Login

Register

Member List

RSS Feed

Amanda | Contact

Auguste | Contact

Jesse | Contact

Pam | Contact

Next entry: Rick Perry praises a hard-working undocumented immigrant Previous entry: Enjoy this video. Do it.

Greg Gutfeld’s House of Delusions

I can't even blog about the heavy levels of wingnuttery in the Republican debate, since right now it's a game of "what's going to piss off the liberals the most?", and that makes me profoundly sad not just for the fate of our nation but for the mental health of conservatives.  It just can't be good stewing non-stop in hate of a largely mythical "liberal elite", hate so profound that you will gladly destroy the nation just to piss them off.  One thing that's increasing my sadness about this situation is the constant stream of clips from Greg Gutfeld's Fox News show. The primary purpose of his show appears to be telling his conservative audience how much better they are than those silly liberals, but the effect is not one of feeling like they actually are better than silly liberals.  It actually causes that same feeling you get when you read some Nice Guy® on an anti-feminist forum ranting about how stupid bitches don't know what they're missing by passing him over in favor of men who shower regularly and don't wax poetic about Ayn Rand on dates.  The delusional myths that Gutfeld and his friends feed their audience tell you nothing about liberals, but are an excellent demonstration of what kind of anxieties Gutfeld thinks are fueling the folks in Wingnutia. Like this rant:

There's so much irrationality here that it's amazing.  Gutfeld denies that science has any value, but then says, "Listen to your doctor."  But your doctor knows what she knows because of science.  It's not actually the white coat.  I'm also guessing there's more to that study than he's saying, stuff that could actually negate the conclusions he's drawing.  The entire segment is dedicated to exploiting the audience's resentments of people that are smarter than them in order to argue that we should basically shut down any kind of non-corporate-funded research, i.e. bring an end to science conducted for the good of humanity instead of some corporation's bottom line. But the to get the buy-in from the audience for this argument, the strategy is to drum up resentment against others for being smarter than you and having better health habits.  Specifically, Gutfeld says, "Why are health food freaks always so sickly looking?"

Now, this comment is just sad-making.  It's supposed to be "funny", but unlike real humor, it has no grounding in reality.  Instead, it causes the non-wingnut audience to feel bad for the people laughing at this, trying desperately to convince themselves that while they get winded climbing a single staircase and they haven't lifted their hands over their heads in a decade, that it's those other people who look "sickly".  Now, it's true that there's no one-on-one correlation between being healthy and looking healthy, and of course "lookingly sickly" is a subjective statement, but this comment is just plain delusional, and in the most obvious sort of way.  Someone who laughs at this is so sad that I can't even be angry at them.  Their need to believe makes me profoundly uneasy, especially since I can see with my own eyes the evidence that the same people laughing at this joke don't really believe it.  After all, one of the reasons Sarah Palin is idolized is because she's youthful and healthy-looking---she's a runner!---and she can be paraded around as another balm for widespread insecurities.  According to Gutfeld's joke, she looks "sickly", but obviously the people out in Wingnutia don't actually think that.

Then there was this whole situation on his show:

Even within this screed, there's a contradiction.  Andrea Tantaros claims both that feminists have sex "like men", i.e. for pleasure, and that we're sexually unsatisfied because we're not getting any.  But it's an even more profoundly stupid statement if taken in the larger context of Fox News and the conservative movement.  After all, the number one priority of the Republican party after the 2010 elections was punishing "feminists" for getting some by defunding Planned Parenthood, restricting abortion out of existence, and just generally expanding the angry rhetoric around female sexuality.  Overall, the tone of the conservative movement regarding female sexuality is one of being furious at anyone else, especially anyone female, who might actually be having fun....with someone else.  "Keep your legs shut!" is the conservative mantra these days.  The concern is actually that feminists are getting some. 

This is in the same category as "health freaks look sickly".  It's a bit of self-delusion fed to a gullible audience who is consumed with jealousy and hatred and who are being instructed to channel those feelings towards "liberals", who are portrayed as an undifferientiated mass of people that are a cross between Rob Lowe's character on "Parks and Recreation" and kinksters who have completely fresh and unique sexual experiences every night.  And the instructions for sticking it to these people for thinking they're so cool is to vote Republican, because it's better to burn this country down than share it with people who make you feel so insecure.

