Take That, Asshole!
The student newspaper at my former university/current workplace is notoriously misguided, especially in regards to the columnists it selects. It seems as if the only qualification for a conservative columnist is to be completeley obnoxious. You also, apparently, have to creepily smile for your headshot. I only wish I could include the picture that accompanies the print version of today's column. Let's just say, this dude's face has "conservative blowhard-in-training" written all over it. Behold (I will bold the parts that give Mr. Hedgepath away as a first-class douchebag):
Democrats must revamp party
Chris Hedgepeth
Columnist
Liberals have been so upset about their situation in America lately, they’re now taking anti-depressants in addition to their Ritalin.
While screaming about Tom Delay’s alleged corruption has allowed the left to imagine they’re avenging Bill Clinton, the joy derived from this exercise has not come close to revitalizing the left’s extremely low spirits. (To get an idea of just how “low” we’re talking, think of Barbra Streisand’s IQ.)
For once, I am almost tempted to sympathize with liberals; just consider all the recent bad news they’ve been faced with:
1. The death toll from Hurricane Katrina was not as catastrophic as liberals were hoping.
2. America still hasn’t surrendered in the War on Terror.
3. President Bush is nominating a conservative (!) to fill the current Supreme Court vacancy.
4. After the 789th recount, Bush still wins Florida.
5. It is now official that the much decried “tax cuts for the rich” have produced $12.2 trillion in tax revenue per year, up from the $10.9 trillion per year before the 2003 tax cuts. Translation: Tax cuts are good.
6. And finally, Dick Cheney just had to recover from his aneurysm.
Most devastating to liberals is their realization that the Democratic Party might be an ineffective vehicle for translating their demands into political results, as if the left was somehow unaware of the fact that “winning” is not exactly the Democrats’ forte.
Indeed, the problem here can be explained quite simply: Liberals want blood, but the Democratic Party is a bunch of losers.
In a speech to the Black Caucus, Harry Belafonte effectively captured the left’s discontent when he remarked that the wreckage in the Gulf region is insignificant and unimportant compared to the wreckage of the Democratic Party.
Belafonte continued, “I guess part of the reason I’m here is to really look through the ravages of the Democratic Party and see if anything is really worth salvaging.”
This, of course, is not a new sentiment. Unimpressed with the 2004 election results, MoveOn.org last December proclaimed to the Democratic leadership, “Now it’s our Party: We bought it, we own it, and we’re going to take it back.”
The Democrats, however, aren’t so sure about allowing crazy liberals to subjugate their party.
Much to the left’s dismay, the Democratic Party has refused to fully devote itself to the anti-war causes and the “Bush is Hitler” vitriol characteristic of the radical left. From the party’s point of view, such a move is feared to alienate normal Democrats who simply hate rich people.
Consequently, Democrats shouldn’t feel safe when Cindy Sheehan and other crazies storm Washington, chant inanities like “Give Peace a Chance,” and demand that America lose the war; liberals still haven’t forgotten that Hillary Clinton and other Democratic leaders voted for the war in the first place. Even John Kerry voted to fund the war — before, of course, he “voted against it.”
Democrats are now faced with the arduous challenge of dealing with the left’s rage in a way that doesn’t end up destroying their own party.
Immediately springing to action, Bill Clinton began catering to the left’s instinctive hatred by criticizing President Bush and his decision to invade Iraq. Inasmuch as Clinton himself in 1998 called Saddam Hussein a “threat” to the “safety of his [own] people, the stability of his region and the security of all the rest of us,” it is hilarious that the former president would object to President Bush actually removing this “threat.”
Then again, protecting America was never something Clinton was on top of. When it came to Bill Clinton, America’s safety and security was a minor concern. On second thought, perhaps that’s why liberals liked him so much.
I say all this about the former president to give Democrats a bit of advice: If you want power, get rid of Bill Clinton. He’s so good at winning elections for Republicans, even conservatives want him on TV more often.
And here’s some more advice: Stay away from celebrities like Bette Midler. They make you look even more insane than you already are.
While starring in a fundraising concert for hurricane relief, Midler made headlines when she began shouting, “We’re surrounded by disasters! The war, the hurricane, Fox News. (Loud cheering) It just goes on and on. I get so depressed!”
Midler’s emotional health could perhaps benefit from getting her facts straight. The “disastrous” Fox News continues to lead cable news ratings, the war is going marvelously well — okay, we’ll just say America is winning, so it’s not going well for liberals — and Bush is rebuilding the Gulf. So why the dismay?
