The Absolute Idiocy of Liberal Logic, or Why Josh Marshall is a Pansy

by Kit Lange on January 22, 2013

John Hawkins has a gem of a piece over at Right Wing News today.  Apparently Josh Marshall (don’t feel bad, I’ve never heard of him either) wrote a long, whiny, nutless screed over at TPM that was meant to explain why Americans shouldn’t be allowed to have guns–which is, by the way, because guns scare him and it’s his right to not have to be around them.   What makes it all even more rich is that he titles his puerile missive “Speaking For My Tribe.”  I’ll get to why that’s fitting and sadly hilarious in a minute.  First, let’s talk about the logic behind this whole idea that because Josh Marshall and his “tribe” are scared, we should get rid of our guns.

As Hawkins points out, the liberal stance on rights is basically this: “If I am offended by it, you shouldn’t be able to do it.  If I support it, you should be forced to accept it.”  This illegitimate standard is applied to everything.  We are told that we must accept every personal choice under the sun as perfectly viable and right and good–and we should happily pay for not only the facilitation of such choices, but any resulting consequences as well.  Stay out of my bedroom, but pay for whatever happens as a result of what I do in it.  The reverse certainly does not apply, however.  Can you imagine if I decided that Josh Marshall should pay for the guns I choose to collect?  (If someone else is paying, I’m going all out, let me assure you.  Hey! I think I just described the motto of the Obama administration…but I digress.)  The average liberal cannot see the hypocrisy in saying that my gun scares and offends him and he doesn’t think I should have it, but his lifestyle choices should be celebrated and loved and valued and accepted and taught to my children over my objections.  On that basis alone, Josh Marshall’s argument fails.  No conservative is saying you don’t have the right to be offended.  BE offended!  Hate guns with every fiber of your wussified being.  No one asked you to like my guns.  Tell you what–how about you do what you tell the rest of us to do when we are offended by the trash on television and the porn clogging our internet and the stupidity that passes for “art” now.  Just don’t look at it.

Now let’s talk about another specific point in Marshall’s article where his inability to form coherent thought rears its ugly head.

I don’t particularly want to be around people who are carrying. Cops, I don’t mind. They’re trained, under an organized system and supposed to use them for a specific purpose. But do I want to have people carrying firearms out and about where I live my life — at the store, the restaurant, at my kid’s playground? No, the whole idea is alien and frankly scary. Because remember, guns are extremely efficient tools for killing people and people get weird and do stupid things.

Yes, people get weird and do stupid things, like try to rape women or kidnap children.  They rob stores and beat up random strangers for an article of clothing.  They band together in groups of stupidity and run around the neighborhood spreading violence and crime wherever they go.  Josh Marshall doesn’t want people carrying firearms out and about where he lives his life.  News flash for the village drooler: They already are.  In fact, they’re everywhere.  They’re already behind you in line at the store, waiting til you leave so they can rob the clerk.  They’re a few tables down from you in the restaurant, watching you pull bills out of your wallet and wondering if you’re worth following outside.  They’re already at the edge of your child’s playground, thinking she looks pretty spiffy in her little dress and waiting for you to take your eyes off her for just a second.  In fact, the difference between all of those people and me, is that I’m not walking around waiting for an opportunity to victimize you with my gun.  In fact, the beauty of the whole situation is that regardless of your ridiculous, factually incorrect, cowardly view of guns in general (and those who carry them legally), I’d use mine to protect you, your child, and your right to talk trash on the internet about how guns scare you and we shouldn’t get to have them.  Again, your argument fails.  (And by the way, I wonder if he knows how much time we crazy gun people spend training and practicing and studying?  He must be assuming that because he’s not interested in learning, we aren’t either.)

Remember at the beginning of this little journey, I mentioned the title of Josh “I’m a Scaredy Cat” Marshall’s article was “Speaking For My Tribe?”  That particular term has a special significance for those of us who subscribe to the belief system shared by people like Lt. Col. Dave Grossman and Bill Whittle.  Back during Hurricane Katrina, Bill Whittle penned an essay called…you guessed it…”Tribes.“  In it, he describes two different tribes of people.

My Tribe consists of people who know that sometimes bad things happen, and that these instances are opportunities to show ourselves what we are made of. My people go into burning buildings. My Tribe consists of organizers and self-starters, proud and self-reliant people who do not need to be told what to do in a crisis. My Tribe is not fearless; they are something better. They are courageous. My Tribe is honorable, and decent, and kind, and inventive.[...]
The Pink Tribe is all about feeling good: feeling good about yourself! Sexually, emotionally, artistically–nothing is off limits, nothing is forbidden, convention is fossilized insanity and everybody gets to do their own thing without regard to consequences, reality, or natural law.

