The Scale of Self-Righteous Indignation

By Craig Andresen – Right Side Patriots on American Political Radio

Self-righteous indignation is defined as: “Confident of one’s own righteousness, especially when smugly moralistic and intolerant of the opinions and behavior of others, which do not match their own.” and dare I say it…there are two groups who, in today’s politically-charged American culture, embody that definition to a tee.

The first, of course, are liberals.

Liberals feel entitled to what others have earned through hard work and tenacity. Liberals claim the right to be offended by those who think, or believe differently than they do, and they believe their offense takes priority over our actual rights as outlined in the Constitution.

Liberals go stark-raving, foaming at the mouth mad when they don’t get their way, or when what they feel entitled to is not simply handed to them on a silver platter.

And it is clearly the prerogative of the garden variety liberal to employ their self-righteous indignation in the form of utter hypocrisy to establish themselves as the one and only voice that should be allowed to be heard.

Last week, on The View, a daytime television show hosted, for the most part, by the cackling hens of liberal self-righteousness, a recent visit to the White House by Ted Nugent, Kid Rock and Sarah Palin became the target of their outrage over not getting what they felt entitled to…a Hillary presidency.

Nugent, Rock and Palin had a group photo taken standing in front of the portrait of former first lady, the Butcher of Benghazi, and Deleter of the Free World…Hillary Clinton. In the photo, which drew the ire of the mindless View hostesses…the three Conservatives were giving a rather tacit thumbs up.

Watch the reaction of head hen, Joy Behar…

She said it was the worst day for the White House since it was burned to the ground during the war of 1812. She called the thumbs up of Ted Nugent, Kid Rock and Sarah Palin disgusting. As a group, the cackling hens called it offensive, classless, and disrespectful.

Notice that they didn’t make any comparison between the photo of the three Conservatives to this photo…

That is Mark Segal, from the Philadelphia Gay News, posing in front of the official White House portrait of President George W. Bush during a gay pride reception in 2012. He is providing the same mocking thumbs up in his photo that Nugent, Rock and Palin provided in theirs.

Did Behar and her gaggle of clucking hens react with disgust over the photo of Mark Segal? Of course not.

And how about these two photos of the national director of Solutions for Progress, Matthew Hart, and photographer Zoe Strauss, who…at the exact same event in the White House gave the double middle finger salute to the official portrait of President Ronald Reagan?

Did the self-righteous Behar and her liberal cohorts either compare them to Nugent, Rock and Palin or react to those photos in the same manner as they did last week…with pretend utter disgust?

Of course they didn’t.

Sure, those photos are 12 years old, and I suppose it is too much to ask for the liberal cackling hens to remember something from the distant past…so let’s draw a straight line to something from last week as a direct comparison.

While Nugent, Rock and Palin were at the White House, having their photo taken in front of a portrait of Hillary Clinton, University of Alaska at Anchorage assistant professor Thomas Chung painted and displayed, in a gallery on the campus, the visage of actor Chris Evans, who, of all things, portrays Captain America in the movies…holding the severed head of President Trump while a hippy-esque Hillary Clinton desperately clings to the actor’s leg.

Like so many other liberal snowflakes, assistant professor Chung admits that he, “spent days just weeping” after last November’s election, and claims that he is a social artist who normally doesn’t deal in politics.

Chung said, “I was really torn about putting this piece up a faculty show, because I would never talk about my own political beliefs to my students. I would never push that upon them and make them feel uncomfortable, and so I wondered to myself if putting up this painting was in a way doing that. But I realized that I feel very strongly about this, and I think even students that might be pro-Trump supporters could benefit from having a conversation with me about why I feel this way.”

Did Behar or anyone else on The View last week, during their contrived disgust over the photo of Nugent, Rock and Palin, bother to even bring up the painting hanging in the University of Alaska Anchorage art gallery?

Nope. And why not?

Because of their self-righteous indignation, defined as…“Confident of one’s own righteousness, especially when smugly moralistic and intolerant of the opinions and behavior of others, which do not match their own.”

