Field Reports From Wingnuttia

April 6, 2007

While the bloggers on the right-wing side of the aisle are pretty much a wash when it comes to intellectual content, I’ll admit there is a certain low entertainment value to watching them stagger around the room, throwing punches at the air.

From a behavioral science viewpoint, however, wingerland offers a rich banquet of opportunities for observation, as this blogger demonstrates with a site called Ace of Spades:

The blogosphere is a gold mine for writers. I don’t mean you can make a ton of money doing this — I mean it in a figurative sense, which is the only sense in which most writers, online or off, will ever see much gold of any sort. That is, you can observe certain human behaviors under glass — the glass of your monitor, in this case — in much the same way Ibsen used to observe the behaviors of that scorpion he kept in a beer mug on his desk.

Let us follow the tail-swishings of one Ace O. Spades . . .

There’s tail-swishing and then there’s tail-chasing. Here’s a consideration of a post at another winger salt lick called RedState. The thread of RedState’s logic on the state of the Iraq war, which follows a path best likened to a cross between a Moebius strip and the outlines of a Klein bottle, is summed up within this sentence: “The issue is not whether or not mistakes were made, the issue is whether those mistakes could have been reasonably considered to have been mistaken at the time or whether there was ever a set of correct decisions that could have been made.”

This leaves our left-wing blogger appropriately awestruck:

I’ve often thought this point might never come, but here I am at last, reduced to staring like a clubbed trout. The issue is whether there was ever what, now? It wha…?!

We seem to have discovered a new stage in the traditional Kübler-Ross process:

1. Denial: “The media doesn’t show the good news in Iraq.”

2. Anger: “The treasonous far-left-liberals and their media lapdogs are making us lose in Iraq.”

3. Bargaining: “If we send x-thousand more troops to Iraq, victory will be ours.”

4. Depression: “Did you catch 300 yet? [munch-munch-burp] God, it made me hate liberals even more. [channels flipping] They wouldn’t last a day in ancient Sparta.”

5. Advanced Literary Theory: “The hegemonic binary of ’success’ and ‘failure’ traumatizes the (re)interpretive possibilities of an ethos of jouissance regarding the War in Iraq.”

Not to be phallogocentric here or anything, but we have to go with the non-fancy everyday definition of ‘mistake,’ meaning when you try to do something, like for instance apply aftershave to your face while your date waits in the hallway, but perform an action which thwarts your desired ends, like for instance mixing up your bottle of aftershave with the bottle of bobcat urine you bought to keep the deer out of the herb garden.

Maybe somebody could be all like, “But nobody knew it was bobcat urine, so how is that a mistake? How was it obvious that there was ever a correct set of decisions to be made, if nobody reasonably considered the chance of covering themselves with bobcat urine?

Dude smells of cat pee. That’s all I’m saying.

Other scholars and medical researchers are conducting similar field studies in Wingnuttia. We’ll be sharing their findings with you from time to time.


One Response to “Field Reports From Wingnuttia”

  1. Caveat Says:

    Ha ha ha! Salt lick! Perfect! Moebius strip! Spot on!

    Can you call something a mistake if you didn’t know when you made it that it was a mistake?

    Dude, that’s the definition of mistake. Otherwise, it’s malfeasance.

    Isn’t it?

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

%d bloggers like this: