Saturday, December 4, 2010

Us Versus Them Versus Me

Ross Goes
Scott: Hello, this morning we have conservative columnist Ross Somebody who somehow has made a career writing, as in putting words in a page in a certain order.  Is that not correct?

Ross: You are correct sir.

Scott: For whom do you order these words?

Ross: Why the New York Times, of course.  That's what gives me creds.  Otherwise I'd just be some loser spouting off on his blog.

Scott: No argument here.

Ross: Good.  Let's keep it that way.

Scott: Well this is a weekend show, and the last thing people want on their Saturday morning is sharp questioning of political figures.  Anyway, why the hell are you here exactly?

Ross: That's an excellent, probing question and I'm delighted to answer it. I'm here, of course, talk about my word-ordering job.  Recently I wrote a column, The Partisan Delusion.  I took many words, as many as 500, and put them in a certain order to make a point: Everyone's a sucker but me.

Scott: You and Homer Simpson, Ross.  Do tell.

Ross: I shall, sir, I shall.  You see, I recently discovered heretofore utterly unknown to Science: Partisanship.

Scott: Partisanship?

Ross: Yes. Partisanship. It affects our perception.  Creates delusions--dangerous delusions.

Scott: Dangerous delusions! [gasps]

Ross: Yes, that is why the progressives have now become pro-war and anti-civil-liberties.
Scott: They have?

Ross: Yes, having a black guy has president has made them arrogant, delusional, and caving into a dangerous group-think.

Scott: So that's why we should not criticize the Republican Party party?

Ross: Exactly.  It's hypocrisy to criticize hypocrisy.

Scott: [gasps]

Scott: So, belonging to one group changes how you see members of another group?

Ross: Correct.affects our perception.  And that's why we should not criticize the Republican Party party.

Scott: Wait a second.  But isn't this simply the well-known principle of in-group/out-group or "us versus them"?

Ross:  No. This is different.

Scott: How?

Ross: Haven't the foggiest.  But as a Christian who's ready to look down upon non-Christians and judge them as morally inferior and therefore more likely to take out sub-prime mortgages, I feel I am in a position to say that partisanship makes one a hypocrite.

Scott: Um...

Ross:  I am ready, sir, to point fingers and my finger is pointing at the Democrats.  Now that they're in power, they're blinded by power and now cast accusations of hypocrisy.  This in turn leads to a demand for intellectual purity...which in turn leads to a refusal to compromise.  And this refusal to compromise is in turn delusional.

Scott:  So was it delusional of you to say that Bush was "right" about Iraq?

Ross: Iraq is a democracy!

Scott: That is aligned with Iran?

Ross: It's a beacon of Hope and Freedom!

Scott: But what about Maliki's alliance with Sadr and the fundamentalists?

Ross: Freedom!

Scott: So there's nothing hypocritical in casting accusations of hypocrisy in order to support your argument that the Democrats should compromise with Republicans no matter how inane, useless or flat-out insane?  And you would dismiss any alternative explanations, such as progressives simply having become despondent because after Obama caving on civil liberties, they simply feel as though there is no better alternative?

Ross: Finally, you understand. You're smarter than I thought.

Scott: Thank you.

Ross: You're welcome.

Scott: So if the GOP wants to send a giant pancake to the moon instead of building new colleges, Obama should compromise?

Ross: Send half'a giant pancake. But leave out the giant bottle of maple syrup.  I mean that's crazy, who needs maple syrup on the moon.

Scott: So you would support sending half of a giant pancake to the moon?

Ross: If that's what the Republican Party demands, then the Democrats must compromise.  That's democracy.

Scott: Makes sense to me. Next up, the ghost of Joseph Goebbels will be on to share ethnic holiday recipes.

No comments:

Post a Comment