…I can certainly pretend I’ve never been a blogger.
— Which works out fine, considering I’m sick and need a day off to recover anyway.
Meantime, here are few odds and ends to consider as I lay congested and miserable on the couch, watching “Monk” reruns.
1. The WSJ on the Big 3: should the public pay pensions promised by companies who can’t deliver them? Answer: Does the Pope shit in the woods? (h/t Terry H)
2. “Ask not what the market can do for you, but what you can do for the market.” Answer: Fine. But first, tell the market to stop stealing my shit and pretending it has the property rights to my labor. (h/t Geoff B)
Meanwhile, Dan’s promise to find me an agent by two Wednesdays ago is two Wednesday’s late. Guess I’m not as marketable a talent as my mother says I am.
3. For Happyfeet: Polar Bears set to save earth from humanity. And in so doing, lead society back to a time when we all lived in huts. And were feasted upon by polar bears — if we happened to interfere in their territorial claims.
So much for the survival of the fittest. To which I quip, “KEEP YOUR RELIGION OUT OF MY SCIENCE!”
4. A review of Shaidle and Vere’s Tyranny of the Nice. Your assignment: in 500 words or less, explain to me how said review runs afoul of intentionalism, and why that matters. (h/t Dan, who was reading this instead of finding me an agent, like he said he would).
5. Mitt Romney: “Let Detroit Go Bankrupt”. Michael Moore: “B-but…People will resort to skinning rabbits!” (h/t Daily Grind)
6. Noted rightwing nutter Tom Wolfe on feminism and academia. (h/t Salt Lick)
7. David Thompson on old hatreds.
Thanks for stopping by. You are vanishingly few, ever since I opened my big mouth and took on some of the more established and “measured” rightwing pundits. After that, links just seemed to dry up.
But that’s cool. An outlaw gang that gets too big becomes a cult — and there are plenty of those to go around already.
Peace!
oh. Those are those bipolar bear ones. Ruthless predators one second and hapless drowning kittenish things the next. Evolution has not been kind.
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother; be he ne’er so vile,
This day shall gentle his condition;
And gentlemen in England now-a-bed
Shall think themselves accurs’d they were not here,
And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
That fought with us upon Saint Crispin’s day.
Thank goodness, I was afraid you would go “Jim Jones” on us. You know how all your minions here love grape Kool-Aid.
8. In case 7 just wasn’t enough. What do you think President Obama will do about piracy doubling in the last year?
I think he’ll blame Bush, but that’s not really going out on a limb.
Headline from the polar bear link: Interior Wants Hand in Emissions Rules
I don’t know why that made me think of the “euphemisms for taking a dump” thread on the Canadian community-organizer post.
Geez, sorry to let you down.
What if, say, shit was going on in my life?
Working on it. Hope you feel better soon.
[ You didn’t let me down. I never expected much. I just wanted to make the quip about my Mom, who is still after me for not becoming a boardwork caricature artist who does Bar Mitzvahs in the off season – ed]
Scott Karp at the Publish 2.0 site had me really thinking about what he was saying until he dropped this,
for the last paragraph.
What Obama is building will not be wonderful. Are all journalists crazy now? Or just sycophants lined up at the government teat.
Comment by snuffles on 11/20 @ 2:23 pm #
STFU, alfie, you retarded marmoset.
You got no room to be talking about manhood, you fucktard.
Shakespeare is gonna rise from the grave and cockslap you for quoting him.
Correction: Tyranny Of The Nice was written by Kate Shaidle and Tom Vere, not Mark Steyn.
It’s official, I’ve woken up in crazy town. Ayers, while not the typical accepted image of a terrorist (via post 9/11) still conspired and in fact participated in the old Weather Underground bombings. He’s got dirt under his fingernails that would tie him with that shit. However to him, he’s REVOLUTIONARY! because America is so “TEH EVIL”.
And in the end, he’s still just a spoiled rich trust fund brat with never better to do than to RAGE against the man. And that’s pretty pathetic.
Ack, PIMF “..nothing better to do..
I thought polar ice was doing better now. Polar bears are probably breeding like bunnies up there.
Warm up the airplane!
Hope you’re feeling better soon, Jeff.
Things in academia are overwhelmingly busy right now. I’m not going to be able to get to my promised work now until Christmas Break.
I blame Obama.
See, wolf? Told you I was sick.
Yeah, Mark Steyn wrote the very cool introduction but — Pete Vere and I wrote ‘The Tyranny of Nice: How Canada crushes freedom in the name of human rights, and why it matters to Americans’
Hey, what can I say: we figured we’d use as many words in the title as we could, before we got censored ourselves :-)
“Hey, what can I say:” OUTLAW
What do you mean, “now”…?
I made the correction, Kathy. Apologies. It’s the cold medicine. And ODS.
I really shouldn’t be operating heavy machinery like this.
since Bill Ayers is so innocuous surely Bill Ayers would not object to someone going all Bill Ayers on Bill Ayers
Fat Mickey says:
link
That would make Billy very frum.
If only we could believe Michael Moore will receive the same gruel ration as the rest of us.
From the Market don’t care piece:
I’m not sure journalism means what he thinks it means.
Don’t apologize. Thanks for the mention, and go back to Season whatever of Monk! :-)
DAMMIT. Breaking my vow of silence. So listen.
You’re a serious sort of guy, Jeff. For such, without fame unrelated to that seriousness, without a Daddy like Ayers’s, without a David Foster Wallace memorial anecdote/resume-checkoff up at McSweeney’s, agents are a waste of…everything. Especially if you’ve yet to sell the thing(s) you’re thinking you need one to sell on your behalf.
Because they don’t do that. Not for you. Your seriousness is, to them, a badge that says “sucker.” Only the vilest among them will have anything to do with you. You’ll get nothing but fucked.
After you’ve sold, they’ll come begging. Ignore them again and get a lawyer. Or don’t. But ignore them. Now, the idea of them shouldn’t even be in your head.
Just make your things well and make them available, by whatever several means, to people who might want them. Among those people will be one or two perhaps inclined to pass them on, at benefit to themselves (and incidentally you). Probably not. But nothing else works.
Unless you’re pals with someone who can show you in, you’re out. Forever.
Act like it. But not like this.
Is all.
Jeff G: Thanks for stopping by. You are vanishingly few, ever since I opened my big mouth and took on some of the more established and “measured†rightwing pundits. After that, links just seemed to dry up.
What do you mean? Who did you take on and when? What was the issue? Thanks.
Mikey Moore is thor. Gah. Madness lies there.
This way happiness lies.
Ed.–Has to do, at least partially, with certain people saying of a newly-minted President-elect that he’s a “good man” even though he seems to believe a lot of really stupid and/or evil stuff.
