The Dim Devil’s Dictionary (D3): “Maudochromatic”

With apologies to Ambrose Bierce, I’m starting a 21st century recension of the Devil’s Dictionary here at Rotten Chestnuts.  But since it hardly takes a wit the level of Bierce to see through dumbass liberal tactics, I’m calling it D3, the Dim Devil’s Dictionary.  Here’s the inaugural entry:

Maud*o*chromatic:  Adj.  Characterized by hysterical appeals to virtue in lieu of any actual argument.  After Maud Flanders from The Simpsons, whose constant refrain in the face of any political or social issue was “won’t somebody please think of the children?!”

My second favorite liberal, Ed Darrell, provides some classic examples here.  The context is a “debate” over high-speed rail, but it’s immaterial.  Witness:

Making nations work well is not so much statism as it is patriotism, and good common sense. Of course, that is a bigger pigeonhole, and it’s not so easy to invent false snark if you’re in favor of patriotism and common sense, and things it causes other patriots to do — like advocate high speed rail.

If you don’t advocate high-speed rail, you’re unpatriotic.

Southwest Airlines ALSO frees people to travel (it’s a Constitutional right, by the way, but what do you care about the Constitution if it costs you money and benefits other people, right?).

Selfish, greedy people hate the Constitution.  And high-speed rail.  Also, “travel” is a Constitutional right.  Who knew?

And get ready for this hissy fit:

You are held completely in thrall to the “statism” that says Americans should have opportunity only if they are rich, that Americans cannot benefit from high speed rail. Oh, you curse the fact that you couldn’t oppose the creation of the interstate highway system (National Defense Highway Act, but who could ever invade us, right?); you rue that liberal Lincoln’s subsidizing the transcontinental railroads, and the giveaways to those lazy louts, the pioneers who settled Wisconsin, Nebraska, Wyoming, Utah, Oregon, California and Colorado — they’ve had their hands out ever since!

Statism? No, Marie Antoinette was right, with “Let them eat cake!” If they’re not smart enough to substitute cake when they can’t afford bread, they DESERVE to have no way to develop economically, no way to travel for jobs or education or pleasure, and they MUST be held in thrall to the oil companies and auto makers!

But he did put “/sarc” afterwards, so that’s ok.  Because otherwise we’d have to order up a fainting couch and a balsam specific, to prevent him from becoming a danger to himself and others.

/sarc.

Meanwhile, the only arguments for high-speed rail are

High speed rails and people being able to get other places, faster, keeps them from the mercy of a centrally managed system

which is exactly bassackwards, and

High speed rail frees people from having to stick in the local community

which is frankly bizarre, coming from someone who in the very next paragraph would go off about those American heroes, the pioneers. Presumably they traveled to “Wisconsin, Nebraska, Wyoming, Utah, Oregon, California and Colorado” in high-speed Conestoga wagons….?

It’s nothing but one long, loud, Maudochromatic screech.

[UPDATE: we're up to hatred of civilization itself.  From mere hatred of humanity

anti-good neighbor, cynical misanthropic political views of any Tea Partier/Remnant GOP/self-proclaimed libertarian

we have progressed to

Yes, Amtrak loses money — all public transportation does. Roads lose a lot more, but we amortize it a little better. Other costs are higher (though EPA finally seems to have done away with the lead-poisoning side effect).

If one counts the massive federal giveaways to get the transcontinental rail routes built out, those railroads are still losing money and always have.

Civilization isn’t free.

Wooo!!!!  I'll keep you posted, but I think we're about to enter the realm of the metaphysical -- what's left to hate, other than "the concept of existence itself?"  Which I'm sure conservatives are also against, because this whole line of "argument" makes so much sense]..

6 thoughts on “The Dim Devil’s Dictionary (D3): “Maudochromatic”

  1. Pingback: D3: Virtue Addiction / Virtue Junkie | Rotten Chestnuts

  2. For starters, Antoinette never said “Let them eat cake.” Ann Coulter completely demolishes the popular perception of Louis XVI and his supposedly pampered wife in her bestselling book “Demonic,” in which she details the many wicked acts of liberal mobs, including the one that overthrew the French monarchy.

    I had a similar conversation about high speed rail over on Facebook awhile back, arguing back and forth with a friend-of-a-friend. Like Ed, he was trying to make the point that high speed rail has worked out extremely well in Europe and Japan. I said, “Be that as it may, it wouldn’t work in the US because our population centers are much more spread out. Here, flying or driving makes more sense.”

    I also pointed out that two other US-sided but Europe-thinking nations (Australia and Canada) don’t have nationwide high speed rail either. They both use conventional (subsidized) diesel locomotives similar to the Amtrak system. His reply was that “long distance travel was irrelevant to the discussion.” No, not really – the entire POINT of the discussion was that long distance travel – of the sort that makes high speed rail impractical – simply doesn’t exist in Europe or Japan because their cities are all pretty close together. That’s not the case in the US, Canada, or Australia.

  3. People who don’t provide free stuff are hating haters who hate.

    There’s an essential confusion between what you can expect from Mommy and what you can expect from almost the whole rest of the world.

    It’s always interesting to explore what people with this mindset are prepared to provide to others, gratis, from their own personal stash of wealth and security.

  4. Pingback: D3: Beachhead Facts | Rotten Chestnuts

  5. Southwest Airlines ALSO frees people to travel (it’s a Constitutional right, by the way

    I guess, then, the government should pay for my vactions in space. After all, it’s “travel”, and it’s my right.

    Wow.

    Aside from the fact that there’s absolutely no mention of anything that specifically or even very very vaguely guarantees a right to “travel”, which in itself is a massively vague term (somebody phone the NBA officials! Apparently “travel” calls are unconstitutional!) … anything that requires someone else to supply a good or service to you is not a “right”.

    • Morgan informs me this Ed Darrell twerp is a teacher. God help his students. Otherwise they must have some…. interesting… answers on the ol’ civics exam. The right to travel? Sure, that’s the fifty-third amendment. It’s right before the infield fly rule, but just after the controversial “bros before hoes” amendment.

      Sheesh. And liberals wonder why we never take them seriously.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>