Right-Wing Pundits Are Wrong About Everything (Example #232,120,100)

For those not caught up to speed with what's happening in London, there's a series of riots that have been happening (or perhaps it's one continuous riot) over the last five days or so. While the reasons are complex, and I don't have a full grasp on British politics, I can sum it up the best I know how as it follows: London is burning, some people have been hurt, the cause is austerity measures (read: open economic warfare on the poor), David Cameron reminds me of Adam Susan from V for Vendetta, and the Right-wing Media in America is using it as yet another chance to make themselves look like fools. While I can't speak for the full depth of British Politics, the BBC article I linked to above is very in depth on the matter. I'll trust the BBC before I trust any American News Outlet any day of the week.

While I can't dissect the full reasons behind the riots, due to my inexperience with the British political system and the danger inherent in watering it down or simplifying the causes, what I can do is analyze the impact that the riots have had on the political right in this country (this country being the U.S.) This article by the Guardian (another news outlet I'd trust before I trust any American media source, but not before the BBC) does a good job of recording the Right-wing noise-machine's reaction in this country to the riots, for me to pull apart and mock viciously. So, here we go.
The first talking head who's reaction they record is Sean Hannity. Now, Hannity is a propagandist and lying sack of shit. I'm sorry, that was an insult to sacks of shit. Anyway, Hannity's response was probably handed down to him by his masters at Fox News, but whether it's their words or his, it doesn't reduce the degree of stupid behind them any at all.

I'm looking at what's going on in London right now and the rioting that's taking place there. Rioting is taking place in large part because of austerity measures because their country's going bankrupt. We should be learning from their mistakes but we're not; and people are out there, they're blaming conservatives, they're blaming the government, they're blaming "rich people" that it's their fault. They've got 16,000 police officers in London trying to handle this – more than they've ever had – and I'm thinking this sounds a lot like America ten, 12, 15 years down the road, because once those promises can never be fulfilled [sic].

They only call it class warfare when we fight back.

His major worry is that maybe, just maybe, America's will get fed up with the Right's almost paraphilia with economic cuts and totally misunderstanding of how economics and riot. That's a legitimate concern. And he's even got the reason right - it's the austerity cuts. Of course, he's also worried that we'll blame the right people too (psst: Hannity, you're wrong. When you're talking about British politics, remember: American Economic Conservative = British Economic Liberal; British Economic Conservative = American Economic Liberal; I'm pretty sure he knows that, but he's playing it to the advantage to further confuse his audience. There's a reason communists wear red - the conservative color - while economic libertarians and liberals were blue. If you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance, baffle 'em with bullshit. That's been Fox's motto for I don't know how how long).

What promises is he talking about? Social Security, Medicare/Medicate, other social safety nets - you know, the things that the Right in this country have been working so hard to rip apart for god knows how long. Wanna guess why those promises might never be fulfilled? Could it because you fools, with no grasp of economics whatsoever, cut them a long time ago? In which case, it'd be your fault, and blaming the Conservatives would be a legitimate thing here?

I blame rich people. They don't pay their 'effin' taxes. If they paid their damn taxes, then we wouldn't have to worry about cuts, now would we? And none of this garbage about how "Oh, but 50% of people don't pay taxes!" Yeah, stupid shit. It's because they can't. It's because they don't make enough. Rich people make more than enough; and while I'm not saying we need to go in and soak them dry and take every cent of what they make, they need to actually pay their taxes once in a while instead of writing their stuff off.

He discussed this problem with Rand Paul, the image of how a stopped clock (on military time) could be right. Lair Hannity continued to spew:

Half the country doesn't pay taxes; 15% of the country now is on food stamps, Senator, and the chairman of S&P said they upgraded after they downgraded five countries, the average length of time that takes is between nine and 18 years. We're not going to be upgraded anytime soon, in spite of congressional senate investigations. That's not going to happen.

