchical, republican orientation of the NDP. They’d be happy with one big global village of socialism.

  19. Benjamin Disraeli, Lord Salisbury, Arthur Balfour & Winston Churchill were conservatives. As were Sir John A. Macdonald, Sir Charles Tupper, Sir Robert Borden, Arthur Meighen, and Viscount Bennett of Mickleham.

    If one is an American, it is impossible to be a conservative.

  20. jp5,

    Interesting that someone who fancies the use of filler is criticizing the prose of another. Your writing is about as clear as the liberal mind, which is to say, not at all.


    I despise liberals because they seek to deracinate society with their failed ideology; a quasi-religion, if you will. My sentiments may be insulting, but I prefer to tell the truth; if this bothers you, I don’t give a damn.

    I do find it amusing that a cabal of thickos, such as yourselves, would unwelcome dissent, because you ascribe to yourselves an ideology which by its very nature welcomes diversity. Weird.

    I was off to find a substantive place to dwell, but it’s much more fun insulting halfwits.

  21. Terrance, did you know that Reagan raised taxes, twice, during his second term in office? Bush Sr. also raised them once, during the later half of his term in office. That regardless of his famous “Read my lips. No new taxes.” sound bite. Why do you think they would perform such ‘liberal’ acts like raise taxes?

    Please comment. I’m looking forward to knowing your thoughts on this.

  22. “I despise liberals because they seek to deracinate society with their failed ideology; a quasi-religion, if you will. My sentiments may be insulting, but I prefer to tell the truth”

    Well you have no empirical proof of that. Wikipedia isnt an acceptible source and it looks like your prose is just as stilted in order to poorly mask your inherent bigotry.

    As for unwelcoming dissent. Noone is trying to welcome dissent. I read your blog. Your defense can be summarized as “Two wrongs do make a right” of “they did it too!”

    Childish, poorly argued and as usual you confuse arrogance and bad english skills with intelligence. One other thing. A person could own a million books but if they fail to learn from them and use Wikipedia as proof, then the books are just a bit of wankery to impress the friends.

    Halfwits, still better than a nowit yourself. Often when a person enters a debate to argue how right and brilliant they are, they are a pretentious fool. Keep it up Terry

    Hey Terrance, what do you think about how Reagan totally screwed up your telecoms in the 80s so now you’re dealing with monopolies? Or has Comcast and Clear channel already put a transmitter in your head? Im guessing its tucked under that cowboy hat? So why is the majority of online video traffic in North America controlled by 2 companies. That’s some mighty bullshit Reagan actions if you ask me. Should we even start about how the fool rescinded children’s advertising rules so now most Children’s TV is just a plug for a toy line? Thinking of Reagan actually makes me glad we had Mulroney, & that’s not something I often say.

    Your false offense about a world leader being insulted was quite funny. I bet you have plenty of choice opinions of other leaders that arent flattering. See the thing is the moment you become a world leader, you’re open game. Its not like its new, heck Caesar was called the Queen of Bithniyia by his detractors. You grow a tough skin and you learn how to ignore; or in the case of Ronnie, not even comprehend.

    Back to your fancy books. Maybe you can cite the popup book as a source. Lord knows it would be the first actual book you cited. See the thing is Terrance, you can use simple prose and a bit of expletive which I prefer or you can attempt to sound like some US version of Oliver Cromwell and come off like a fool.

    Your choice.

  23. @TofKW

    The feature of that discussion over at Dawg’s place is the placing of where these ‘anti-integrationists’ lie on the political spectrum. According to one conservative commentator, there exists “nationalist elites” and “progressive nationalists,’ but then, you have people like Robert recognizing integration as an inevitability. My take is that skeptics of integration most likely cross along the political spectrum, but it undercuts the propensity to categorize this constituency. I also do not think that our integration is not purely functional. It has become a mark of ideology, and that became no more clear when I remember Pierre Pettigrew openly admitting that free trade was the ‘way to go’ as a vision for Canada. That language does not strike me as pragmatic functionalism. Apart from maybe the executives at Bell, the corporate culture encourages more integration both continentally and globally. That is why I agree Sir Francis that it is unlikely that there is a large group of “nationalist elites.” If there is any skepticism with respect to continental integration, it is now summarily marginalized. If a CEO of a company raises questions, he or she is labeled a protectionist and not a true entrepreneur with global zeal. If a working class person laments the downsides of Free Trade, that is considered too far left. But if the core premises of integration are accepted, well, all of a sudden progressives and neo-conservatives have found some overlap.

  24. * “progressive natioanlists”
    *I also do think that our integration is not purely functional
    *I agree with Sir Francis

    Sorry, Red, I am not trying to derail the thread. I will just leave this as my last comment on this, but hopefully, we can return to this topic when another relevant news item arises.

  25. sapp,

    Another fine example of liberal idiocy is when someone who doesn’t understand the virtue of grammatically correct sentences goes about criticizing the “english” skills of another.

    Hilarious. You’ve read my blog, which you’ve admitted, so I know very well what you’re doing: you’re approaching a topic you know to be sensitive. And why? Because you’re petty like that.

    I freely admit that I insult liberals, and Leftists in general. And do you know why? Look in the mirror.

    The rest of your banter (i.e., the false description of Reagan’s policies) is hardly worth a response.

  26. BTW Red,

    How on earth do you do it? Ive never seen a blogger with an ability to attract the wackiest of the Whack-a-moles from outer teabaggia?

    Truly impressive though Im not sure if it’s a gift or a curse. 🙂

  27. This “Terrance H” person is the most vile & obtuse yet; he cannot comprehend the manifest differences between Hooker and Locke.

    I am sure he thinks “Hooker and Locke” were a Reagan-era cop-show of the type common to the early 1980’s.

  28. I believe you mean T J Hooker. And yes our lovely Terrance here is a vile creature.

    Yo troll, you were right. Silly me, I was only thinking of the two corporate tax hikes he did over 5 years to generate an extra $120 billion. Reagan didn’t raise taxes twice, it was in fact 11 times he did so…

    “Ronald Reagan was never afraid to raise taxes,” historian Douglas Brinkley, who edited Reagan’s diaries, told NPR. “He knew that it was necessary at times. And so there’s a false mythology out there about Reagan as this conservative president who came in and just cut taxes and trimmed federal spending in a dramatic way. It didn’t happen that way. It’s false.”

    Oh look, Reagan’s Liberal Legacy…

    And since you like Wikipedia, here is Bush Sr’s tax hike…

    By the way troll, by not dignifying us with a response about Reagan, you admit you’ve got nothing. Now kindly fuck off!

  29. Also jkg, don’t apologize for derailing this thread, our Ambassador from the land of Teabaggeria has already seen to that.

    My point about McClelland is that I’ve already figured out he’s one of the true faithful on the socialist end of the NDP. The ultimate goal of a socialist would be to create a world government where everyone shares. This wonderful Utopia is written about by everyone from Karl Marx to John Lennon. It’s a beautiful concept, which of course can never work because it fails to address the greatest principle that motivates all humanity …greed. Ugly but true (fear being the other great motivator) and at least capitalism recognizes this fact.

    And speaking of which, the neo-liberal capitalists have their own reasons for globalism, though this has to do with exploitation and not some naive and unobtainable Utopian fantasy.

    So I can see how someone from the far-left and the far-right can each see the disintegration of the concept of the nation-state though their different perspectives, and both agree to globalization as being accepted and inevitable.

  30. “By the way troll, by not dignifying us with a response about Reagan, you admit you’ve got nothing.”

    Well that’s simple. Terrence doesn’t want to admit that liberal media bias is a load of bunk and that clearchannel and a few others control what they see and hear. Im not trying to be end of the world but when your media is monopolized like that it kind of flies in the face of his Reagan idolism and concept of freedom.

    “Hooker and Locke”? Hilarious

  31. S&S: How on earth do you do it? Ive never seen a blogger with an ability to attract the wackiest of the Whack-a-moles from outer teabaggia?

    It’s not that I “try” exactly to attract whacky commenters – quite the opposite these days, in fact.

    If I truly wanted to do that, I’d have no problem doing so because I know exactly which buttons to push in that regard. These days however, it doesn’t interest me in the least.

    I just post whatever happens to catch my fancy in the limited amount of time I’ve got to blog and might make for amusing discussion. I’ve really go no particular axe to grind.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s