Swing And A Miss: The Progressives Don’t Get It

John Baglow, the progressive writer who authors the site “Dawg’s Blawg”, has responded today to my response to his original post about Michael Coren denigrating deceased Trooper Karine Blais.

Not only does he get every important part of his argument wrong, he does so in spectacularly arrogant fashion, or roughly par for the progressive course. He begins by utilizing the old “you’re a racist” routine in order to discredit me before proceeding, knowing that kind of assertion will work to encourage most of his ideological allies, and then proceeds to speculate that I was put up to the task by military blogger Mark Collins. Of course it is needless to say this was dressed up with faux-creative writing skills, accompanied by the kind of smarmy posturing and ad hominems that so frequently characterizes the attacks from “the left”.

In two short paragraphs he manages to say that I’m: racist, brainwashed, childlike, unintelligent, and irrelevant. That’s just his preamble ad hominems, of course, to ensure that he has a fallback in the event that his actual argument falls flat on it’s wobbly face.

And so Dr.Dawg begins to swing the bat… and misses. Strike one:

Indeed Damian Brooks eventually responded quite capably to Coren’s vicious little rant: I noted that, and linked to his post. At that point we were all on the same page. The problem was that the hawkling was holding the book upside down.

See, my post wasn’t about Afghanistan at all–not about our doomed mission, not about the steady descent of that puppet-state into corruption, tyranny and misogyny. It was about respect.

See, I know Baglows’ post wasn’t about Afghanistan at all, which was entirely the point of mine. That he can’t muster the moral consistency to fight for women’s rights wherever they may be oppressed, whether a deceased Canadian female soldier being denigrated in the Canadian media, or women marching for their rights in the third world, says all that needs to be said about his hypocrisy. How can one talk about “respect” for women, any women, if one’s silence on the rights of women in the third world are complicit in their continued oppression?

Baglow then drones on, trying to explain how and why progressive writers chose to write about the Coren slight on Trooper Blais. That part was already evident to anyone who has the least bit of respect for women. That is to say, that everyone who read Corens article would have wanted to respond in the exact same way. The point, “dripping, as it were” is that progressive bloggers can only muster outrage where it pertains to simple, reconcilable, easy fights. A white man denigrates a white woman in Canada? Why, serve that up on toast with a side of light Cream Cheese, that’s a perfect article for dear Baglow. It’s perfect because Coren is answerable to the Canadian public as a journalist, and because what people say here will have an affect on his future syndication. It doesn’t take much flexing of the mental muscles to pound out an entry that calls out Coren any more than it would to call Harper a fascist. It’s reflexive by this point.

Not that I would have had a problem with it, as I mentioned before, but for Baglow’s insidious comment that suggested the right side of the blogosphere was “curiously silent” on the matter. The implied meaning, was of course that we here on the right don’t care about women very much. Hell, we probably agreed with Michael Coren. Right?

Baglow’s piece, then, “was unconscionable because it used Trooper Blais’ death, her body barely cold, to score a cheap and vulgar point” on conservatives. “It was an uncalled-for [...] attack” on many of us who, unlike dear Baglow, don’t have access to a computer during the day, busy as we are with these little things called “jobs”.

This kind of intellectual dishonesty is worst coming from cretins like Baglow and Canadian Cynic, because they form their opinions first, and then work around how one might be able to shoe horn a situation into that preconceived notion. Conservatives are racists and misogynists, ergo goes the painful non sequitur, no posts about Michael Coren’s comments on Trooper Blais constitutes a “curious silence” that resembles my preconceived notions.

How goddamned convenient.

I can safely predict that Baglow will never own up to his intellectual dishonesty, cognitive dissonances, moral relativism, and internal contradictions. And after all of this arguing, he still hasn’t answered the one question that he and his friends avoid at all costs: how can the so-called progressives say they care about the inalienable rights of women in the third world, if they aren’t up to the job of defending the only barriers to their regression back to barbarism and gender apartheid? How very selective women’s “rights” are: For me, but not for thee.