------

Registration is now required! We're still in the process of getting it all squared away, so for the moment don't forget to Login or Register using the links in the upper left menu before starting to write your comment.

Posted by Amanda Marcotte on 07:48 AM • (42) Comments

It’s practice. If you believe six impossible things every morning before breakfast, it’s so much easier to believe that social security is a ponzi scheme or that it takes balls to execute an innocent man.

Comment #1: paul  on  09/08  at  09:12 AM

It is hard for me to tell the difference between those of us laughing at the Faux news idiots and those who are laughing at their jokes, at least until the laughing stops and someone says something.  The reactions to whatever is said can usually let you gauge.

Comment #2: helen w. h.  on  09/08  at  09:19 AM

I am actually genuinely terrified by the wingnut reaction to Perry’s execution stats.  They literally just hate America and want as many of its people killed as possible, full stop.

Comment #3: Punditus Maximus  on  09/08  at  10:37 AM

I think the best explanation of this madness comes from psychologist Bob Altemeyer and his (free downloadable http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/ ) book “The Authoritarians”.  While his research is not ironclad, I think he makes a very strong case for an “authoritarian personality type” which is more fearful, more self-righteous, more likely to punish, less moral, and less curious than the general population.  Even further than #1 suggests about believing six impossible things, authoritarians will often believe six impossible things _that contradict each other_ and have not mental trouble with it.

I really don’t know what you do, politically speaking, with a group of aggressive morons who can’t be reasoned with.  They seem to make up like 20-30% of the nation.

Comment #4: Jake  on  09/08  at  10:39 AM

Of course, if you were visiting FOX News a few years ago, you’d be hearing about how “Big is Beautiful” was a liberal plot to fatten your kids up.  And if you tuned in a few years before that, I’m sure you could find a news story about how food stamps make people fat, and that’s bad.  And then go back a little further and you’ll get to hear about how black people are notoriously unhealthy and the liberals aren’t doing anything about it, which proves that you should vote Republican.  And on and on.

None of these complaints are intended to maintain any consistency.  They’re not intended to guide people towards solutions.  The only purpose of these segments is to make people blame liberals for the sum total of their problems.  It’s day after day after day of “liberals ruin everything - even the things that contradict the other things.”  They’re propaganda at its finest, pitching conservatism as the panacea for whatever ails you.

I’m still waiting for the ads to start running that literally start hawking Quack Brand Snake Oil (TM).

Comment #5: Zifnab  on  09/08  at  10:46 AM

“Why are health food freaks always so sickly looking?”

Health food freaks. You’re healthy. You’re a fucking freak.

I’m so tired of this kind of bullshit. Seriously.

Comment #6: Mark  on  09/08  at  10:55 AM

The first one, which starts off as basically “nutrition science changes”, is almost passable. The opening bit about salt is kind of smarmy, but basically fine. Then it just descends into weirdness with the global warming shots and the liberal bashing.

But that second clip??  WOW, that’s some grad-a distilled wignut there. “I’d pay if it was a good long-term investment”?  Creepy.

Comment #7: LC  on  09/08  at  10:58 AM

I should add the bizarre “Why do health food people look sickly” bit you mentioned to the weirdness the first clip wanders off into.

Comment #8: LC  on  09/08  at  10:59 AM

The Tea Partier, the Union rep and the CEO are sitting at a table with a plate of a dozen cookies in the middle.  The CEO takes eleven cookies, turns to the Tea Partier, and says, “that union guy wants to steal your cookie.”  Conservative strategy in a nutshell.

Comment #9: Kit-Kat  on  09/08  at  11:15 AM

I can’t even watch these clips anymore, I made it as far as the woman complaining about Mayor Bloomberg (a Republican for #$%^ sake) being an oppressive nanny-stater, and I had to stop.  The stupid, it burns…

Comment #10: progrocker  on  09/08  at  11:20 AM

Addendum: I have the greatest respect for the people at MMFA.  I certainly wouldn’t be able to watch this drivel all day, even if I was paid to do it.

Comment #11: progrocker  on  09/08  at  11:21 AM

  Sometimes I think the conservatives stole their mantra from the old Groucho Marx song “I’m Against It.”

