riverdaughter:

So, someone wrote an editorial at WaPo asking why liberals are so condescending and Chris Bowers wrote a post upholding the right of liberals to be condescending jerks.  He cites scientists as his models of excellence:

Less than 10% of scientists consider themselves Republicans or conservatives.  Why shouldn’t liberals consider their positions to be based on fact and reason, and see conservative views as largely illegitimate?…

So, 9 out of 10 scientists do not consider themselves to be Republican or conservative, eh, Chris?  Let me tell you something about the scientists I know, since I am one and work with them all fricking day long.  Most of the scientists I know voted for Hillary Clinton in the primary of 2008.  Yeah, they used their abilities to reason and examine the facts to determine that when it came to a choice between Obama and Clinton, the choice was clear.  There was NO DATA TO SUPPORT OBAMA.  We looked and looked and looked and all we could find were missing data points.  He was tofu.  You and your creative class wannabes slapped some progressive special sauce on him and called him a savior.   We looked at his anti-war creds, which is all you guys seemed to care about, and there was no there there…

You are not a scientist, Chris, as your stupid pick of weakling president shows.  Please don’t try to be one of us.

It was Chris Bowers who proclaimed, “Wow, we nominated the black guy!” after his cohorts had spent months calling Hillary supporters racists.

I don’t know why anyone pays any attention to this kid.

In the comments, someone brought up Donna Brazile talking about the Old Coalition vs. the New Coalition, so I was moved to bring up the fact that Brazile bragged about the fact that Karl Rove advised her on how the New Coalition should be put together. (Yes, the link is to No Quarter. But the original is no longer available at The City Edition.)

She really put one over on old Karl, didn’t she? Following his advice on shoving working people out of the party?