This article pretty much sums up what it's like to be a conservative in New York City.
In fact, just this past week, I had to endure "Obama Love" in a business meeting with five colleagues until I finally "spoke up." I was instantly ridiculed and my co-workers honestly looked at me like I had three heads for the remainder of the week.
Then today, I was in a local cheese shop on Bedford Avenue in Williamsburg, Brooklyn. My girlfriend and I were having a taste of some sharp cheddar we were planning to make grilled cheese sandwiches with tonight. When my lady mentioned that it tasted like cheese we recently had from Fresh Direct (a local food delivery company), we were subjected to an angry liberal rant from the cheese guy about how evil the company is for union busting. Can't a Republican even get some cheese in this town without being preached at by "tolerant, diversity seeking" liberals?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
did they still give you service, or did they make you order at a separate counter for "your kind"?
ReplyDeleteThis goes both ways. Talk to the uptown bourbon democrat about her one month exile in east Texas....
i wanted to punch the dude. when i decided to try and ignore it, i asked whether or not the store makes any of their own cheese. he snidely said, "uh, no. you may have noticed there aren't many cows left in brooklyn." i again wanted to punch him. in a moment of "thought of a brilliant line just moments too late" as we were walking down the street, i thought i should of said, "well, maybe there're no cows because their union drove up wages and forced the dairies to move to mexico!" i started to go back in to tell him, but the EVR Gal thought it would be a bad idea and i took her advice.
ReplyDeleteso, did the UBD face verbal abuse and societal judgment? the difference to me is in the hypocrisy: liberals stand on the soap box preaching diversity and tolerance, but it's all a big lie.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletewhile i have no excuse for this guy's obviously intolerable behavior (even other pinkos i know won't shop there due to the high dickwad factor there), you just lose intellectual honesty points when you say "liberals stand on the soap box preaching diversity and tolerance, but it's all a big lie".
ReplyDeleteliberals (LBJ, specifically) brought us civil rights, and many other tolerance/diversity results, etc. please point to similar successes from the conservative right.
let's try not to paint large swaths like that. after all, i could say all conservatives are duplicitous sacks of shit when it comes to morals/religion/gay/torture, but i generally don't, unless i've recently watched a palin speech.
in conclusion, i will definitely grant that there is much hypocrisy (like you dealt with) on the left, but that's more of a human issue that a "liberal" issue as we see it consistently on both sides. very few of us practice what we preach, unfortunately.
but i would argue that we are better off in life having both liberals/conservatives preaching their respective tolerance/morals (and ultimately not following through 100% of the time, as they do), than neither side preaching their causes at all.
sorry, did you just advocate gay torture?
ReplyDeleteonly in the "ticking broadway musical" scenario...
ReplyDelete;)
also, you love the phrase "intellectually dishonest."
ReplyDeletei'd argue that, if the BCPL ever considers the EVR to be intellectually dishonest, he might want to read any post I've ever made about Ms. Sarah Palin, none of which unquestionably support her -- I only support her as part of a ticket which is running against another ticket which i unquestionably DO NOT support.
i do love the phrase "intellectually dishonest" because it perfectly describes the current right-wing embrace of sarah palin (outside of the laudable sullivan, frum and -- finally -- brooks).
ReplyDeletewhile it's fine for one to champion her (imho, archaic and back-assward) social values, to revel in her (imho, dubious) record of "reform" and "executive experience" and become excited about the (imho, short-lived) political patina that she's brought to mccain's ticket, it's another thing to completely gloss over her glaring lack of knowledge and interest in foreign policy just because she's on the ticket of the guy one supports. what about her fitness for the role she may play as president while we're at war?
this critique was borne against obama (who is demonstrably more interested and well-versed in the issues before him, whether you agree with his stances or not), and it is intellectually dishonest to not hold palin to the same standard, no matter how knowledgeable the person at the top of the ticket is.
and, unfortunately, the EVR has been guilty-by-omission of a similar offense.
i have yet to hear EVR posit any specific concerns about palin's foreign policy creds or fitness for office except for the throw-away lines: "She made me nervous", she "was not at all confidence-inspiring" and "She’s not a perfect candidate".
so, if you only support her insofar as you support mccain (which sounds like you do NOT support her, without your previously-mentioned minimum two years of mccain tutelage), why not be direct and upfront about your implied reservations about her, specifically? what case is there to be made for palin (within the context of palin, no obama/mccain) given our knowledge about her shortcomings?
that would be full intellectual honesty, and would bring a refreshing context for our conversation.
also:
ReplyDeleteas much as we disagree on the proper role of government in american life, i know you to be an incredibly thoughtful and deliberate person who has high expectations for the qualifications of elected officials, especially the presidency. in fact, i may presume to believe that those same expectations underly your main line of critique against obama and his readiness for office.
so: outside of the political arena of helping get mccain elected, can you honestly say you are pleased with the pick of palin in terms of governance?
can you say you are filled with confidence at the thought of her leading this nation in a time of war and economic strife if something were to happen to mccain?
and if the answer is less than yes, does that color how you feel about mccain and his decision to put a palin so close to the whitehouse? does that say anything to you about his leadership choices, or is it all ok because he needs to do what he needs to do in order to get elected? if so, does that kind of cynicism say anything in particular about mccain?
i believe one can still support mccain as a fate better than obama (hell, i did it in 2004 with kerry/bush) and still directly answer these questions and critiques of palin and mccain's decison to select her.
in fact, real intellectual honesty requires it.