Amazing Wingnut Facts

Thanks to Steve at No More Mister Nice Blog, it’s time for another edition of Amazing Wingnut Facts. He quotes Neal Boortz who writes:

The obvious goal [of the left] here is to create a spokesman that cannot be attacked … one who’s essentially bulletproof….

When you think about it, Hillary Clinton has even approached this bulletproof status in some ways. She’s a woman, and she’s a woman who has endured public humiliation at the hands of her philandering husband. As such, some would say that she is beyond criticism.

Actually, Neal, there is not one fucking person who would say that. (NMMNB provides a few links to make his point, whereas unleashing the profanities is all we’re willing to do.)


Comments: 11


A spokesman who can’t be attacked? I nominate Al Gore. Oh wait. John Murtha? Damn. Cindy Sheehan.

Uh, the 9/11 widows? Oh crap. Um…



Obviously, we need to get George W. Bush as our spokesman. They’d never think to attack him.


Neil Boortz is the main reason I hold libertarians in low regard, as he’s not only a mouthpiece for ’em but also a pretty good example of the group as a whole. Misinformed, mean-spirited and mendacious, the man claims to be for “the little guy” but spent most of the debate over the Patriot Act practically begging for a Big Daddy Government. And what is it with wingnuts and Hillary? Don’t they realize more people on the right want her as president than left-wingers do?


“As such, some would say that she is beyond criticism.”

ok guys. i’ll fess up. it was nearing the a.m. one night and neal and i were wrapping up a two day bender of MD 2020 and some bathtub meth. in my defense, i was *fucked*up*, but i may have said something to neal like, “you what neal? you know what? hillary has had some bullshit thrown in her path. not only was she born a woman but to throw salt in her wound, she has been publically embarrassed. i think that lot in life shields her from any and all criticism. i mean, come on.”

so there it is, i planted this turd in the brain of boortz and it’s flowers are just coming into bloom.


I can’t help but feeling like a certain dynamic being set up here. The duality that underpins classical wingnut thinking holds that things are either one thing or its complete and total opposite.

As such, if you were to say that someone is beyond criticism, where no criticism is acceptable, the only other option is to make all criticism possible, acceptable and essentially constant. Thus, balance is restored and the earth remains spinning on its axis.


I think we should nominate Rumsfeld.


Hillary? Immune to all criticism?!? Agh! *hkkktthhpbth*
[swallows tongue, dad calls paramedics]

[some time later…]
Damn! The right-wingers are trying to kill us!


I nominate this 3-ton slab of granite as our spokesman!


Christ!!! Did you guys read through all the links?

Boortz write that crap about Hillary being “unattackable” and if you scroll down and read the other stories IN THE VERY SAME POST he calls her “Hildebeast”!!!

What a fucking asshole.

I wrote him the following:

“In your June 12 post about poor, poor, trembling victim Ann Coulter, you hit back at Hillary Clinton to support Ann’s indefensible attack on the 9/11 widows, saying that “some would say” Hillary Clinton is beyond criticism, including her in the category of supposed “unattackable” spokespersons.

Yet what do I find when scrolling down in your post? An all-too-common gratuitous insult to Hillary Clinton, using the right’s favorite nasty moniker, “Hildebeast”.

The right, including you Ms.Coulter have never hesitated to savage Hillary Clinton. Well, fine, she’s a public figure, it comes with the territory. She’s been called a lot more nasty things than that, and, incidentally, has shown much more good grace in dealing with it than Coulter has.

For you to champion the cause of poor thin-skinned Ms. Coulter, because she was called “vicious” and “meanspirited” by a woman who you and Coulter have slandered in far, far worse language, is hypocritical, dishonest, and ultimately, laughable.

In fact, I am puzzled that you or Coulter would take offense at Clinton’s description, which is, at least, accurate. Ms. Coulter seems to take a great deal of pride in her viciousness and meanspiritedness.

But it really takes gall for you to decry Clinton as somehow holding herself up as “unattackable” and then attacking her in the very same post.

Thank you. It’s always nice to have such a clear-cut example of total moral bankruptcy to point out.

You and Ann are good company.”

Signed, g


To me, that this whole meme caught on is proof that many on the right really have no idea what they are saying. Like Neal, they can endlessly repeat things that fall apart after *one microsecond* of critical analysis. Things that they themselves refute moments later.

This isn’t stupidity,it’s something scarier. Something about the robotization of people who can do that really creeps the shit out of me.

(Of course, this is also a perfect case of displacement- it’s the *wingers* who want to call all criticism of the president treason, even if they havent succeeded. All left-wing criticism, anyway- we understand that calling the president weak on immigration or weak bc of Harriet Miers is patriotic as all heck).


(comments are closed)