Rush Limbaugh Wet Dream 1: Ressentiment

W. Kiernan WKiernan at concentric.net
Sun Sep 13 19:01:46 PDT 1998


Marta Russell wrote:
>
> MScoleman at aol.com wrote:
>
> > In a message dated 98-09-13 00:30:38 EDT, bautiste writes:
> >
> > > Isn't the reason the ruling elite want to get rid of Clinton
> > > because they can use his sex life as a way to delegitimize the
> > > so-called Liberals: "See what that life-style and political
> > > system lead to..."
> >
> > They do this by playing on the repressed anger of over-40 boomers
> > who fantasize doing what Clinton did but can't (won't). The
> > self-righteous anger I hear people expressing sounds like repressed
> > desires to me.

Sounds like pure unmitigated hogwash to me. On the few occasions I've heard the "sexual irregularity = unfitness to govern" thesis in person, I've called the parroting fool on it, and after a couple short sharp arguments they blush and shut right up. Nobody I've met yet actually wants the Sex Gestapo to bust down their bedroom door.

Mostly you hear that crap in the mass media, where, by definition, the ordinary fellow can't speak back, at least not and be heard. Please note that despite months of relentless, entirely one-sided propaganda, a majority of Americans STILL think Clinton's legendary dick is not public business, much less political business. So it seems there still remains a practical limit to the hypnotic effect of television.


> > > Isn't what's hapening here a classic case of _ressentiment_?
> >
> > hmmmm, suddenly all the republicans are fessing up to illicit
> > affairs (three in the last week)

THREE!? I only heard about that pig Burton and that moron Chenowith. Who else? Dish dish DISH!


> > -- sounds like the conservatives are as afraid of the starr
> > inquisition as the liberals. maggie coleman mscoleman at aol.com
>
> A reliable source told me that Clinton has been collecting details of
> members of congress personal lives for years - their sexual liaisons -
> and basically let them know that if he goes down they will go down.
> Anyone else hear of anything similar?

Fuckin' A! I love porno, so long as it's good (i.e. amusing) literature.

Although this sex inquisition is far more akin to rape than healthy happy humping, so I still find it outrageously, criminally vile; in ordinary porno, so I understand, the participants are willing volunteers, plus they get paid too.

There is a morning radio talk show in my town hosted by a couple of loudmouth asses initialed "M.J." and "B.J.". You can just imagine how idiotic this radio program is. Today in the car with my innocent little son Felix on the way home from the ball game, I saw billboards bare against the sky aside the Interstate. On the left side of the billboard there's a picture of the one ass "M.J.", and at the bottom of it it's labeled "M.J.," and on the right side of the billboard is a picture of La Lewinsky, and at the bottom it's labeled "B.J.".

Has anyone here noticed that the Republiswine have finally, once and for all, hammered a wood tent peg right through the heart of censorship in the U.S.A.? I'll bet they didn't really intend to do that. I mean censorship of sexy stuff, of course; we citizens still won't be allowed to know what the damned CIA are up to.

Yours WDK - WKiernan at concentric.net

** No one will be watching us! - McCartney ** ** ** ** She's well acquainted with the touch of a velvet hand ** ** Like a lizard on a window pane - Lennon **



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list