(I can see where the opponent who lost the election to him might say something like that in the spirit of good sportsmanship, a meaningless but civilized gesture, but there’s not much reason for anyone else to do so.)
I denounce psycho’s vow of silence I think.
I must have missed this, beause I only remember the spat between Jeff and Patterico, which I thought was water under the bridge by now………
You are vanishingly few, ever since I opened my big mouth and took on some of the more established and “measured” rightwing pundits. After that, links just seemed to dry up.
Strangely enough, that dry spell corresponded almost exactly with the end of the election and the reaction to its results. It couldn’t possibly be reader exhaustion or anything like that. Because blog readers just hates them some blogwars and internecine feuds. People prefer to read calm, measured prose. Conflict is such a turn off!
The market or country or government or whatever should by rights have no claim on your labor. Now your productivity on the other hand? Maybe. You get paid for your productivity, not your labor. Productivity is the result of labor, plus the infrastructure that leverages that labor. You provide the labor, but the system provides the infrastructure, and thus the system has some claim on your productivity.
“And I say good riddance”
Then Moore shouldn’t mind if I come over to his house and help myself to whatever he’s got in the fridge.
Whose orifice did you pull that one from?
Good lord, no wonder you’re so desperate to keep the Nazis from being identified as socialists and think the Soviets’ hearts were in the right place.
“You get paid for your productivity, not your labor. ”
Been to McDonalds lately? They get paid for their labor.
Don’t pick on the sick guy, people. It’s unseemly.
What we can’t pick on Thor anymore?
Statements like that amuse the Hell out of me (I might as well be amused; it’s better than scared s*tless).
The things we need to live come from factories. (Yes, food included. Agricultural productivity derives almost entirely from turning “farms” into “food factories”.) Factories cost money. The money paid to build a factory has a special name: “capital”. No capital, no factory. No factory, no stuff.
What Marx was on about under the heading of “capitalism” was already-rich people throwing their weight around. That system became moribund in the late 1800s and had almost entirely disappeared by 1930. What goes under the name today is people scrambling around to get the money to build factories (“capital”) in dribs and drabs from sorta-rich people and the middle class, because that’s the only place to get enough money to build enough factories. All the “rich” taken together don’t have a hundredth of the necessary.
So the “end of capitalism” means either no more factories and consequent poverty, or some other system for assembling the capital to build factories — and that system will be “capitalism” no matter what it’s called. You might as well call for the end of air because fish don’t get enough.
Regards,
Ric
Sorry. I had this dung beetle thing going on. I feel better now. And hungry.
“no wonder you’re so desperate to keep the Nazis from being identified as socialists and think the Soviets’ hearts were in the right place.”
I’m concerned that we remember that the Nazis were an ultra-Right group, and that totalitarianism can spring up when either the Left or the Right decides its cause demands that we ignore individual liberty.
As for the Soviets, the initial idealists had the good of the many in mind as their goal. Whether that put “their heart in the right place” is quite debatable however, since they thought their goal superseded individual liberty, justified violence, etc…
“I’m concerned that we remember that the Nazis were an ultra-Right group,”
Only a Stalinist communist would believe that.
So I want the new system turned around. As I, an independent contracted flight instructor, am not paid a salary or wage, but by time. Prop is turning, I make money. The flight school collects the money, and we share that… my share minus the accounting and space rental whatever. Similar to a real estate agent or barber.
In either case, I am selling a product to the school- time and experience. They are willing to go into business with me and I charge them for that time. It is my responsibility to pay the taxes etc.
So why is it not the same in other examples. Why should not the person providing the service for a company, at a cost, not be the one responsible for setting his/her cost, billing the company, and exacting the federal and state taxes etc. Certainly, it is such in a sense, but we lay the dynamic, and responsibility on the company. That is their fault for whatever is wrong. Society blames them for the ill, wishes to saddle them with the extra “rights” and THEN complains that they are a slave to the man in a top hat. But, they, the business, are the customers.
Get into it man. Think about the new dialectic.
Nah — complete morons believe it, too.
Nazis were mainstream Germans. That’s why Nazis are scary.
Snuffles has been found wanting.
May his landing be rough and accompanied by many tiny cuts that he finds out about only after he accidentally falls into a pool of lemon juice.
Oh the humanity.
Michael Moore and Bill Ayers in a steel cage death match I say.
Gotta disagree there. The Nazis were the progressive Germans, in the political sense: they had a plan for “perfecting” society, and weren’t all that interested in compromise. The mainstream Germans failed when they didn’t look too closely at the Nazis’ plans, and when they failed to remove the Nazis once those plans became clear.
Excepting the party members and the SS, the average German was as much to blame for the Nazis as the average Russian was for the Soviets.
I don’t know what the talk of agents is about, but I do know that this afternoon I was re-reading Styron’s “Sophie’s Choice” and I thought, “This is really smart and vivid writing, like something Jeff G. would turn out.”
Which I hope is a complement. After all, for the longest time I thought Calvino was a line of clothes for little boys.
“What Obama is building will not be wonderful. Are all journalists crazy now? Or just sycophants lined up at the government teat.”
Yes.
Rob — Gotta disagree with your disagreeing. Algis Budrys, the SF author, was a child living with his diplomat parents in Berlin during Hitler’s rise to power.
Hitler was an INCREDIBLY popular and compelling figure to the german menschen in der strasse. Budrys reports they would literally lose control of their bodily functions seeing Hitler drive by, and jump over the wall into his yard to relieve themselves in his bushes.
Thank heaven there’s no such impulse in the American body politic today.
“I’m concerned that we remember that the Nazis were an ultra-Right group,â€Â
Yes, I remember all the articles in The New Republic, the Nation and Mother Jones about that back in the 30’s.
Oh, wait, no I don’t. The progressive movement in America didn’t decide fascism was bad til uncle Joe told em so. Some kind of property dispute in 1940, as I remember.
GMG: Thank heaven there’s no such impulse in the American body politic today.
You are wrong. An American wouldn’t be courteous enough to hide behind a wall.
I’m still here, my nigga! Outlaw, Outlaw, Outlaw (They came in to sin)
Outlaw, Outlaw, Outlaw (Dear God, I wonder could you save me?)
And in regards to points #3 and #5, wouldn’t that miserable fat lying piece of shit WANT us to start skinning rabbits? That falls in line with the whole reversing civilization thing from #3.
“Thank heaven there’s no such impulse in the American body politic today.”
Well there was the O! fainting thing.
From the Tom Wolfe interview, this concerning political correctness.
The last sentence is where I disagree.