This frustration would be more understandable if liberals actually identified some real disasters for once. They could pick any of the following: Air America, MSNBC, the U.N., the War on Poverty, etc. The point is: Finding real disasters in America is really not that difficult. It’s certainly not as difficult as “Thinking” is for Barbra Streisand.
I’m just glad I don’t have to deal with this anger and depression — I get to laugh at it.
On the other hand, if Democrats want to keep their power, they had better do something fast about the left’s anger or the whole Democratic Party will collapse.
Not that I would lose any sleep over that.
— Chris Hedgepeth is a freshman in political science. He can be reached at chedgepe@utk.edu.
Here is my inevitable response. I've yet to find out if it will be printed:
Dear Editor,
Reading Chris Hedgepeth's column in today's Beacon, I was reminded of a universal truth--there is virtually nothing more pathetic than an arrogant, pompous bore who regards himself as clever. How very suitable that Hedgepeth chooses to write a column on the sad state of the Democratic Party at precisely the time his own beloved party is reeling from a series of egregious missteps and ethical failures. To quote Glen Quagmire from Family Guy, how...expected. Speaking of vitriol, what else does a Bush apologist have to hang onto at this point? In the face of Valerie Plame, the utter failure of Social Security "reform," the criminal ineptness of the federal hurricane response, rampant cronyism, government-financed propaganda, a ballooning federal deficit, Bill Frist's active management of his "blind stock trust" and Tom DeLay's little problem with the entire concept of ethics, not much. And what about Iraq? Despite Mr. Hedgepeth's shameless assertion that the war is going "marvelously," I believe there are quite a few American soldiers and Iraqi civilians who would disagree wholeheartedly. Just a guess. I suppose the insurgency is still in its "last throes" as well. I might actually pity Mr. Hedgepeth for his desperate grasping, if it weren't for his trivializing of mental illness, cheap pot-shots at the intellect of Barbra Streisand (don't conservatives know any other easy targets?) and grieving mother Cindy Sheehan, logic-defying assertions and overall tendency for nasty and unnecessarily personal attacks.
If the Democratic Party is floundering, as I believe it is, it is not because its members are angry losers, to paraphrase Mr. Hedgepeth. It is because it can't compete with the ruthless tactics of a certain party that long ago declared moral bankruptcy. You know, bleeding hearts and all.
Veronica Randolph
Graduation Specialist
2003 UT graduate in Journalism
Kiss my ass, freshman punk.
Democrats must revamp party
Chris Hedgepeth
Columnist
Liberals have been so upset about their situation in America lately, they’re now taking anti-depressants in addition to their Ritalin.
While screaming about Tom Delay’s alleged corruption has allowed the left to imagine they’re avenging Bill Clinton, the joy derived from this exercise has not come close to revitalizing the left’s extremely low spirits. (To get an idea of just how “low” we’re talking, think of Barbra Streisand’s IQ.)
For once, I am almost tempted to sympathize with liberals; just consider all the recent bad news they’ve been faced with:
1. The death toll from Hurricane Katrina was not as catastrophic as liberals were hoping.
2. America still hasn’t surrendered in the War on Terror.
3. President Bush is nominating a conservative (!) to fill the current Supreme Court vacancy.
4. After the 789th recount, Bush still wins Florida.
5. It is now official that the much decried “tax cuts for the rich” have produced $12.2 trillion in tax revenue per year, up from the $10.9 trillion per year before the 2003 tax cuts. Translation: Tax cuts are good.
6. And finally, Dick Cheney just had to recover from his aneurysm.
Most devastating to liberals is their realization that the Democratic Party might be an ineffective vehicle for translating their demands into political results, as if the left was somehow unaware of the fact that “winning” is not exactly the Democrats’ forte.
Indeed, the problem here can be explained quite simply: Liberals want blood, but the Democratic Party is a bunch of losers.
In a speech to the Black Caucus, Harry Belafonte effectively captured the left’s discontent when he remarked that the wreckage in the Gulf region is insignificant and unimportant compared to the wreckage of the Democratic Party.
Belafonte continued, “I guess part of the reason I’m here is to really look through the ravages of the Democratic Party and see if anything is really worth salvaging.”
This, of course, is not a new sentiment. Unimpressed with the 2004 election results, MoveOn.org last December proclaimed to the Democratic leadership, “Now it’s our Party: We bought it, we own it, and we’re going to take it back.”
The Democrats, however, aren’t so sure about allowing crazy liberals to subjugate their party.