  Today, they’re trashing Michelle Obama for saying that we need to eat healthier; fifteen years ago they were trashing Pres. Clinton for being fat.  Rep. Bob Dornan even sneered that Clinton’s jogs with the Secret Service were “girly girly” and some kind of plot to lure gay people into voting for Clinton. No, really.  Of course, Rep. Dornan saw gay plots every where, but still…

Comment #12: Blue Jean  on  09/08  at  11:22 AM

It’s like a black hole of stupid; once a mind crosses the event horizon, no coherency can escape.

Comment #13: atheist  on  09/08  at  11:25 AM

Addendum Post-Script (or whatever): That article about the Ayn Rand-based dating site..  WTF?  First of all, every excerpt was from a male users page.  (Suprise of all suprises.  I’m sure that site is like 95% guys.)  And if you ever thought perhpaps, maybe, Randroids are socially well-adjusted individuals, the excerpts will surely wipe away any thought of that particular delusion.

Comment #14: progrocker  on  09/08  at  11:28 AM

The basic wingnut line about feminism appears to be, “If any woman anywhere fails to act in accordance with our stereotype of feminists, every feminist in America has to answer for it.” It’s not like they’re actually concerned with whether or not women or happy, but conservatives latch easily onto meaningless “gotcha!” arguments.

Comment #15: Triplanetary  on  09/08  at  11:38 AM

Wow, progrocker, I was too fearful to click the link. Now I’m sad I didn’t do it before.

Comment #16: felagund  on  09/08  at  12:00 PM

Wow, it was hard to listen to that strained laughter after, “I’d pay if I considered it a good long-term investment.” Of course, on Fox that’s not a warning to stop, it’s an invitation for several men who look like trolls to discuss on-air whether or not the supermodel/career woman next to him is a good long-term investment. Yeesh. And, “I’m going to eat a bag of normal chips after this segment?” Uh huh. I’m pretty sure women who work on air for Fox know damn well they have to watch their weight. I’ve got to say, though, they didn’t interrupt and ridicule the women in these segments as much as they usually do on Fox.

Comment #17: MoseyMcShuffleson  on  09/08  at  12:02 PM

This is in the same category as “health freaks look sickly”.  It’s a bit of self-delusion fed to a gullible audience who is consumed with jealousy and hatred and who are being instructed to channel those feelings towards “liberals”

Oh yeah?!  Well, liberals are jeal;ous of conservatives because of, um,...

I’ll start this rant again.

Comment #18: Phoenician in a time of Romans  on  09/08  at  12:14 PM

Being inconsistent about your crazy beliefs is more annoying than just having crazy beliefs, so they’re going to keep that as a strategy.

Comment #19: Satanicpanic  on  09/08  at  12:29 PM

#18: Phoenician in a time of Romans:

I’m a little jealous of them for having politicians that pander to their base. Does that count?

Comment #20: mr_subjunctive  on  09/08  at  12:37 PM

“Please note: If you’re overweight, I won’t date you. If you believe in God, I won’t date you. If you vote for Democrats, I won’t date you.”

Whoof!  Dodged a bullet there!

Comment #21: Older  on  09/08  at  12:44 PM

@Comment #19: Satanicpanic on 09/08 at 12:29 PM

Being inconsistent about your crazy beliefs is more annoying than just having crazy beliefs, so they’re going to keep that as a strategy.

This is a question I’ve been pondering lately as well. But I’m not sure I agree that having inconsistent, crazy beliefs is worse than having consistent, crazy beliefs.

For instance, say I believe that I’m being followed by wee murderous leprechauns who want me dead. Now, does that belief get less crazy if I’m also afraid of garden gnomes and can’t stand short people? Honestly, I’m not sure it does. I suspect that any attempt to be consistent about my craziness is also, well, just crazy. It actually might be better if I was inconsistent, and was afraid of leprechauns, but was neutral toward short people; this might make me more high functioning. In short I think consistency in madness is overrated.

Comment #22: atheist  on  09/08  at  01:15 PM

Whoof!  Dodged a bullet there!

Yeah, my thoughts exactly.

Comment #23: atheist  on  09/08  at  01:15 PM

I found Greg Gutfeld moderately amusing when he was the editor of Stuff Magazine. Then Stuff ended and I grew up. I shouldn’t have been surprised that he turned out to be a right-wing toolshed.