If “open disrespect” is now shunned, is it now channeled into private, secret paths that are even more damaging and much harder to root out or even discern? Humans have not been suddenly changed into warm fuzzy bunnies by political correctness or by any other agency ever.
What is a, “group classified under the heading “minority—? Classified by whom? What about those not so “classified”? Is it fine to show open disrespect to the ones not “classified”? Isn’t this simply an exchange of one pariah group for a new one?
I believe it is just that. In this election we saw it in a most public form. Obama is a member of a “classified minority group”. No disrespect of anything he said or did would be countenanced.
Sarah Palin and “Joe the Plumber” were not so “classified” as they are part of the new pariah class.
There may be some “good” coming out of the political correctness on campus but exchanging who can be looked down on is sideways progress at best. Not “all to the good”. The cost is greater than the good obtained.
I am unable to apologize for sarcasm. There’s a rider in my contract that prohibits it.
open disrespect toward any group classified under the heading “minority.†It makes one seem ill-bred.
Don’t wanna dis them head choppin’, motooning, wife beating mooslims now do you BOY.
Dave G: I’m concerned that we remember that the Nazis were an ultra-Right group
Why should we “remember” that when it wasn’t true?
psycho: agents are a waste of…everything. Especially if you’ve yet to sell the thing(s) you’re thinking you need one to sell on your behalf.
Jeff, psycho is right on the money here.
May his landing be rough
And the crowd says “yea!”
In hilarious memorial of the author of such notable works as “shipping container Chinese invasion” the “the missile defense mile high dirt berm”, and the never fails to get a laugh “balloon fence missile shield”, I give you IAF commander Maj. -Gen. Ido Nehushtan :
Rabbits are tasty and much better skinned than not.
Or is this one of those
“Look Fuzzy Bunnies”
moment things.
Duuuuey!
Look, it’s the wingered whore splatter!
Heel-to-toe, arm out-sretched, kick the foot!
Goose-step’t, schnauzer’n, zeig hiel’n Right Vingers!
zeig hiel’n Right Vingers!zeig hiel’n Right Vingers!
You’re a sitzpinkler Thor.
And Stalin was incredibly popular, too.
I think the bulk of Germans were as well-informed about the Nazis as the American electorate is about Obama. To some extent they didn’t want to look too deeply, and they certainly deserve condemnation for that, but, again, the bulk of the German people hold as much blame as the Soviet subjects.
That’s not blameless, BTW. Both traded their freedom for their lives, and to some extent the lives of others for their own comfort.
zeig hiel’n Right Vingers!
Ask not for whom the tell tolls… …it tolls for trolls.
Thanks for stopping by. You are vanishingly few, ever since I opened my big mouth and took on some of the more established and “measured†rightwing pundits. After that, links just seemed to dry up.
I lurk here frequently, but find that even with my overly-educated brain, I often understand your posts about as well as a Beck song. Nevertheless, keep up the good work! Many of the conservative blogs have become uncomfortably anti-science. I retreat here when I want to be reminded that it’s ok to be a conservative scientist.
“uncomfortably anti-science.”
What exactly does that mean?
Heil Heil in Der…. no… not allowed to say it anymore are we. Fine here is the same thing with Donald. Maybe more apropos.
thor, have you been on here for a solid week, obsessively clicking refresh, just waiting for me to show up?
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
That’s quite the productive life you have there, son.
What exactly does that mean?
That’s code for xians.
Oh hell Go Steelers
If you think “anti-science” conservative blogs make you uncomfortable, try hanging out at a progg blog.
SPB,
Exactly, he’s a loser. Needs a hobby.
Nice to see you’re still around…
Try wearing a McCain shirt to an O! rally.
Jeff, check the Pub: I think Dan might be upset…or something.
To hell with the Steleers. . . .
Go Browns, DAMN IT! ! ! ! ! !
“Go Browns, DAMN IT! ! ! ! ! !”
Steelers roll Bungles
I wish you Ohio people would move to Michigan.
You PA people suck (Obamessiah. . . )
Love Joe Pa, but the rest of PA can go stick it with Ann Arbor. . . .
Comment by rao on 11/20 @ 8:06 pm #
Hugh Hewitt troll
Ohio is so dumb. They only have 4 letters, and they had to use one of them twice.
This is strange to me. I, on a somewhat regular basis, visit over 100 “conservative” blogs. and since conservatives often link to others I see even more of them. The only “anti-science” talk that comes up is related to the pseudo science of “anthropogenic global warming”.
There are undoubtedly “anti-science” sites. Some associated with fundamentalist Christians. Those however cannot be called as exemplars conservative political blogs.
There are just as many, nay many more sites that could be considered “anti-science” on the left since feelings not reason are of paramount importance for the left.
It would be of interest to know of these “anti-science” conservative blogs. Please, provide links so that we may view them and discuss this further.
And we want them why?
Some of the dumbest sonsabitches I’ve ever known came from Ohio, they should stay there.
Ohio IS so dumb (that’s why I left! ! !)–what other 2nd rate state would go for the Messiah? ? ? ?
And as for Hugh Hewitt. . . Go Tribe–Cliff Lee all the way! ! ! !
Anti-science? I’ve had NIH and VA grants that are dedicated to (trying) to understand/treat disease.
Where the hell does “evolution” support that idea?
Glad we’ve got Tom Daschle in charge now so Bush’s “ideology” doesn’t get in the way of all the
major breakthroughs that embryonic stem cell technology would have given us by now, as if the research
done
in other countries that did not have this “oppressive” rule stand in their way.
What a bunch of maroons!
Vive Che, Fidel, Mao etc.
To the end of Western Civilization, my comrades! ! ! ! !
I mean, just what the fuck is a buckeye?
Roland!
Glad to see an O! sycophant here. . .
“God Bless” (O! is a self described evangelical, you know!)
BTW, may Bo’s corpse rest in peace, since the rest of Michigan surely cannot (go Rodriguez-best thing OSU ever had! !)
What say you–how about that auto bailout? Great for the country!
Yeah, you need an agent I get people telling me I should publish my stuff. As if I would ever bother to proof-read it… and who, exactly, will pay for ink on paper if they won’t even bother to download some electron patterns for free? Yeah, I can see the preface: Why did you pay for this when you could have had it free for the download? And only two types of things come free: the priceless and the worthless. The last flu you got was the latter.
So no complaints about not getting an agent, ok? You need a ‘marketer’ not an ‘agent’: one sucks up money from you with promises of good work and the other takes your awful stuff and makes it shine… worked on everything except New Coke, nothing could save that. They should have given it away. Nope, get rid of the idea of work and find someone to market what you’ve got. It isn’t working out so hot for Bill Ayers, but he is just a spoiled brat and wannabe punk who is now just a henpecked dad wearing the panties in the house. And it *shows*. He needs an agent to get a real job, but he is trying to market himself and its New Coke all over again.
