But as such, he's actually quite useful as a bellwether, as he's just going to repeat what all the other conservatives are saying, and you don't need to worry about him going out on a limb with his own thoughts, as he rarely has any. In fact, he has no problem hyping contradictory posts, because he has no inner-consistency beyond the need to blame liberals for everything. It all goes straight from his source to his readers with little or no filtering by Donald himself.
And in that regard, I found "his" posts on the anti-healthcare reform mobs to be quite telling.
Here he is on August 3, proudly reporting about how conservatives disrupted Congressman Doggett's rally here in Austin, elating in the "the eruption of protest" from the "angry demonstrators." One of his commenters on that post states that "continued civility" isn't in the public interest.
And here's another from August 3, where he writes about a "freaking amazing" video of an audience which "shouts down" Senator Specter and Secretary Sebelius at a town hall meeting in Philadelphia. Donald describes Sebelius' "extremely frustrated body language" as "priceless" when she is "loudly heckled." He also quotes Atlas Shrugged saying that the "hostility" was growing as Specter and Sebelius are "heckled" and "jeered." The title of Don's post proudly proclaims that "Town Halls Get Results". Apparently, stifling debate was the result they were looking for.
And here we are on August 6, when Donald states that these disruptions are happening because "folks are really mad" and blames the media because they write articles describing the actions of these mad people, which Donald says "feed the anger and cynicism that's erupting at all of these town halls." And another post on that same day, he states that "Voters are steaming mad."
And it seems pretty clear to me that Donald Douglas thinks that the people disrupting these events are extremely angry and he approves of it. I think that's entirely undeniable.
Fuck! Fuck! Fuck! I swear I finished this post the other day and posted it, yet not only is it not posted, but the final draft wasn't saved and all I have is this early draft. Fuck!
Oh well. My point here was that Donald attacks liberals for being angry (as evidenced by posts Donald's made to defend conservative anger, which I no longer have the links to) and knows that anger is bad and hurts the side using it. Yet he continues to cheer on conservative anger and blames the people who made them angry. And he doesn't think twice about these contradictory memes, because that's what he was told to think and reflects what the movement as a whole is saying.
And in contrast, I mentioned how I've always rejected political anger, even when it comes from my side. And my final point was that as an educated PhD, Donald should be the conservative equivalent of my liberal voice of reason, but isn't. And how this shows how doomed conservatives are, as even their "intellectuals" are going batshit crazy and imagine that anger is the answer.
Oh well, I hate rewriting my post, so I guess I'll just chalk this one up to getting blogger'd. Damn. It took me a long time to write that.