Much to the left’s dismay, the Democratic Party has refused to fully devote itself to the anti-war causes and the “Bush is Hitler” vitriol characteristic of the radical left. From the party’s point of view, such a move is feared to alienate normal Democrats who simply hate rich people.
Consequently, Democrats shouldn’t feel safe when Cindy Sheehan and other crazies storm Washington, chant inanities like “Give Peace a Chance,” and demand that America lose the war; liberals still haven’t forgotten that Hillary Clinton and other Democratic leaders voted for the war in the first place. Even John Kerry voted to fund the war — before, of course, he “voted against it.”
Democrats are now faced with the arduous challenge of dealing with the left’s rage in a way that doesn’t end up destroying their own party.
Immediately springing to action, Bill Clinton began catering to the left’s instinctive hatred by criticizing President Bush and his decision to invade Iraq. Inasmuch as Clinton himself in 1998 called Saddam Hussein a “threat” to the “safety of his [own] people, the stability of his region and the security of all the rest of us,” it is hilarious that the former president would object to President Bush actually removing this “threat.”
Then again, protecting America was never something Clinton was on top of. When it came to Bill Clinton, America’s safety and security was a minor concern. On second thought, perhaps that’s why liberals liked him so much.
I say all this about the former president to give Democrats a bit of advice: If you want power, get rid of Bill Clinton. He’s so good at winning elections for Republicans, even conservatives want him on TV more often.
And here’s some more advice: Stay away from celebrities like Bette Midler. They make you look even more insane than you already are.
While starring in a fundraising concert for hurricane relief, Midler made headlines when she began shouting, “We’re surrounded by disasters! The war, the hurricane, Fox News. (Loud cheering) It just goes on and on. I get so depressed!”
Midler’s emotional health could perhaps benefit from getting her facts straight. The “disastrous” Fox News continues to lead cable news ratings, the war is going marvelously well — okay, we’ll just say America is winning, so it’s not going well for liberals — and Bush is rebuilding the Gulf. So why the dismay?
This frustration would be more understandable if liberals actually identified some real disasters for once. They could pick any of the following: Air America, MSNBC, the U.N., the War on Poverty, etc. The point is: Finding real disasters in America is really not that difficult. It’s certainly not as difficult as “Thinking” is for Barbra Streisand.
I’m just glad I don’t have to deal with this anger and depression — I get to laugh at it.
On the other hand, if Democrats want to keep their power, they had better do something fast about the left’s anger or the whole Democratic Party will collapse.
Not that I would lose any sleep over that.
— Chris Hedgepeth is a freshman in political science. He can be reached at chedgepe@utk.edu.
Here is my inevitable response. I've yet to find out if it will be printed:
Dear Editor,
Reading Chris Hedgepeth's column in today's Beacon, I was reminded of a universal truth--there is virtually nothing more pathetic than an arrogant, pompous bore who regards himself as clever. How very suitable that Hedgepeth chooses to write a column on the sad state of the Democratic Party at precisely the time his own beloved party is reeling from a series of egregious missteps and ethical failures. To quote Glen Quagmire from Family Guy, how...expected. Speaking of vitriol, what else does a Bush apologist have to hang onto at this point? In the face of Valerie Plame, the utter failure of Social Security "reform," the criminal ineptness of the federal hurricane response, rampant cronyism, government-financed propaganda, a ballooning federal deficit, Bill Frist's active management of his "blind stock trust" and Tom DeLay's little problem with the entire concept of ethics, not much. And what about Iraq? Despite Mr. Hedgepeth's shameless assertion that the war is going "marvelously," I believe there are quite a few American soldiers and Iraqi civilians who would disagree wholeheartedly. Just a guess. I suppose the insurgency is still in its "last throes" as well. I might actually pity Mr. Hedgepeth for his desperate grasping, if it weren't for his trivializing of mental illness, cheap pot-shots at the intellect of Barbra Streisand (don't conservatives know any other easy targets?) and grieving mother Cindy Sheehan, logic-defying assertions and overall tendency for nasty and unnecessarily personal attacks.
If the Democratic Party is floundering, as I believe it is, it is not because its members are angry losers, to paraphrase Mr. Hedgepeth. It is because it can't compete with the ruthless tactics of a certain party that long ago declared moral bankruptcy. You know, bleeding hearts and all.
Veronica Randolph
Graduation Specialist
2003 UT graduate in Journalism
Kiss my ass, freshman punk.
posted by Veronica @ 1:41 PM
0 comments