Say, if your gang needs a new name, better talk to a marketer or else you will end up with the ‘Hole in the Head Gang’ in the Obama Gulag and Rest Stop.
Roland–
It’s a hard nut– would you know anything about that? ? ? ?
That’s stoopid I think. Mr. Instapundit is like the Bill Nye of our times. I like science. I want them to make me a dinosaur. A nice non-bitey one.
I would name him Clem and and we would have adventures.
“I mean, just what the fuck is a buckeye?”
Rao
oh. Just the one and. While I was writing that I was in a me and my dinosaur reverie.
Bill Nye?
My kids live on his videos (note how I did not say DVDs, since we are archaic)
Oh–and we home school as well. Jill Behar, kiss my grits! ! ! !
Anyways, I’m all for whatever Mr. G wants to call his gang–I’m part of the posse! ! !
(Unless, of course, it has anything to do with the JOOOOOOSS ! !–then I’m like one of them outlaws he’s talking about)
Sorry to hear that your being unjustly treated in my opinion for having an un-orthodox outlook. Is that not what we have devoted a years worth of time, money, crimped hands & law suites, with suffering to those being persecuted. To preserve free speech against the HRC’s? So those boycotting this because of another view. Wake up & look at the nose on your own faces.
This is a good Blog, hardly a Socialist sewer from the Kos Kids.
JMO
I think it’s Joy. Cause of her being so joyful and all. She’s been on that tacky little show for over a decade now. I’ve never done anything for even half that long.
Hey Revnant!
I think most of us are having a good time here. . .
We’ll all have a little noodling at another’s expense.
As for me, I’m starting to hoard guns and ammunition, since our new Lord Obamessiah! has announced a 500% tax increase
on ammunition.
Just let Him come and try to get it from my warm, clinging hands–I’ll give him some wealth to spread arpund! ! ! ! !
If this isn’t a cult, what’s with all these jello-shots?
Thanks HF for the correction;
Don’t know much about “The View” other than it has a great look up their collective A** (sorry Mrs.Hasselback)
Having lived in a fly over state for quite sometime, my armamentary inclinations are getting a little out of hand. . . .
I checked the Pub, but I don’t speak Spanish.
Is this another Karl moment? That would be sad, especially on a day when I’m sick and my wife’s been out of town and I had to bring pies to my son’s Pre-K “turkey day” celebration, and then I forgot the whipped cream and had to go home for it and there’s no cold medicine in the house because somebody used it up when she had a cold and didn’t restock.
Again with the ammunition stockpiles. You can’t fight the dirty socialists what have conquered America with bullets I don’t think. Victimyness is mother’s milk to these ones.
Seems to be a lot of pissy folks these days.
Maybe everyone should put on their big boy pants.
HF–
what;s the mater with wanting to tak out a few? ? ?
And Roland. . . .
Go Bucks! ! ! (Even if it involves a few acorns. . . .;-} )
Buckeyes
Used to use them in slingshots as a kid. In Michigan.
“Is this another Karl moment? ”
The Collins Moment: full of intrigue and tacos!
Wreckem Raiders!
Being exTex I root for my used-to-be’s
Did I mention, I hate Ohio?
Plus Go Steelers
And Buckey Badger is for shit this year.
If we are to be a proper cult shouldn’t we at least get matching sneakers?
I like Peetsborg. They’re winning at the moment.
As my husband said today, out of sorts and the sort store is closed.
Dang I want a little dinosaur, too.
Armadillo tats.
I think Dan deserves some bucking up too. A little dinosaur and a fruit basket.
Does he like butter tarts?
It needs Scotch, lot of. Cures anything that bacon doesn’t. So I hear.
Pies, and Scotch.
Cures most anything.
I checked the Pub, but I don’t speak Spanish.
Here, let me translate.
“Geez, you people are a load. How can you are stand to me? Insane thing and my life is a horse. That is more than enough.”
Ah, fuckit.
Who’s up for shooters?
Go Steelers
Well, follow this post by Dan and you will see that a baby wooly mammoth might be possible.
And cigars.
“Duuuuey!
Look, it’s the wingered whore splatter!
Heel-to-toe, arm out-sretched, kick the foot!
Goose-step’t, schnauzer’n, zeig hiel’n”
Oooo, look, thor’s having a wet dream.
I will name him Clem and we will have many adventures, my wooly mammoth and me. I love science and I love Dan and I hate change.
Does he like butter tarts?
And big fat slurpy treats?
teats?
Buttered tarts with slurpy teats. What more do you need?
Go Steelers
big fat slurpy treats and why can’t we be ourselves like we were yesterday I think. For real, change is retarded.
For real, change is retarded.
Word. I also prefer bills, seeing as how change weighs down your pockets and jingles and you can never find that extra two pennies when you’re trying to make exact change.
The AG just passed out…
An Ohio State fan, a Michigan fan and a Penn State fan are in a car.
Who’s driving?
The cop.
GO SPARTANS!!
TV
The AG just passed out…
No, that was the teaser for the next episode of House MD.
What do you get when you drive slowly through Columbus Ohio?
A degree from Ohio State University.
GO SPARTANS!!!
TV
“The AG just passed out…
No, that was the teaser for the next episode of House MD.”
Brutal…
YES!
Miami Bitched 41-23.
Yeah Baby!
Pies, Scotch, butter and bacon.
Sounds like the Scottish national cuisine.
GO EAGLES!!!!
Oh, fukit….
Go Stealers 27-10
“…should the public pay pensions promised by companies who can’t deliver them?
Personally, I believe that chapter 11 is the only way for them to go, in order to shed the useless legacy UAW contracts, the bloated dealership networks, and other unnecessary personell so that they can actually be competitive with the foreign car companies. Otherwise it’s good money after bad and is only forestalling the inevitable insolvency…
Still the turn of the phrase is deliciously ironic, since the government itself is already guaranteeing pensions that it ultimately will never be able to deliver!
—————————————-
“You are vanishingly few, ever since I opened my big mouth and took on some of the more established and “measured†rightwing pundits.”
