HARRRR HAHA HEE HEE HEE HARDY HAR HARRRRR! This is so unreal as to be completely and entirely drifting in from another dimension.
First of all, is this not the most grammatically uncomfortable thing you’ve ever read? Leadership, media, smear groups, Wall Street, and partisans. Some are people, some are concepts, some are places, and some are things. Some are more than one of those. None are generally recognized as running in “gangs”. In fact, it would be physically impossible for a concept such as “leadership” to be in a “gang”. And then, some are plural and some are singular. “THE extremist liberal leadership” is different grammatically than “THOSE Hollywood partisans.” And NONE of these are individual sentient beings, so you just can’t say “WHO are the “Gang of Five”. It just sounds lame and strained, which I doubt would be the effect the authors are going for.
Second of all, if I were a Chinese person who was around in the 70’s, I might feel resentful that my national history was being milked for a very silly conservative campaign in 2013 USA. The original “Gang of Four” were four individuals in a 70’s Red Chinese political faction, who in a series of complicated political maneuvers, supposedly intended to take over the country upon Mao’s death. It was a big deal in China, and kind of a big deal here too, because in those days we had actual independent journalists reporting actual news from other parts of the world, instead of the slop we are currently being fed by the “Gang of Six”, otherwise known as the 6 giant media conglomerates that pre-chew all your information for you.
What else can we gather from this interesting document? Well, for one thing, we know these conservative buckwallers are not talking to anybody under the age of 30, because no current 30-year-olds were born yet. To get the maximum creepy, Mao-reminding, sneaky-Chinese-politics impact of the “Gang of Five” label, you have to be old, because they don’t tell you about it in high school either. You kind of had to be there, so to speak. So, conservatives, here you are, speaking only to all the old-fart, get-off-my-lawners yet again. When are you going to figure out there are people out here that don’t share your weird, uptight history? And, in fact, weren’t even around for most of it? Seriously, you guys should think about that.
Oh! Oh! And then there are the … the… what are they, anyway? Elements? List items? Talking points? Hallucinations? It’s hard to tell. The first one refers to “extremest liberal leadership”.
OH. MY. GOD. Where? Who? Name one! No, don’t just name one, name one and list their extremist liberal views. Because I am DYING to hear a few of those issuing out of the catbox called Washington DC. But I can tell you right now, there aren’t any. The most liberal legislator in the august Congressional ranks is barely a moderate in any other country. Obama himself is more conservative than the Republican president Richard Nixon. This “extremest liberal leadership” claim is such a pot of lard it deserves to be fed back to the hogs.
Next there is “The Elite Media”. Whatever. Giant media conglomerates are owned by fabulously wealthy people. Hmm… are these fab Richie Riches liberals or are they conservatives? I would say – neither. Whoever helps them make more money, that’s who they go for. Believe you me, media has its own agenda (more about that here), and it has little to do with you, me, or Nancy Pelosi.
Next up: “anti-American foreigners and mega-rich environmentalists” and their ‘SMEAR CAMPAIGNS”. Seriously, you guys? I don’t know why you keep talking about this, because the ONLY person any conservative can EVER name as being both “rich” and “liberal” is George Soros. I’ve read books by George Soros. He’s a very smart guy. He made money by being smart, and not by lying, cheating, misleading, bullshitting, or being so crazy he’d sacrifice anyone and anything for the next dollaroo. And he isn’t very liberal, at least by Earth Firster standards. And “anti-American foreigners”? Really. Aren’t you CONSERVATIVES the ones who cheered the stupidest Supreme Court decision ever, where Roberts and Scalia and their pet Clarence Thomas declared money as free speech? So everybody ON EARTH could pour money into political campaigns to get the kind of American laws they wanted? If there were tons of “anti-American foreigners” dumping wads of green into Democratic coffers, not only would the Dems win a lot more elections, but we would be hearing it blared from your dozens of media outlets both ceaselessly and tirelessly. So I’d say … it ain’t happening.
Okay, this one is priceless. “Wall Street Liberals.” Well, we know that Wall Street SOMETHINGS screwed over the entire PLANET with their magical money-generating bullshittorama of a few years back. And I know Geithner was a Wall Street loyalist, and Larry Summers is a dick, and neither of those guys was any kind of liberal whatsoever. I know that the conservatives HATE Elizabeth Warren, the scourge of American bankers and hedge-fund managers. And I know the conservatives do NOT support such measures as, let’s say, taxing each exchange of stock a mill or two (that’s “mill” as in “one-tenth of a penny”, not “mill” as in what you want to win in the lottery), or making speculators actually take possession of that hundred-thousand barrels of crude oil, as opposed to buying it on paper, stashing it on paper, and then selling it on paper when the big-ass shortage hits in the real world because they were playing their little money games. “Wall Street liberals”. Hah. Stupidest, most transparent claim ever.
“Hollywood partisans.” Whuh? What are they talking about? Like, Bruce Willis is a real librul, fer shur, and then there’s that librul bastard Arnold Schwarzzeneger. Oh yeah, but my favorite is Craig T. Nelson, who famously said on the Glenn Beck show on Fox TV 2009, “What happened to society? I go into business, I don’t make it, I go bankrupt. I’ve been on food stamps and welfare, did anybody help me out? No. No.”
I get it, though. There’s a lot of actors with various hobbies and causes that could be considered “liberal”, like sympathy for the homeless, or women’s rights to health care, or even (gasp!) vegetarianism. And there’s the whole Hollywood gay thing, which drives authoritative bossypants religious people straight up a wall.
But do these Hollywood folk have any real power? Let’s see, there’s probably a couple hundred of them at the most generous estimate, and none of them is anywhere near as rich as Bill Gates. In fact, there isn’t a billionaire among them, unlike the Republican Party. And how, exactly, do those two hundred non-billionaire actors affect the nation? Explain it to me. If you don’t like a movie they make, don’t freaking go to it. That’ll show ’em. Cuz if there’s anywhere near the huge majority of Americans you claim on your side, the movie will quickly sink, and you will be free forever of annoying people in Hollywood holding any kind of view that does not entirely match your own. Just like the McCarthy blacklisting days! Then we can look forward to a steady diet of “Little House on the Prairie”, and “Breaking Bad” will be entirely erased from our collective memories.
You’d like that, wouldn’t you, you crazy werewolf Republicans. Your happy place is where everybody thinks and acts exactly like YOU. But it’s a big ol’ complicated world, and it will never be the way you think it should be – even when you paper the country with malarkey like “The Gang of Five”. What a futile, self-serving, transparent, oh-so-obvious attempt to scare people over to your questionable position.
Really. It’s embarrassing. Stop it.