Paper Says Bush Supporters Are ‘White, male, middle-aged and slightly stupid’
By: Warner Todd Huston
So, what we have here is the only hate-speak that the MSM will allow. Attacks on white men who vote Republican. In this case we see our friendly Seattle Post-Intelligencer columnist, Dorothy Parvaz, reveling in her hatred of Bush supporters. Not only is she attempting to malign white Republican men, but she is also doing so on the basis of physical appearance alone. And here I thought that the left was fond of scolding people who judge others by their looks?
So. I’m sorry to report that President Bush’s most loyal supporters look just like him: White, male, middle-aged and slightly stupid (sorry guys, I calls ‘em like I sees ‘em).
Now, I’d love to say that all Democrats look like Michael Moore; Fat, ugly and slightly stupid. But, it just wouldn’t be true. Some look like Cameron Diaz; skinny, pretty and slightly stupid. So, I would never claim to know a Democrat merely by their physical appearance, but, not so for Parvez and her self-proclaimed ability to discern a person’s entire life and philosophy at a mere glance.
I congratulate her for her mental acuity… or gymnastics, which ever fits best.
But, wait, it isn’t just Bush supporters that are in for a slap by our columnist, Parvez. Ann Coulter gets a smack down, too.
I promise that if I ever see the dark day when I agree with that boney GOP mouthpiece whose name I won’t mention — you know, the blond broad who looks like a D.C. prostitute — I’ll start cutting and snorting lines of Drano crystals.
Wait a minute. How can Ann be a Republican if she is skinny and female?
Next our pop culture wiz carps about the Clinton administration…
These guys remain supportive despite the fact that Bush’s administration is stinkier than hot garbage. He rewarded crony after crony with positions in his administration…The few decent people who found a job with Bush ended up resigning…
Oh, wait. She did say Bush there. It seemed an enumeration of the Clinton years. My mistake there.
And, of course, this pro-terror columnist is also against the war on terrorism.
Oh, yes, and then there’s that matter of Bush’s asinine “war on terror.”
Now it isn’t just for their physical appearance that she attacks. She also doesn’t like them because they are churchgoers and married.
If you’re conservative, an evangelical Christian, white and in your 40s, you could be a Bushie. Live in a rural area? Married? From the South or the West part of the U.S.? Go to a church at least once a week? Then you’re more likely to support both the president and whatever it is he thinks he’s doing in Iraq.
All in all the pap vomited out in the pages of the Seattle P-I are typical hate-speak against Republicans employed by the extreme leftists like those in the nutroots. So, she isn’t really all that hip and edgy. Yes, fairly prosaic leftism there.
But here is the worst thing of her screed and it is at the end of the piece.
D. Parvaz is an editorial writer and member of the P-I Editorial Board
A member of the editorial board? A woman who can write with such vitriol against her political foes, a woman who barely has enough control of her emotions to sit herself before a keyboard to succeed in typing in full sentences is trusted to be an editor guiding the content of the paper?
I’ll bet THAT paper puts out some unbiased work, eh?