I don’t understand who you mean Jeff G; is it Patterico? As they say here in NYC; Fuhgeddabowdit…
Speaking for myself, I generally read straight news stories, at least as close as one can get to that these days! I confess that I’m a bit suspect of the punditry; I’m never quite sure if I’m being sold a bill of goods. That’s one thing that makes PW so refreshing is that many of your posts, and the esuing discussions, are based on principles and realities rather than feelings; but still contain the passion of you and your readers convictions-at least most of the commenters…
Other than your site, Ace’s place, and Hot Air, the only other blogs I visit are Drudge-for headlines, Pat Santy (Doc Sanity)-but she’s on hiatus ’til new years, and Classical Values. Of course, I check out the links at most of these sites in order to examine the motivating content myself. But overall, I find that PW usually has the most thoughtful, and often entertaining, content…
As far as the traffic falling off…I believe that it is happening to everyone since the election. And I have noticed that some folks have been complaining about the visiting trolls. They don’t really bother me though; having been a conservative, classical liberal, living in or near DC for 35 years-well let’s just say that I got used to folks trying to shout me down with fanciful, assinine, and repetitive arguments…
So, feel better, Bro…And remember, a couple of shots of scotch will suffice in place of most over-the-counter cold remedies! And more appropriate for an Outlaw! anyway…
“The Nazis were the progressive Germans, in the political sense: they had a plan for “perfecting†society, and weren’t all that interested in compromise. ”
Oh for crying out loud…they were Ultra-nationalists. You think you can just make up history? They were not much interested in things like distributing wealth to the poor, etc… They were all about the greater glory of Germany.
Once again, totalitarism can come from the Left or the Right, if either thinks its goal are more important than personal liberty. You can also preserve liberty in systems that are far to the Left or Right. Sweden is quite socialist, and quite peaceful, happy, and free, for example.
Maybe this comes from signle-dimentional black-white thinking and having a different idea of what “Right” is. Right-wigng emphaticly does NOT = liberty. If you think the Right is Reagan Republicans, then, no taken to the extreme that is not totalitarism. Reagan blended libertarian ideas with traditionalism. But it is the traditionalism that places him on the Right, not the libertarian ideas.
Liberty, or a lack of LIberty belongs neither to the Left nor the Right.
What happened with Karl? I was gone for a while, so I probably missed a lot.
What, exactly, was their problem with the Jews, Dave? And how did they sell it?
BTW, socialists aren’t really interested in giving wealth to the poor. It’s just a nice frame for taking it from the rich. The second part never seems to work out.
I think Jonah would argue with Dave G.
Would Mussolini be a hard right guy, too? Just trying to get a feel for the layout of Dave’s field.
Poor Dave G.
He never learned in school that “Nazi” is short for “National Socialism,” which differed from the Bolsheviks only in that the latter was international.
Or that Benito Mussolini and his father were hard-core socialists, the son having been named for Benito Juárez.
Tsk, tsk, tsk.
You have socialism on the extreme left, where the gubmint controls everyjunk, and on the far right you have anarchy, where there ain’t no gubmint at all.
Categorical errors are so sad, aren’t they?
Get well soon, Jeff. If the cold medicine is wicked enough, it might replace the red pills in the sofa cushions….
But that’s probably impossible.
Nationalism is also an opiate. Distract and create a scapegoat/ strawman to focus energy on while you build your reforms and power. As long as there is someone else who is always lower than you on the ladder, you wont feel so bad no matter how hungry or broke you are. Like the dirt farmers in the south.
One thing you need to know about Dave: while the words appear to be English, they don’t seem to mean the same thing to him as when the rest of us use them.
https://proteinwisdom.com/?p=13687#comment-594095
And with that, I’m out of here. All have a great Thanksgiving, I am on Holiday for a week. Tip your host!
you’re supposed to squirrel that stuff away for yourself. or don’t you have to show your driver’s license to purchase it? I figure if I’m going through that hassle it’s mine all mine.
If you have a sauna, use it. The heat helps to keep the viruses from multiplying.
If you don’t have one fill a big bowl with boiling water. Put a large towel over your head and the bowl. Breathe in through the nose and out from the mouth as hot and moist as you can stand for as long as you can. Helps to clear the sinuses and slow down the replication of the virus so your immune system can catch up. It’s always worked for me anyways. YMMV
and all the dinosaur talk made me think of this I was all, “gee that sounds fun” but then you reach the end and it says “has to be able to cry on cue.” and I’m thinking there’s medication for that kind of thing. what is Barney doing to people nowadays?
“You have socialism on the extreme left, where the gubmint controls everyjunk, and on the far right you have anarchy, where there ain’t no gubmint at all.”
Interesting, well at least you’ve defined what you think “Right” and “Left” mean. For you, it applies to the size of government, and nothing else. So, how do you connect this to the origin of ideas like “Left” and “Right” in Europe and “conservative” and “liberal” in England? Originally, the conservatives were the monarchists, and liberals favored more distributed political power. Classical liberals were the capitalists.
Also, don’t you think there is some distinction between a government like Sweden which is most of the economy, but does not try to control every aspect of life, and something like Nazi Germany, which did try to control all aspects of life?
But, O.K., given you’re recently minted definitions of “Right” and “Left” the Nazis were on the Left. Of course with this kind of simplified thinking you’ll end up forgetting that the most defining feature of the Nazis was the greater glory of the German race, and the German nation.
“Sweden is quite socialist, and quite peaceful, happy, and free, for example.”
Wrong. Because government provides so many more services, Swedes have far less options than your average American.
They are not, “Free to Choose” in many circumstances.
“Liberty, or a lack of LIberty belongs neither to the Left nor the Right.”
Wrong again. The advocacy of the transfer of power to the government is the constant harangue of the left. The right recognizes the coercive threat from government, and seeks to limit it.
Money is power in a free society, and every dollar transferred to the government is a usurpation of the power of the people.
Additionally, the bureaucrats then wield the power, not the people.
Read your Friedman and Hayek…
Dave’s having problems distinguishing between political systems and economic ones. Not an uncommon failing.
Feets, If you end up with a non-bitey dinosaur, let me know. I think the kids might want one too. Adventures with a dinosaur sound fun.
I am going to go take a week in the Bahamas making sand castles with my kids and letting the wife relax with a tropical drink. I think we have earned it this past year. Then I will come back and help Jeff’s page views.
BTW – I think everyone loses some visits after an election – it’ll come back up after the holidays. Not to worry, OK?
I know my visiting/reading has scaled back a bit. just.don’t.care. lately.
you’re [sic] recently minted definitions of “Right†and “Leftâ€Â
Not recently minted at all. It’s been around since at least the 1960s. That it’s new to you is not a testament to your stupidity but to the education system’s failing.
Dave, you’re parroting back clichés that come right out of the mouth of the average smug college lecturer. Do some homework and read this book and this book and this book. Find out what a bunch of frustrated, overgrown hippies hid from you “for your own good.”
This shit is fucked up.
It’s fucked up.
Game over, man. Game over.
oh, and welcome back Major John, have fun on your trip. we got a big honkin tv during RaTsO’s second deployment.
One thing I’ve learned over time is that there is little use in arguing what definition of things are “correct”. People can always insist that terms be used the way they think they should be used. All I can do is lay out the way I use them, and the way they have been used historically.