For his part, Lt. Dave Grossman expands on this as well:

Here is how the sheep and the sheepdog think differently. The sheep pretend the wolf will never come, but the sheepdog lives for that day. After the attacks on September 11, 2001, most of the sheep, that is, most citizens in America said, “Thank God I wasn’t on one of those planes.” The sheepdogs, the warriors, said, “Dear God, I wish I could have been on one of those planes. Maybe I could have made a difference.” When you are truly transformed into a warrior and have truly invested yourself into warriorhood, you want to be there. You want to be able to make a difference.

While there is nothing morally superior about the sheepdog, the warrior, he does have one real advantage — only one. He is able to survive and thrive in an environment that destroys 98 percent of the population.

So, you see, Josh Marshall’s use of the phrase “my tribe” is telling–not because someone else used it too, but because he proves the point that there are sheep, and there are sheepdogs.  Grossman is right–people like Josh Marshall don’t like people like me.  Until they’re in a mall and some crazy gunman starts shooting, and someone like me pulls their own concealed weapon and ends the problem before the shooter kills another sheep. Thanks, buddy…now go away.  Your gun scares me.

It’s ok, Josh.  We know what tribe herd you’re a part of, and we accept that.  We accept that you don’t have the cojones to defend yourself, and will fully expect someone else to show up and save the day when you become the damsel in distress.  We even accept when you’re being victimized and there are no cops around, it will fall to one of us to step up and defend you with no thanks expected–if we’re around, that is.  Then again, we wouldn’t want to scare you.

 

 

{ 20 comments… read them below or add one }

Kender Breitbart MacGowan January 22, 2013 at 1:25 am

Who had the toasted, shredded libbiewuss? Your order is ready.

Reply

beverly January 22, 2013 at 3:08 am

“Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and the keystone under independence…

‘From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace, security, and happiness, the rifle, and pistol are equally indispensable…

“The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that’s good.”
–George Washington, Father of Our Country

Reply

Larry Obama January 22, 2013 at 7:34 am

Awesome! I totally agree.

Reply

Blue January 22, 2013 at 8:19 am

The Liberal mind is incapable of understanding the thoughts you have shared. Its the way they’re wired. :)

Reply

Elm Creek Smith January 22, 2013 at 2:45 pm

Josh Marshall is not a member of a tribe or a herd. He’s a member of a flock. All he can do is bleat that something, like the sheepdog, makes him uncomfortable and wants it to go away, ignoring the wolves that lurk just beyond his myopic field of vision.

I’m a paid sheepdog at work and have had people thank me for keeping them safe. Some of them don’t seem to understand that I would do the same thing whether I were paid or not away from work.

ECS

Reply

Kate January 22, 2013 at 3:03 pm

awesome. ^^

Reply

bartdp January 22, 2013 at 4:03 pm

Ouch!…………I did so enjoy this. When a conservative woman has to point out to a liberal man….what his position in life is supposed to be. Josh I’ll hold your purse for you, give it another shot!

Forgive me I know this was my first post ever, here I know the error of my ways!

Reply

Veritas January 22, 2013 at 6:49 pm

Does Marshall prefer lace edging on his panties?

Reply

Dana January 22, 2013 at 7:57 pm

Since he wears thongs, the lace irritates him. :)

Reply

Dana January 22, 2013 at 8:46 pm

The right to keep and bear arms works both ways; Mr Marshall has every right to choose not to own a firearm.

More, I honor our Constitution and the Second Amendment in exactly the same way: I choose not to hunt, and I choose not to shoot, and I choose not to own a firearm. For my situation, in a very safe small town, the odds of some sort of accident occurring with a firearm are far greater than the odds I would ever need one to defend myself.

When I was in college (way back in the 1970s), it was the liberals who were pro-freedom. It was the liberals who were most adamant about the freedom of speech and most vociferous that the government needed to stay out of people’s lives to the greatest extent possible.

That has all changed. I will never call our friends on the left “pro-choice,” because they support the individual’s right to choose on one topic only. The oh-so-noble defenders of freedom of speech now call for limiting speech, to stifle corporations and to punish “hate” speech; the great progressives who wanted government out, out, out! of their private lives want the government to be able to reach into your home and seize your property.

Reply

Kit January 23, 2013 at 1:15 am

Dana,

I absolutely support your right not to own a firearm, regardless of my personal feelings on the matter. I only have one question, though. What is your last resort defense against tyranny?

