The Wisdom of Left Wing Cracker15 May 07
Posted by M. Wright | Filed in: Blogosphere
Freedonian calls Steve Steffens, a.k.a. Left Wing Cracker, “the dean of the Memphis liberal blogosphere.”
But what sort of dean is he on a day like this, which finds him celebrating (along with his fellow left-wing Memphis bloggers) the death of a controversial public figure, who passed just this morning?
Howard Dean, perhaps?
And though Mr. Cracker bristles at the suggestion that he is a “chorus,” a study of his recent activity suggests that, while he may not actually be a chorus, he certainly plays one on the small screen.
So, without further ado, we present the complete, unabridged comments of Left Wing Cracker that have been posted over the past week or so:
- Megadittoes!
- What Jeff said.
- Harris looks great on a horse.
- Should I start reciting the Lord’s Prayer backwards right about now?
- Well, who gave Mike Godwin the right to make laws?
- These kids and their music -it’s just NOISE! Hey! Get the hell off my lawn!
I feel smarter already.
May 15th, 2007 at 7:51 pm
“Controversial?” Yes, the man who supported Apartheid, American segregation, blamed 9/11 on gays, and the ACLU (”I point my finger,” he said), was “controversial.” There’s doubtless plenty of debate we could be having on these deeply complex issues.
He preached a gospel of hate and division. Perhaps you have some kind words for this good, good man?
May 15th, 2007 at 8:17 pm
None of you appear to have any evidence of this alleged support for Apartheid and segregation, and I’m not finding anything online at the moment. I would ask that you provide some actual sourcing on that, but I know that’s against your constitution. Regardless, you folks celebrating the man’s death is pretty sickening, no matter what he may have said (and in most of these cases, from what I’m reading, apologized for).
May 15th, 2007 at 8:29 pm
Jamey Tucker makes some good points on that, btw.
May 15th, 2007 at 8:42 pm
Didn’t find any references to Falwell supporting apartheid? Did you actually bother to look? He opposed Mandela’s release from prison, *claimed* to oppose apartheid, yet told us that if we would just be patient with him, Botha would straighten the whole mess out. Because, you know, he had been in such a hurry to do so.
How about what he said about Archybishop Tutu: “I think he’s a phony, period, as far as representing the black people of South Africa.” Yes, I suppose that when it comes to what’s best for black people, we should ask a fat white guy.
BTW, here’s where he spoke out against the Civil Rights movement too. Ministers speaking out against racial prejudice? Bad. Ministers using the pulpit tp e;ect Republicans. Good.
Sorry. If you couldn’t find anything indicating Falwell was a bigot, you just chose not to look.
May 15th, 2007 at 8:48 pm
Your evidence that he supported apartheid is a quote saying he doesn’t? Gotcha.
May 15th, 2007 at 8:52 pm
Yes Mick, just as President Bush was against nation building, his words and actions were in perfect synch.
May 16th, 2007 at 3:43 am
In that case, Pesky, I would expect Freedonian to build his case that the President shifted his policy after 9/11 using something other than the just the transcript of the 2000 debates. Call me old fashioned.
May 16th, 2007 at 7:23 am
Okay, and 9/11 is related to Iraq how? Please explain. Even the President admitted (eventually) that the two were unrelated, though he continues to marry the two in his speeches.
You are dangling from a rope of sand.
May 16th, 2007 at 8:21 am
First off the libs keep using the word hate when they describe their feelings toward Falwell. I can understand someone saying they hate a guy who raped their wife or who murdered their mom or molested their little girl. But how can you hate someone who brought so many lost souls to christ like Falwell did through his ministry and University? I don’t understand that.
Second of all I think what we are seeing here with the Falwell insults is a growing distaste within the democrat party for christianity. This is especially true on most of the democrat blogs. These sites are regularly filled with insults directed toward these good everyday hardworking decent americans who go to church on sunday and believe that homosexuality and abortion is wrong. The good news is this christian bashing strategy by the liberals is backfiring, especially in rural areas like west Tennessee. Rural church going democrats are flocking to the GOP because of this extreme agenda. Just look at how many counties Corker and Bush won
in ‘06 and ‘04 in west Tennessee. Democrats used to have a lock on all of west Tennessee.
May 16th, 2007 at 1:25 pm
Yes, never in the history of the world has a man of the cloth used his love of god to recruit an army of Christian soldiers and chase a less than godly agenda.
Please.
That is justification, the keep one retreats to when all defense has failed.
As I recall Christ had some things to say about clergymen who prayed loudly but served themselves. Perhaps you’d like to crucify the Lord all over again by siding with his named advesaries— those wolves dressed up like lambs.
May 16th, 2007 at 1:58 pm
Guys, let’s not stay here and play with the trolls, it only gives them hope that more people will pay attention to them.
see ya back at the MLB…
May 16th, 2007 at 2:48 pm
[...] Jiggawho? [...]
May 17th, 2007 at 8:33 am
I like that cool pic of the Jiggernaut. Looks a bit more “deanish” than the one he’s got on his blog.
May 18th, 2007 at 5:42 pm
…Okay, and 9/11 is related to Iraq how? Please explain. Even the President admitted (eventually) that the two were unrelated, though he continues to marry the two in his speeches…
Of course. No way Bush goes into Iraq if 9/11 doesn’t happen–the twoofers on your own side even use that as evidence he staged the attack. Bush has said over and over that Iraq is the leading front in the WoT (as has bin Laden), and mentioned about 100 times that he was taking out Saddam because of the paradigm created by 9/11. He’s never said the attack was related to Iraq.
But I guess you’d have us bombing Iraq in the no-flie zones for another ten years, causing all that Islamohate Ron Paul was talking about.
May 18th, 2007 at 8:56 pm
Now that’s pretzel logic a man could choke on.
May 19th, 2007 at 10:15 am
I remember the good ole’ days of no fly zones, budget surpluses, and gas under $2. Who’s better off now? Not us, not the Iraqis, not anyone. Bush lied, commited high crimes (as was revealed in the Comey Senate testimony this week), and it has been documented in the congressional record.
http://www.bushoniraq.com/bush1.html
May 19th, 2007 at 11:00 am
It’s telling that nobody wants to defend LWC, instead just changing the subject back to pet theories and attacks on the usual whipping boy.
May 19th, 2007 at 12:23 pm
…Now that’s pretzel logic a man could choke on…
Yes, let’s talk about pretzel logic. Maybe you can help me here, since I know most liberals are known to believe themselves smart.
For example, can you explain how anyone could support a party who once nearly unanimously painted Saddam as evil personified–some even after 9/11–only to morph him into a harmless puffball after we failed to find the very same WMDs they had railed about while Bush was still the Governor of Texas? Then somehow the new guy to the party becomes the only one who lied. Weird, that is.
Some in the same group have suggested we leave Iraq because we’re stuck in the middle of a civil war, but advocate intervening in Darfur in the Sudanese civil war.
Finally, Ron Paul regrets that we caused 9/11 by bombing Iraq, exciting 35 percent of this group who believe we’ve not been told the truth yet they’re so busy celebrating his drift off the reservation they completely miss the fact Paul was blaming Clinton for 9/11. And to top it off they want to return to those same failed containment policies again in 2009.
If you can untwist any of that I’d be most grateful.