Conservatives and the Right are traditionalists and nationalists. Originally they were the monarchists and the church. They still favor traditional morality.They have always favored concentration of power in the hands of fewer people. Originally they resisted extending the franchise to more and more people. Today the battles tend to be about the concentration of economic power, with the Right favoring greater concentration of wealth in the wealthiest members of society. They still favor traditional morality. And finally, they favor greater use of the military to assert dominance and influence.
The Left has been about distributing power. Originally this meant giving the vote to a larger and larger segment of society, and favoring capitalism and trade which created wealth for the middle class. This eventually progressed to socialism, where the goal was to distribute economic power more evenly throughout society. Socialistic policies are one feature of the modern Left, but it is also features less traditional morality, and favors more limited use of the military for cases of true defense of liberty at home. They favor a more international system (again distribued power).
Using these ideas of Left and Right, neither side has a monopoly on Liberty. Both can allow it, and both can restrict it, and in the extreme produce totalitarianism.
oh man, have you picked the wrong blog to comment on.
” It’s been around since at least the 1960s. ”
O.K. well mine have been around since the 1500s.
Dave G: One thing I’ve learned over time is that there is little use in arguing what definition of things are “correctâ€Â.
Which is why you do it incessantly?
the Right…have always favored concentration of power in the hands of fewer people.
Yes, Friedman, Hayek, Rand, and Heinlein were well-known for their submissive natures.
The Left has been about distributing power.
Yes, Pol Pot, Stalin, Mao, Castro are famous for their equitable distribution of power.
Jeez Louise.
where do you get this idea from?
or abroad, really. ie: the Balkans. or whining about Darfur.
See, this shit, it freaks me out.
O.K. well mine have been around since the 1500s.
As was pointed out in the other thread, the terms “right” and “left” came from the French Revolution.
Hint: the French Revolution began in 1789.
Hint #2: the 18th century came well after the 16th century.
Dave, we don’t care how the terms have been used in Europe and Latin America or anywhere else. The U.S. never had hereditary caste systems, landed gentry, monarchy, or a state church.
You want useful axes, go here, an essay that should be required reading at all colleges and blog sites.
Welcome back, Maj. (P) John.
Have a great time in the Bahamas!
Ayn Rand was a *libertarian*. That is nether Right nor Left. She agreed with the modern Right on economic issues, and with the Left on social issues. She was an Atheist. She was all about Liberty as the only virtue, and opposition to the totalitarianism (absence of liberty) of the Soviets.
“As was pointed out in the other thread, the terms “right†and “left†came from the French Revolution. ”
And as I pointed out, before that the terms were “liberal” and “conservative”. “Left” and “Right” came about later, and were used to refer to liberals and conservatives.
Ayn Rand was a *libertarian*.
She would have disagreed. In fact she explicitly disavowed it.
Next.
SBP welcome, however you are trying to argue with the cartoons that dance in his head. Sisyphus had an easier task.
The term ‘conservative’ came to be used as a description of the British right-wing Tory Party in 1830, and the term ‘conservatism’ came into currency shortly afterwards.
And as I pointed out, before that the terms were “liberal†and “conservativeâ€Â.
So?
The interchange in question was:
You: you’re [sic] recently minted definitions of “Right†and “Leftâ€Â
dicentra: Not recently minted at all. It’s been around since at least the 1960s.
You: O.K. well mine have been around since the 1500s.
I don’t see “liberal” and “conservative” in there anywhere. Do you?
As it happens, though, the Oxford English Dictionary records the first use of “liberal”, in the political sense, in 1820: Edin. Rev. XXXIV. 3 Our travellers..continue to resort to Paris..and occasionally take part with Ultras or with Liberals and the first use of “conservative”, in the political sense, in 1830: J. W. CROKER in Q. Rev. Jan. 276 Attached to what is called the Tory, and which might with more propriety be called the Conservative, party..
Next.
Yes.
“She would have disagreed. In fact she explicitly disavowed it. ”
Yes, I know, she was smarter (at least in her own mind) than the political party that called themselves “libertarians”.
So to be more correct they both follow a system that ethical philosophers have labeled ‘egotist” systems. Rand’s is just a very well developed philosophical system, whereas the libertarian party pretty much just wants to do whatever they want. Rand favors maximum possible liberty *consistent with the same amount of liberty for others*.
As long as he doesn’t start attacking my wife we’ll get along fine, geoffb.
Anyone a bit pissed off with the obvious subtext?
Anyone?
Yes, I know, she was smarter (at least in her own mind) than the political party that called themselves “libertariansâ€Â.
That’s it, start backpedaling.
[…] Via Protein Wisdom. […]
Me, I’m doing my part to fight global warming. Every night I wrap up in my polar bearskin rug, in front of a roaring teak and redwood fire, with my harp seal ear muffs and lemur skin gloves.
That way I don’t have to burn oil, coal or natural gas to stay warm.
Cuz, you know, of the ENVIRONMENT!
So John Galt isn’t a libertarian either?
SBP welcome, however you are trying to argue with the cartoons that dance in his head. Sisyphus had an easier task.
And I reiterate from the thread the other night….
https://proteinwisdom.com/?p=13687#comment-593042
It’s nice to know the architecture hasn’t changed.
“As it happens, though, the Oxford English Dictionary records the first use of “liberalâ€Â, in the political sense, in 1820”
Wouldn’t want to argue with the OED. So apparently I’m still injecting anachronisms. But pulling out the old text book – the conservatives developed from the Tory party, which was a name adopted by the Royalists. The liberals were the Whigs before they were the liberals. So putting the names aside, the main point is that there is a political chain stretching from modern conservatives back to the Royalist, and from modern liberals back to the opposition in these early English parlemenents. Many things have changed, but there are still commonalities between the modern versions and the originals.
As for the specific terms “Left” and “Right”, in France when they came into use, the Right reffered to the monarchists, and the Left was the opposition.
When you think about it dethroning a monarch as in the French revolution is a quite radical Leftist act. I mean the monarch owns everything, the whole country. The rebels are taking it from him by violence and distributing the wealth and power.
The liberals were the Whigs before they were the liberals….Many things have changed, but there are still commonalities between the modern versions and the originals.
I’m fascinated. What are the “commonalities” between, say, John Locke and Bill Ayers? What are the “commonalities” between, say, Milton Friedman and Cardinal Richelieu?
If you’re going to redefine “left” as “opposition to those in power”, that would make those who don’t like the current situation, where the Democrats control both houses of Congress and (soon) the presidency, “leftists”, yes?
Hint: words have meanings.