Comment #24: BrianX  on  09/08  at  01:26 PM

It’s not the message that conservatives care for, it’s the feeling they get from the message, which is why they spout platitudes or say things that side by side don’t make sense. The messages are designed to stroke the lizard brain, not to engage the neo-cortex.

Comment #25: R.T.  on  09/08  at  03:40 PM

R.T. got it right.

Comment #26: catfood  on  09/08  at  04:31 PM

The only interesting point that Gutfeld made was that there are always studies to dispute other studies.  Now, the Fox & Friends style panels always like to make note of how many taxpayer dollars are spent on studies to demonstrate this or that.  In this particular case, it was a study showing that sodium is not always bad, that it can be safely used in moderation by people who don’t have high blood pressure, and that a blood-sodium level that is too low can be dangerous. 

What they didn’t tell us is that the reason for the danger is that sodium and potassium are the major electrolytes responsible for transmitting electrical impulses from the central nervous system to the organs, and that if our sodium is too low, we could have a heart attack because the heart can’t hear the brain when it tells the heart to pump.  But that’s beside the point. 

The point is that right wingnut groups like Marcus Bachman’s “pray away the gay” clinic, Focus on the Family, and the Heritage Foundation have staffers who do nothing but write grant applications all day long.  Same as the private corporations who are doing stem cell research.  The fraudulent quacks like Bachman, Dobson, and Delay have just as much chance of getting a Federal research grant as the legitimate scientists doing the stem cell research.  Therefore, if Bachman and Dobson publish a study that contradicts whatever the stem cell researchers publish, it doesn’t mean that the science changed.  It means that the same tax money that funds scientifically rigorous experiments is the same tax money that funds whatever right wingnut screed the right-wingers decided to have published next. 

Funny how nobody on Fox even mentions that you can determine which studies are worth believing based simply on the “methodology” section of the publication. 

Comment #27: Rachel Tyrel  on  09/08  at  04:51 PM

Well, I do agree that people who have fallen for the high-carb, low fat, low protein scam look sickly, but that’s because they’re starving themselves of necessary nutrients.

if our sodium is too low, we could have a heart attack because the heart can’t hear the brain when it tells the heart to pump.  But that’s beside the point.

Didn’t something like that happen to Terri Schiavo?

Comment #28: keshmeshi  on  09/08  at  05:41 PM

It is possible to have health problems if sodium is too low, and that’s why salt was so valued in the past.  But it’s incredibly rare today, and usually happens only among people with special or severely restricted diets or problems absorbing nutrients due to medical issues.  Salt is in basically everything, and it shouldn’t be a concern to even the healthiest eater.  A crouton or a single olive on your daily salad should be more than enough to keep most people alive.

Comment #29: bananacat  on  09/08  at  06:01 PM

I processed unhealthy health food nuts as the kind of people who’ve jumped on some bad junk science diet that doesn’t provide there nutritional needs or at least not in the way they’re practicing it. But that kind of complexity in eating habits is too much for this crowd. Eating is easy; anything that requires a little forethought or research (lets just say effort) can’t be natural.

Comment #30: scrumby  on  09/08  at  06:32 PM

@BrianX I did not know he edited Stuff magazine, but I am not remotely surprised.

Comment #31: Liz212  on  09/08  at  07:28 PM

Didn’t something like that happen to Terri Schiavo?:

Her heart attack was thought to be caused by electrolyte imbalance, but not due to low sodium.

Initial medical assessments

Her medical chart contained a note that “she apparently has been trying to keep her weight down with dieting by herself, drinking liquids most of the time during the day and drinking about 10–15 glasses of iced tea.” Upon admission to the hospital, her serum potassium level was noted to be very low, at 2.0 mEq/L; the normal range for adults is 3.5–5.0 mEq/L. Her sodium and calcium levels were normal.[7] Electrolyte imbalance is often caused by drinking excessive fluids. A serious consequence of low potassium levels can be heart rhythm abnormalities, including sudden arrhythmia death syndrome.[8] Vomiting, a self-induced act for many bulimic patients, is another cause of low potassium levels. Terri’s husband, Michael, later filed and won a malpractice suit against her obstetrician on the basis that he failed to diagnose bulimia as the cause of her infertility.[9] She was eventually switched from being fed by a nasogastric feeding tube to a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) feeding tube.[10][11]

There have been recent cases of hyponatremia, because marathon runners overhydrate, but that’s also related to water intoxication.