But, I said there were two groups in our current politically-charged American culture that embody that definition, so let me shed a little light on the other…those who feel the need to attach “Christian” to their conservatism at every turn. I have often referred to this group as the “holier than thou.”

This group, while they are loathe to admit it, want a theocracy rather than a Constitutional Republic and want our country to be based in their chosen version of the Bible. They insist that our Founders and Framers wanted it this way, and shun any evidence to the contrary, of which there is a great deal of evidence.

It was, after all, theocratic rule that our Founders and Framers were declaring their, and our independence from, and as a fine point to that very end, they wrote the 1st Amendment, which clearly says that the government will be separate from religion.

Religion…much to the consternation of the holier than thous, is a man-made entity. Religion was created by man, to provide an excuse for things which man cannot explain. In the earliest days of religion, if something went wrong, they blamed it on an angry God or Gods. If something went right, they gave credit to an appeased God or Gods. Gods were created for this, that and the other thing until there were finally so many different Gods, in so many different cultures, that praying to one, would make others unhappy, and nobody could keep them all straight.

It was the ancient Egyptians who came up with the one God approach to religion, which was then adopted by the Jews and slowly, over time, became the standard, although differing cultures, as parts of differing civilizations, all had a different version of that one God. But religion itself, regardless of the brand, is a man-made entity.

Christianity has some 1,800 different sects, and/or denominations, with each holding different tenants, some of which only slightly vary, while others are seemingly light years apart, and to be blunt about it, there is absolutely no way to discern which is closer to the original form than any other.

The self-righteous indignation of the holier than thous is based on their belief that only their particular brand of Christianity is valid, and unless you believe exactly as they do, you are doomed to hell, and unless our nation subscribes to their one and only particular brand of Christianity, as a theocracy would, our entire nation is likewise doomed.


But this is the group which gave us all a second term for Obama, because they refused to vote for Mitt Romney based on the fact that he was a Morman, and thus didn’t subscribe to their particular belief. “Better the Muslim we know, than the Morman we don’t,” was their mantra in 2008.

I’m talking about a very narrow faction of Evangelical Christians as the holier than thous, who make it a point to tell everyone they come across that those who don’t fit into their little box, aren’t worthy. To them, gay people can’t be either Conservatives or Christians, because their interpretation of the Bible tells them this…which really flies in the face of those gay people who are both Conservative, and Christian.

These are the people who make a point to use their interpretation of their version of the Bible on which to base their political stand….which flies in the faces of our Founders and Framers.

The holier than thous believe the world really was created in six days, that the world is only 6,000 years old, that every word contained in their version of the Bible was written by God himself, and that our Constitutional Republic should be based solely on their interpretation of their brand of religion.

Those things simply fly in the face of reality and scientific fact.

It took the bulk of the earth’s 4.something billion year timeline to form, the only words in the Bible that are directly credited to God himself are the Ten Commandments, and the United States was never intended to be, nor can it possibly survive, as a theocracy.

But the self-righteous indignation of the holier than thou far right manages to manifest itself every day, and as an example of it, I offer this snippet from one of my recent Facebook posts. When Don Rickles passed a couple of weeks ago, I posted that he could insult St. Peter and still get inside the pearly gates…to which a holier than thou responded…

I had to remind Kevin Wright that both Jesus, and Don Rickles, were of the same religion…and naturally, Wright felt the need to argue based on his narrow interpretation of his chosen version of the Bible based on his particular brand of Christianity.

As a Christian myself, I don’t feel the need to judge others, any more than I believe every passage, or word in the Bible literally. The Bible, regardless of which version you like best, is a good book, full of good stories, packed with morals to which we can all aspire…but I also know that the Good Book has been edited beyond its original texts, and mostly for political reasons by those in positions of political power stretching back to almost the beginning of it…and therefore, in large part, no longer resembles its original manuscripts.