Where do progressives fit into your spectrum, Dave? How about statism vs. individualism? Populism?
I denounce myself for demanding definitions.
Fascist.
Ayn Rand was an objectivist, she coined the term, she honed the philosophy. She is the genius who made BFD, Inc. (Bulloch Fence and Door, Inc., didn’t that work out great?!) possible. She’s a goddess, and Dave’s…not really up on intellectual thought.
Dave is still trying to keep the National Socialists from being on the left?
Nationalism and socialism are not mutually exclusive. The Nazis pursued socialism because they believed it was the way to promote their nationalist agenda.
Now, I always take Wikipedia with a grain of salt, but under Naziism, they say:
Does that sound like a government that practices capitalism? Or one that practices socialism?
What economic system do the following policies sound like?
o Abolition of income from interest
o Confiscation of war profits
o Guaranteed income
o Nationalization of trusts
o Shared profits with labor
o Expanded old-age pensions
o Communalization of department stores
o Execution of usurers
Finally, someone much more studied on this subject than either of us wrote the following:
(From Liberal Fascism, p 70.)
“This eventually progressed to socialism, where the goal was to distribute economic power more evenly throughout society. Socialistic policies are one feature of the modern Left, but it is also features less traditional morality, and favors more limited use of the military for cases of true defense of liberty at home. They favor a more international system (again distribued power).”
Are you really this stupid? Socialisms goal is to distribute economic power evenly thru society in what world? The goal is to concentrate it in a large central government and then dole it out as they see fit in order to maintain power. A governments number one goal, when you rip away all the bullshit, is to maintain power. Even our Representative Republic’s number one goal is to stay in power. They are not oriented toward you or me but toward their own ends. WTF did you do stop your education after kindergarden?
Oh and this gem of stupidity,
“favors more limited use of the military for cases of true defense of liberty at home. They favor a more international system (again distribued power).”
is a tired cliche. “True defense of liberty” my ass, how the fuck do you have any liberty when the government takes 1 dollar for every dollar you make? By the way maybe they favor large international systems, which do not work by the way, because they are blowing all their money in patronage(ie large social programs and 20 week paid vacations) to keep their own people happy and in check. They do not have the money for a military capable of anything other than a nice showy parade. You really can not be this stupid.
Dave circles back to Nazis in 3…2…1
You ever asked yourself who gets to distribute this power? I mean these are just angels on earth capable of no ill intent and with only our best interest at heart. Jesus christ if you haven’t been conned outa something yet I am sure you will get sold the Brooklyn Bridge at least once before you die.
What economic system do the following policies sound like?
o Abolition of income from interest
o Confiscation of war profits
o Guaranteed income
o Nationalization of trusts
o Shared profits with labor
o Expanded old-age pensions
o Communalization of department stores
o Execution of usurers
What are “Democrat’s Wet Dreams”, Alex.
Somehow I think this guy has a different definition of “liberty” than most people here as well.
“Comment by Dave G. on 11/21 @ 12:23 am #
One thing I’ve learned over time is that there is little use in arguing what definition of things are “correctâ€Â.”
That way the cartoons in your head can substitute for reality.
Nice trick.
“Today the battles tend to be about the concentration of economic power, with the Right favoring greater concentration of wealth in the wealthiest members of society.”
See what I mean?
“The Left has been about distributing power.”
Oy vey.
Tell that to Lenin, and Stalin and Hitler And Mussolini and Pol Pot and Mao ad…..
And to the 120,000,000 murder victim’s your “power sharers” put into their nice comfy mass graves.
Fucking idiot.
“The Left has been about distributing power.â€Â
I know I read that too and I just kept thinking of some naive 16 year old virgin from Montana flying into California to persue her dream of being a star but ends up getting picked up by some sleezy pimp.
Well, the Left has been about distributing power. To themselves. And their cronies.
The rest of us? Not so much.
Also for the government to “distribute economic power” they would by definition have to take it from someone. I do not want the government taking shit that it does not need to exist, especially not for a goal that can never be met.
You want to vote to give the government power to take money from private citizens in order to distribute it to you fine ok I will agree with that. As long as you have the balls to skip the middle man, come to my house, and try to take it yourself. I would wholeheartedly support that “change”.
I’d like to strike the word “cronies” from common usage, and replace it with “droogies”. “Cronies” is exhausted from overuse, and needs a lengthy convalescence.
“Pals” isn’t currently busy, also, and could use the extra income.
Ditto “buddies”.
But pulling out the old text book – the conservatives developed from the Tory party, which was a name adopted by the Royalists.
Interesting. What book would that be?
Wikipedia, incidentally, says:
Which is not to say that “Republican” maps into and is mapped into by “conservative”, but it appears that your book might just be wrong.
My html skills are good, but my typing skills suck. I think you can figure out what I meant to emphasize if I tell you I bolded two passages.
I’m nostalgic and prefer “Comrades” it just seems so historical.
Hey here’s another one of those liberty and freedom loving leftist telling us how he wants to restrict speech on the internet. Maybe Dave can explain how this is a good thing.
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/11/21/obamas-ag-choice-regulate-internet-communication/
I understand that Holder is also really big on disarming the citizenry.
He’ll make a fine AG.
200+ comments in and I’m here to say I can send you my copy of 1989 Writer’s Market if you’re still looking for an agent.
Still, my advice (which is free and worth every penny) would be to go the Dan Brown conspiracy/action/adventure/mystery route. You’d make a couple of million bucks and maybe even get a cameo in the movie.
#
Comment by thor on 11/20 @ 6:21 pm #
Comment by Spies, Brigands, and Pirates on 11/20 @ 5:56 pm #
Thor, leave SBP alone. He’s been basking in that McCain popular vote and electoral victory for weeks now. He was so focused on the polls and he took right to the lying media! He’s returned like MacArthur to prepare for the inauguration.
Oh, and N O.Brain:
Go back and read your posts on this thread. All of them = snarling, cursing, vicious ad hominems. What is wrong with you and why are you so pissed at everyone but the ten regulars on this site?
Lastly, helpful suggestion for ThomasD. Buy all the guns you want. But stock in gun companies and all. But, Obama supported Heller and picking a fight with entrenched gunophiles ain’t gonna win anyone any points. For what he has to do in the next few years, hacking people off for things that don’t matter makes no sense.
Besides, if he’s the crazy Socialist you think he is, your AR-15 won’t protect you from the Apaches anyway.
So, smear on camouflage and scream Wolverines all you want. Obama and Holder won’t being playing the role of Cuban and Russian invaders ….sorry.
I pity you, thor.
Really.
Greg Craig:
“For what he has to do in the next few years…”
That is exactly why we are buying guns.
You think my brothers in the military are going to fly Apaches against us?