Reply

Dana January 23, 2013 at 7:02 am

At this point, I should say two daughters in the Army! :)

If it came to the point at which we had to fight, I’d fight; if I believed that tyranny was creeping up on us, my decisions concerning owning a firearm might change.

But, as much as I despise the policies of President Obama, I see no tyranny on the horizon. He might wish to be a tyrant, but he is still a constitutional officer, restricted by the law, and for the next two years, at the very least, he will have a House of Representatives controlled by the Republican Party, which will not grant him much of what he wishes.

Our friends on the left absolutely loathed President Bush, and thought him to be the reincarnation of Adolf Hitler, but on January 20, 2009, right on schedule, he left the White House, legally and peacefully. And on January 20, 2017, as much as we loathe President Obama, I have absolutely no doubt that he, too, will leave office peacefully and legally.

I am far more concerned about an economic calamity than I am someone seriously trying to impose a tyranny on the US.

Reply

Elm Creek Smith January 23, 2013 at 8:50 am

If you are more concerned about an economic calamity, Dana, that’s an even better reason own a gun. If that happens, you’ll need to be able to protect yourself and your “stuff.” Under normal conditions, your “stuff” isn’t worth someone else’s life, but in an economic breakdown other people will think your “stuff” is more important than YOUR life.

I’d recommend a good, solid repeating shotgun (12 or 20 gauge) and a serviceable handgun (.38 Special or 9mm as minimum calibers). You could add a rifle or carbine to the mix, too, in either the same caliber as your handgun or in something readily available in your area, e.g. .30-30 Winchester. Of course, you’d also need a good supply of ammunition for your “arsenal.”

I’d also recommend getting training on whatever you decide to get. Just knowing how to shoot won’t be enough. You’ll need to know when to shoot and how to shoot quickly and accurately.

Stay safe.

ECS

Reply

Dana January 23, 2013 at 3:42 pm

ECS, you are advocating preparing for the Revolution; I don’t see that as on the horizon, even after an economic calamity.

I live in a nice, safe, small town in a rural county; the kind of anarchy about which you are writing is an urban area event. If it comes to the point where I have to defend my humble abode from the ravening mobs, we will have already reached some sort of science-fiction scenario post-apocalyptic society.

All of that could happen; anything is possible. But I’d guess it to be a rather improbable future, at least as far as the rest of my life is concerned.

Reply

LD Jackson January 22, 2013 at 8:52 pm

Great post, Kit. Truly, people like Josh Marshal do not understand people like us. I have serious doubts about their capability to do so.

Reply

Red Dawn January 23, 2013 at 1:58 am

Way too much weapon stroking going on here.

Reply

Elm Creek Smith January 23, 2013 at 8:55 am

Really, Red? In what way?

ECS

Reply

Moose January 23, 2013 at 8:37 am

I like the idea that they should pay for our guns, especially now since I can’t find any at a decent price anymore.

Reply

DNW January 23, 2013 at 1:15 pm

A reader of yours, a fellow blogger, appreciated your take on the Josh Marshall situation.

Especially, he implied, it was your clearly stated recognition and characterization of the ‘reciprocity problem’ which inevitably crops up when dealing with so-called liberals and their social theorizing.

I agree. You have grasped the central conceptual problem that exists when dealing with illiberal liberals: the seeming impossibility of negotiating a reciprocally recognized set of boundaries, when the principle of reciprocity itself [whether realized by act or restraint] and the recognition of discrete interests, is just not conceded by illiberals as the critical presupposition for a rational and voluntary association of moral peers.

No, instead, they somehow have a right to be accommodated; and you a duty to associate, to accommodate, to affirm, and to ultimately underwrite.

On what conceivable basis?

For a handy precis of that critical point, I went to the original article. Here’s how it condenses with a little help from word search:

“I also have a random and kind of scary experience from childhood.

I think guns are kind of scary and don’t want to be around them.

…the whole idea is alien and frankly scary.

The first time you see something scary, that you may not understand completely, are you less afraid when nothing bad happens?

I don’t own one. I don’t think many people I know have one. It would scare me to have one in my home …

That frightens me.”

Yeah, ok. But, you know, he’s ready to talk …

Reply

KEVIN January 23, 2013 at 2:00 pm

I just found out about VICTORY GIRLS. Linked to it from BLACKFIVE.
Makes me wounder if I should have given up on dating/marraige back in’91…………
Good on you ladys,
<

Reply

Leave a Comment

{ 1 trackback }

Previous post:

Next post: