If I could pick one moment that really gets to the black, oozing heart of Bush-Era Conservatism, it would have to be Bill O'Reilly blowing up at Jeremy Glick. In case you don't know what I'm talking about, this was something that happened about a month before the Invasion of Iraq, where Jeremy Glick, the son of a victim of the 9/11 attacks, was pulled on The O'Reilly Factor so that Bill could yell at him for signing an Anti-War Resolution. What was great about it was that early in the Yell-Session, Jeremy reminded Bill that the same people who carried out the attacks were trained by the US Government, a point which Bill, assuming the smug, assholish tone of a Vice Principal chewing out a student who cut class, dismisses as a "Far-Left Viewpoint". (Here's the video)
This, to me, is Modern Conservatism in a nutshell. Anybody with even a passing familiarity with 20th Century History knows that this is absolutely true. Damn it, O'Reilly knows this is true. However, since he and the rest of the demons at Fox News know that it's inconvenient information, they know they can write it off in the minds of their flag-waving audience by simply branding it "Far-Left", and thus either irrelevant or downright treasonous to cite.
I bring this up because it's this same mindset that has given us such hilarious/frightening phenomena such as The Fox News Channel itself, World Net Daily, and, of course, Conservapedia. All of these are monuments to the Neocon Legacies of willful ignorance, brutish reasoning and rabid, commie-crushing paranoia. Conservapedia, however, might be my favorite.
Just like the Fox News Channel, the site was created because of alleged Liberal Bias of an existing institution. Where Conservatives started fomenting conspiracy theories of a Marxism within the pages of the New York Times, and the content of CNN, the Fox News Channel was created. Years later, they got the same ideas about Wikipedia, and thus Conservapedia was born.The geniuses behind this even went so far as to have a lengthy catalog of Wikipedia's Covert Socialism.
The general, outstanding dumbness of all of this is pretty obvious. I mean, if your problem with Wikipedia is clearly biased, then simply make an alternative that you feel is more objective. But no, Bush-America ain't havin' none of that. That's why instead of seeking objectivity, they just create a much more skewed version, one that caters to their stubborn worldview, reality be damned.
So if you're looking for a good way to waste an hour feeling your misanthropy percolate, Conservapedia is a must-read. But where to start? Because, as it turns out if you enter fun terms like "blowjob" or "butt sex", you only get pages like this. That's why, I've selected a few of my favorites to get you started. Enjoy:
In case you actually took the time to read over their entry on Wikipedia's Tofu-Loving Ways, you might have noticed number four, which is as follows:
Wikipedia allows hundreds of thousands of obscure and offensive entries, such as unsuccessful punk rock groups and silly television shows.[10] But within hours liberals on Wikipedia completely deleted an informative and well-referenced entry about Hollywood Values, in order to censor examples of how the liberal ideology harms people. (This deletion occurred on Feb. 15, 2008; Wikipedia hides a record of its ideological deletions.)
So an example of Wikipedia's Bias is that it doesn't allow Bias on its site. Gotcha. Can you imagine that those Surrender Monkeys would rather read about The Damned or Ren and Stimpy?! (you are so wrong Daniel Coleslaw, since they didn't post our Conservative Bias, that means they're Liberally Biased. I mean, obviously!)
But that voice in my head is right, I mean, how could Wikipedia not post something this well-thought out? After all, they have a point when they talk about how Hollywood frequently shows "flagrant disrespect" for Marriage, Religion, Patriotism and so forth. They even have a long list of films where this is the case!
Wait, they don't. Funny, because I could probably point out plenty of films that clearly advocate these things (Religion: The Passion of The Christ, The Ten Commandments, and so forth. Patriotism: Rambo, Top Gun, and so forth. Marriage: Almost every Romantic Comedy or Chick Flick ever.)
What they offer instead is a long list of famous people who died from living the Hollywood Lifestyle, which include many people who no one would associate with Hollywood (Kurt Cobain, Janis Joplin, Lenny Bruce...). The suggestion of course is that no one who doesn't live in Hollywood or embody their values has ever died from sleeping pills, suicide or alcoholism. This, as we all know, is totally absolutely true.
