Stimulating “Progressive” Discourse: On Michelle Obama’s Posterior and Liberal Hatred of Blacks and Christians

The kind of intelligent discourse we can look forward to in the New Age of the Liberal, especially after they revive the Fairness Doctrine and eviscerate their boorish conservative competition: on Salon.com, we have a bizarre mash-up of liberal handwringing, self-congratulation, political correctness, and exceptionalism in this interchange: “Should Michelle Obama’s booty be off-limits?,” which discussed a Salon article by Erin Aubry Kaplan, “First Lady Got Back.” Salon’s editor rhapsodizes that Kaplan’s piece, which reports that Michelle Obama has “coruscating intelligence, beauty, style and–drumroll, please–a butt”, is an “eloquent” “celebration and a love letter.” As one of the smug pundits, one “Mary Elizabeth Williams,” intones, “Ignoring Michelle Obama’s *ss won’t make it go away and it won’t cure racism or sexism in our time.” Why, uh, no, Ms. Williams, it won’t. Tell us of other things the ignoring of which will not cure racism. I’m sure there are billions. What about woodpeckers? Will ignoring woodpeckers cure racism “in our time”? Why, no, it won’t. So feel free not to ignore woodpeckers.

And take Dana Douglas, soi-disant “six-foot, blonde, busty, liberal, lesbian lawyer”, who wonders “Why shouldn’t I hate Blacks and Christians?“–after all, it was “Christians and African-Americans, who were largely responsible for” passing laws in California, Arizona, Arkansas, and Florida limiting gay marriage and gay adoption.

Obviously, only the smug left can get away with objectifying a black First Lady and openly wondering about “hating” and “actively work[ing] against Christians and African-Americans”. They tried to mind their manners a bit during the campaign, but now that they’ve won, expect the true vileness and coarseness–and hypocrisy–of the left to be unshackled.

Share

2:46 pm on November 21, 2008