As you recall, a year or two ago the big media geeks announced that “Constitutionalists” were inherently evil and just as bad as Evangelical Christians (like both my grandmas) and gun owners (like just about everyone I know). In fact, it was announced by that wall-eyed woman with the butch skunk hairdo, that these sort of people were the new “terrorists”.
Apparently, the type of fun-loving terrorists we met on 9-11 had become extinct and it was no longer proper to refer to “Islamic Extremism.” But Skunk-Do felt we needed to be educated on this issue and start watching out for “constitutionalists, evangelicals and gun owners.” The new Troika of Evil.
This reminded me of a little old lady I knew several years ago who took a vacation to China and filled one suitcase with Chinese Bibles. (She was traveling alone, her husband being dead.) She was told that the Chinese soldiers who man the border checkpoints are looking for three types of contraband. They watched for: 1) drugs, 2) guns and 3) Bibles. That is/was their “Troika of Evil.” Those are the three things they feared most. This is true of all totalitarian regimes. Hey … possessing a Bible will get you a death sentence in Saudi Arabia (our “ally” in the Islamic world).
Before I get too far from the CNN story, I want to explain why I engage in poking fun at the physical appearance of enemies, like Skunk Do. Such fun has a fine historic tradition. For example, an old friend used to give me books he thought I needed to read. He was a closet liberal. I think he was losing his mind in his dotage. (A lot of evidence has surfaced since his recent death.) The books he gave me nearly always had high-sounding titles and sometimes even espoused the things he said they did. He was always trying to straighten me out. Giving me pompously titled tomes was one of his methods. (Another and less effective method was shouting the same arguments, which had failed to persuade when spoken in normal conversational volume.)
One slim book he gave me in 2007 was supposed to explain “how things actually worked in America.” I should mention my friend never read these books he expected me to read, he just thought I should have my mind expanded in certain areas. I became suspicious the book was rubbish when I noticed the prologue was penned by Noam Chomsky (whom my friend did not know).
The next funny thing I noticed was how each short chapter, each being devoted to lionizing or excoriating some prominent person, started off with a physical description of the person who was the topic of the chapter. If the description was favorable the guy’s politics were always applauded. If the person described was depicted as ugly, badly dressed, overweight or possessing a speech impediment, his/her personal politics or behavior were also, correspondingly, ugly. Apparently, in the liberal mind-set, politically unpleasant and undesirable thinking, always, cosmically and mysteriously, aligns with unpleasant physical characteristics. I personally never noticed this phenomenon.
Relatedly, a funny aside happened about a year ago when my wife found this book in the library dustbin and, thumbing through it, found a short chapter discussing one (then unknown) Barak Obama. He was described simply as possibly the latest and greatest hope for the World. She angrily asked where I had gotten the book. When I explained how I was not a closet Trotskyite and who had given me the book, she just muttered, “I see”, and walked out of the room rolling her eyes.
(I think this is a good time to point out I think Obama is far from a “good lookin’ guy,” in spite of what People Magazine may think. Or the gender-confused Chris Matthews. I also find his manner of public speaking irritating and affected. The way he accents and stresses the last word of every sentence is very tiresome.)