Comment #32: Dark Avenger Guardian Chow Mein  on  09/08  at  08:45 PM

Liz212:

Not only that, he eventually got promoted to the flagship, Maxim UK.

You know, I think I have some magazines I long since should have taken to the dump… in my defense, haven’t opened a single one in years.

Comment #33: BrianX  on  09/08  at  11:16 PM

It just can’t be good stewing non-stop in hate of a largely mythical “liberal elite”, hate so profound that you will gladly destroy the nation just to piss them off.

Wish I thought these people’s motivations were that complicated.  I no longer think they want to destroy the nation in order to annoy the liberal elite; I now think that they want to destroy the nation just ‘cuz.

Comment #34: bekabot  on  09/08  at  11:57 PM

It’s sad to see people who actively choose ignorance and stupidity. It’s even more disappointing to see people who actively choose to propagate ignorance and stupidity, which is essentially Fox News’ business model.

Comment #35: Dan2108  on  09/09  at  12:51 AM

I’m glad to see you recovered before morning.  This post is a pretty great example of why I read your work.

Comment #36: megamahan  on  09/09  at  01:29 AM

bekabot:

I don’t think fundies do anything for the lulz—their worldview teaches them that having fun is selfish.

If you want to see what they’re after, go look at some right-wing/Christian-oriented Y2K literature. We’re talking about people who sincerely believe they’ll be the last ones standing when the shit hits the fan, and that everyone is going to come groveling to them because the nonbelievers were out having gay sex with pregnant women and then getting them abortions while pissing on churchgoers’ cheerios. (More or less the same goes with the Paultards.) They want the opportunity to be smug, and certain among them will do anything they can to make that happen.

Comment #37: BrianX  on  09/09  at  02:14 AM

Comment #37: BrianX

I really have to object to the -tard construction. People with mental disabilities aren’t bad things to be used as an insult to others, and there are plenty of ways to insult a group or individuals without using words or constructions that slur under privileged and oppressed groups.

I understand that the construction is common and you may be using it without realizing the further implications, but it contributes to the oppression of a disadvantaged group to use them as a pejorative as it reinforces the idea that it is bad or wrong to be the people being used as an insult.

I’m not condemning you or calling you bad or anything, I’m just writing this so you and others may be aware of unintended oppressive messaging. (:

I think that it is important to communicate my objection as I feel very strongly about the disparaging people with mental disabilities as much as many who comment in this blog would feel about the disparaging of female persons and women, disparaging of sexual minorities, and disparaging of POC in the US.

I won’t write anything more about this subject in this thread so as to avoid a derailment.

Comment #38: R.T.  on  09/09  at  04:06 AM

Anyone saw Buddy Roemer on Maddow? He seemed reasonable.

Comment #39: Baruk  on  09/09  at  08:08 AM

@14: Wow, that’s a lot of holier-than-thou messaging for a bunch of self-identified athiests.

Do conservatives even have a platform?  They spend all this time picking apart liberals as people and/or politicians, but they rarely seem to advance arguments of their own. Everything they do is basically a reaction to liberals. It would be sad if it wasn’t working so well.

Comment #40: Jayn Newell  on  09/09  at  01:06 PM

RT: Fair enough.

Comment #41: BrianX  on  09/09  at  01:06 PM

If you want to see what they’re after, go look at some right-wing/Christian-oriented Y2K literature. We’re talking about people who sincerely believe they’ll be the last ones standing when the shit hits the fan, and that everyone is going to come groveling to them because the nonbelievers were out having gay sex with pregnant women and then getting them abortions while pissing on churchgoers’ cheerios. (More or less the same goes with the Paultards.) They want the opportunity to be smug, and certain among them will do anything they can to make that happen.

I’ll have to take your word for it.  (Respectfully.)  But my thing is that I’m not all that evolved, so that when I observe the behavior you describe above and then translate it into terms which I can understand, what I’m left with is: “Oooh, destruction!!  Me likee!!”  In other words, just ‘cuz.

 

Comment #42: bekabot  on  09/10  at  03:40 PM
Page 1 of 1 pages
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.