You know, I just answered that. How pervasive the lie is, that I know it'll come up on any given discussion about taxes. It's like their trump card; I'm reminded of how stupid fanatics think they've got you when they throw "only a fool doesn't have God in his heart" - and then they run their victory lap, patting themselves on the back for coming up with a one move checkmate that consists of moving the pawn on the far right one square and calling it a victory. Schrodinger's Logic in action, folks.

15% of the country is on food stamps. This is a bad thing. The government needs to get out there and spend more money to put these people back to work so they aren't living on food stamps. Oh, wait. You mean they're Black people on food stamps (or stereotyped). Kick 'em off. Don't need no welfare queens.

The bottom line, for both men, is that austerity cuts in America will prevent riots in London... sparked by austerity cuts.

At this point, I'd ask who they think they're fooling, but we know who they're fooling. And their fools enjoy every minute of it.

Limbaugh the Last Man had a different take on it:

All this is happening 'cause of rich people, the people that got businesses, the conservatives. That's why all this is happening. You're dubious about this? They burn down the stores to show the rich people we can destroy what they have so that they will have nothing, too. We can burn down the property of the rich people so that they've got nothing, either.

You'll notice he has no delusions about the economic element of it. That's unusual for Rush, because he's usually suffering from any number of delusions, none of which make sense.

Dig his second quote: "They burn down the stores to show the rich people we can destroy what they have so that they will have nothing, too. We can burn down the property of the rich people so that they've got nothing, either."

Why does this sound familiar?

Oh, yeah:

Limbaugh: I'm happy to be the last man standing. I'm honored to be the last man standing. Yeah, I'm the true maverick. I can do more than four words. I could say I hope he fails and I could do a brief explanation of why. You know, I want to win. If my party doesn't, I do. If my party has sacrificed the whole concept of victory, sorry, I'm now the Republican in name only, and they are the sellouts.

When poor people destroy everything in the process of getting what they want, it's a crime. When rich people do it, it's called "winning" and "being a true maverick". 

Of course, it could just be that Rushbo doesn't actually mean what he says. Which, of course, would make him a liar. But I'd never call him that.

They live in a full-fledged socialist country. They have their equivalent of food stamps. They have interminable unemployment. They have free medical care, ostensibly. This is what they were promised. These were the people that bought into the false promises of socialism. These are the people that bought into the false promises of Utopia, and who are they mad at? They are mad at people who didn't! They are mad at people who are self-reliant. They're mad at people who are making something of themselves independently. They think they have been defrauded.

There's those food stamps again. What, does the right have something against people eating? They want to starve people who don't have work or don't make enough money because they're chronically underemployed? Is it because they're stamps?

Ooh... he's just jealous because he has to fly to the Caribbean to get his free medical care.

False promises of socialism. Which is totally different from the false promises of capitalism. And the false promises of Utopia, and now they're mad at the people who are "self-reliant" people. People like Rush, who make a living peddling bullshit to a hive-mind collective who stupidly considers themselves independent human beings with independent thoughts while proudly naming themselves "ditto heads."

These people who use national health care and live on food stamps are deadbeats. They've done nothing for themselves. How dare they not pay 104 dollars a month for crappy-ass health insurance. How dare they not pay 200 dollars a month in groceries when they only bring home 600 dollars a month. How dare these people, who are chronically underemployed and working two, three jobs not make something of themselves. How dare they not make enough money to support themselves, like the rich people like Paris Hilton. How dare they.

Once again, the implication is this: austerity cuts will prevent riots caused by austerity cuts.

At least O'Reilly had his head about him:

The difference between America and Great Britain is that here in America, many of us are armed because of the second amendment. In Great Britain, they don't like guns, as you mentioned, the cops don't even carry guns. But here is a really good example of if you are a shop owner or a store owner and you don't have a gun, you're in big trouble. Now, is [sic] any of that been raised by the BBC and the other liberal British press that maybe the cops should be tougher and maybe should be armed?

Or not.

54 fatalities in the Los Angeles riots caused by guns. Anyone have any figures on how many people were killed or injured by guns during these riots? Any?


1.

With another 7 caused by various things (according to the article), for a total of 8.

That's 8 too many. But that's a far cry from 54. So yes, guns solve everything.