The holier than thous need to understand, though they most likely will never admit it, that when they display their judgements of others based on their narrow biblical interpretations,t hey have to ignore the part that says, “Judge not, lest ye be judged,” which tilts their self-righteous indignation all the way to hypocrisy.

Here is a perfect case in point…

Not only is this self-professed “Christian-Conservative” judging and comdemning President Trump, but through her self-righteous indignation, she is also judging, and condemning other Christians who don’t subscribe to her particular one and only brand of Christianity.

This woman claims that Trump and Maples met in a church pew…false…they met on Madison Avenue when Trump got out of his limo. She claims that Trump pays no taxes…false…as 2012 records indicate that Trump has paid tens of millions of dollars in taxes, even after a loss would have allowed him not to pay any during that time period. She claims that Trump is greedy…when in fact, he has given millions upon millions to causes like Citymeals-on-Wheels and the National Network to End Domestic Violence, New York City Police Foundation, Ronald McDonald House of New York, and New Yorkers For Parks, the Joe Torre Safe at Home Foundation, the  Marine Corps—Law Enforcement Foundation, two dozen veterans groups, American Cancer Society, American Diabetes Association, Alliance for Lupus Research, Autism Speaks, Crohn’s & Colitis Foundation of America, and the Institute for Implant Analysis at the Hospital for Special Surgery…just to scratch the surface.

In fact, Donald Trump has even given money to the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association.

This woman slams Trump for the theme song to his television show…which no doubt was the decision of the show’s producers. She claims that Trump mocked a reporter for his disability…false…and yet amid all these easily provable falsehoods…she labels Trump as a liar.

My point is…self-righteous indignation exists on both the left, and right side of the political scale, and on neither end does it add productive meaning to our political discourse. If we are to maintain our status as the greatest nation on earth, we cannot allow self-righteous indignation to dictate, or mandate our political course.

Liberal self-righteous indignation’s end game is socialism, and a nation whose path is set by the flimsy feelings of those who believe their offense takes precedence over the rights endowed us by the Creator, and entrusted to us by our Founders and Framers.

Conservative self-righteous indignation’s end game is a theocracy whose path is set by the most narrow interpretation of a far too often trifled with manuscript on which man-made religious denominations are based.

Smaller government, less government interference in our daily lives, self-reliance, the protection of capitalism, a strong defense and fiscal responsibility are the basic prescriptions for success, and on which what we, as Conservatives, should be basing our political agenda.

If liberals want to continue to embrace their end of the self-righteous indignation scale…let them…but we Conservatives, must disavow our end of that scale if we are to maintain our nation’s place on the world stage.

But above all…know these two things as facts…socialism, the end game of liberal self-righteous indignation scale always fails when it runs out of other people’s money…and theocracies, the end game of the holier than thous self-righteous indignation scale, have always been as flimsy as a house of cards in a whirlwind.

A truly great nation will never survive at either end of such a scale, but if we on the right can let go of our self-righteous indignation while those on the left continue to embrace theirs…we will all rise to to greater heights.

Copyright © 2017 Craig Andresen /


Today, Tuesday, April 25th from 7 to 9pm EST on American Political Radio, RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS Craig Andresen and Diane Sori discuss who has the upper hand in regards to North Korea, misplaced indignation from both sides of the political isle, and important news of the week.

Hope you an tune in at:

One thought on “The Scale of Self-Righteous Indignation

  1. Agree on analysis of both groups. Liberal intolerance in the name of unbounded tolerance, and likewise religious indignation by those who’ve indignantly proclaimed their version of religion is the only right one.

    As a Catholic I can confirm that we, if holding true to the teachings and moral lessons of our faith, are called not to judge, and to love all. Love the sinner (always), condemn the sin (not the person). For those of faith it is for God and God alone to pass judgement. And, it strikes me dumbfounded when “nuts” like the lady in the “How Can Any Christian Support Trump” video disregards the eighth commandment, “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.” I get it she believes she is right, but those of the indignant persuasion refuse to acknowledge or accept any evidence contrary to what they WANT to believe, because feelings trump all else, no pun intended.

Comments are closed.