Right off the bat, I am not an American Conservative.
American Conservatives are too meddlesome and moralistic. They make me sick. They spout individualism and autonomy and republicanism but they are always in your face with their marching orders. They are hypocrites because while they proclaim a symbolic sort of laissez faire attitude that suits their cosmetic political needs, yet they are just as intrusive and meddlesome as your garden variety American liberal who is less subtle about their ambitious progrom of destruction of your Constitutional rights.
American Liberals are the flip-side of the American Conservatives because they have their own brand of personal morality which appears as immorality to many, but it is still a standard of behavior and set of societal expectations your’re expected to abide by lest you be shunned or criminalized.
What makes the typical liberal hypocritical is essentially what makes the conservative the same…the fact they rail against that which they in fact, ARE.
That said, I enjoy reading Gawker on many levels. I really enjoy its snarky vibe. Those biting observations. I enjoy its youthful abandon, and simultaneously, I enjoy the cathartic apoplexy I experience when I read its under-aged, under-experienced, naive commenter’s weak attempts at justifying their immature grasp on life. Young people simply do not seem to appreciate or comprehend the fact that “older” people were once young as well. The nature of the generational procession does not change. The details might, but the youthful vigor and skepticism and cliquishness and suspicion of the “older” never changes. I went through it. Those who are open-minded realize just how narrow-minded they were, or are.
One thing I’ve noted after reading recent Gawker and Reddit posts, especially in the period following Barack Obama’s November victory, is the youthful celebration of Obama’s “hip” attitude. While most Obamazens certainly realize he is not the penultimate hip guy, they are convinced he “speaks” their language and they exaggerate this minute adjacency to their generation as something to laud and boast of. Yet, anyone can see that Obama is about as hip as your great-grandmother’s broken one. The dude wears daddy-style, high-waist jeans, he wears a dorky bicycle helmet, he bowls like the bitch you want to bone later after you give her a joint. He’s a pile of “Urkelized” 4-BMI’d bones that you would laugh at on the subway.
A man’s hip factor is exponentially reduced when his perceived hipness falls flagrantly below expectations. That’s Obama. So the youthful liberals praise Obama’s hipness because they are apparently desperate to be represented in government, and because as a generation, they are weak and self-indulgent, and lack a cultural sense of stoicism. So they latch on to the first thing they see that comes close to their self-professed generational image.
Who needs a hip President? Presidents should be dignified, they should be stoic, they should be socially out of touch so as to govern more efficiently and fairly. We want our President to be unaffected and neutral and mature. Who cares if he dresses right or whether he knows each and every cultural icon and marker? In fact, I would argue that Presidents should be as socially out of touch as possible because the more they connect with culture’s intricacies, the less “democratic” they will be. Children surely do not want “hip” parents. That would be embarrassing and it’s an affront to our evolutionary nature. Our President is our national “father.” We want him to run the country, not be a goof.
This is the United States of America, it is not high school. Our President must be a robot because equality is the key concept. Equality, not preferences.