Boy, are you in for a rude awakening…
“Greg Craig” is thor, by the way.
Ahhhhh…..troll….thanks SBP
“Oh, and N O.Brain:
Go back and read your posts on this thread. All of them = snarling, cursing, vicious ad hominems. What is wrong with you and why are you so pissed at everyone but the ten regulars on this site?”
FOAD, thor.
The Nazis were the sworn enemies of Communists.
Indeed, they fought them to the death.
That puts the Nazis squarely on the right.
Indeed, they fought them to the death.
That puts the Nazis squarely on the right.
The Vietnamese communist government fought wars with Cambodia and China. I guess that puts them “squarely on the right”, too?
Which side was “squarely on the right” in this conflict?
Just because you fight someone does not mean that your ideologies are entire polar opposites, sir.
Please consult logic before posting, sir.
NAZI stands for National Socialist, sir.
Please understand your history before posting, sir.
Even for the internet, that’s pretty dumb Spies.
And that’s saying something.
Which side in the last election labeled their opponent a Marxist?
Why is it dumb?
Based on your logic, it absolutely follows….I reasoned it out the same way.
SBP is correct, until your prove otherwise
you
No, I’m not, SBP. I’m a person who read your election prediction and laughed and laughed.
As for O’Brain, your spittle-flecked rage is a just a little too typical for you. Maybe some Prozac would remind you of basic communication skills?
And, for Sgt. York, the Army put down Shay’s Rebellion, it put down the Whiskey Rebellion, it defeated and occupied the South, and you can ask David Koresh about whether one can use small arms to beat the Feds.
In your apocalyptic wet dreams, you might imagine the army would side with you. The ghost of John Brown begs to differ. Your “Wolverine Revolution” against your own government might make you excited, and after reading the weirdness on this thread, I say go all Eric Rudolph. Clearing the underbrush of bunch of strange, gun-obsessed, Jonah Goldberg worshiping couldn’t be bad for society.
However, I’ll just go ahead and imagine your fantasies are as impotent as the Michigan Militia and the “patriots” in Montana were during the 90’s. Watch out for those black helicopter, Sergeant!
I think this notion that the Nazi party was socialist just because it had socialist in its name is a little overworked. They worked their way into power by promising people what they thought people wanted, and then viciously repressed actual socialism.
As much of a dumbass as thor is, I think he’s got this one right. I tend to think of it as an isolated, accidental kind of being right, though.
Which candidate has a proven history of significant interaction with self-avowed Marxists? Which candidate has run for office under a socialist party designation?
Just because Obaby seems to be a fellow traveler with Marxists, doesn’t make us fascists.
A+B+C=D You’re missing C
I guess parsnips thinks there is a bizarro version of the Democratic Peace Theory. Too bad history has proven him an idiot.
No, I’m not, SBP.
Shut up, thor.
Even for the internet, that’s pretty dumb Spies.
Yes, you are.
Trollhammered.
Keep talking…I’m the one who has relatives who are actual generals, you know, the guys actually running the armed forces.
Believe me, there will not be a socialist takeover of this country…
“Comment by parsnip on 11/21 @ 10:41 am #
The Nazis were the sworn enemies of Communists.
Indeed, they fought them to the death.
That puts the Nazis squarely on the right.”
And Stalin had an assassin put an ice pick in Trotsky’s brain.
So that places Trotsky firmly on the right.
Actually, that is exactly what Stalin did, calling all his comrades in the Communist party who either disagreed with him or that he turned on “fascists”.
Sound familiar?
Or is that too much history for you?
“As for O’Brain, your spittle-flecked rage is a just a little too typical for you.”
What, you got banned again, thor?
FOAD.
Exactly…The question is, how do we keep him off permanently?
The funny thing is he doesn’t realize that Generals are capitalists too. They own stock. And land. And have been fighting this leftist ideology for their entire careers. They know how dishonest, sneaky and pernicious it is.
Thor thinks they will just blindly obey the CinC, ignoring their Constitutional oath.
Like I said, a rude awakening.
Barack Obama hasn’t been sworn in yet, but he already is disappointing his supporters on the Left. Some Republicans are almost giddy at the mainstream appointments Obama has made or is reported to be considering–Hillary Clinton, Rahm Emanuel, Tom Daschle, Bob Gates, and so on. Jennifer Rubin, for example, writes:
Little did we know that “Change we can believe in” really meant “Change that will delight the Right and freak out the Left.”
Jennifer posits three possible explanations for Obama’s seeming moderation: indifference to national security policy; cynical opportunism; and political calculation. No doubt all three explanations contain a kernel of truth, but, with all due respect, I think that Jennifer and quite a few others are overlooking the obvious.
Throughout the campaign, when Obama talked about “change” what he mostly meant was having an African-American in the White House. His vagueness on this score was often criticized by those who care about policy, but most of his supporters understood perfectly well what he meant. A black man in the Oval Office was change enough for them. Obama’s signature issue during the early phase of the campaign was the war in Iraq, but when it became inconvenient to talk about that issue, Obama dropped it without a qualm and his supporters, with relatively few exceptions, didn’t hold it against him.
I think that Obama is similar to Bill Clinton in one important respect. Clinton famously wanted to be President not because there was anything in particular he wanted to do, but because he craved the status of being President. In Clinton’s case, this seems to have been due to an insatiable need for approval and affection. Obama, likewise, wants to be President not in order to do anything, but because he believes that for Barack Obama to be President is an end in itself. In Obama’s case, this view is due not to a psychological craving, but rather to the historical importance of being the first African-American President.
If I’m right about that, it makes sense for Obama to be reasonably moderate. He makes history simply by being a President with dark skin; what he desperately wants to avoid is for his Presidency to be seen as a disaster or a fiasco. Thus his sudden moderation on foreign policy: Obama is smart enough to understand that it is always possible for things to go wrong, but if the public perceives that an international setback is due to weakness, the President is in trouble. He’s Jimmy Carter. If a President is perceived as tough on foreign policy and something goes wrong, voters will say that they’re glad we have a hard guy in the White House.
In domestic policy Obama has more latitude, but here too it makes sense for him to play it safe. If he completes a mainstream Presidency successfully, he goes down in history. If he goes out on a limb and is marked down as a failure, it will be a setback for African Americans, more or less forever.
This doesn’t mean that Obama isn’t the most liberal politician ever elected President. He is, and no doubt that liberalism will manifest itself over and over during his administration. But it will be tempered, I think, by a high level of risk-aversion, a caution that would not be present if Obama were mainly an ideologue rather than a racial symbol.
Conservatives don’t generally see it this way because they don’t care about race. But lots of people do, and that fact will be central to an Obama administration that may well turn out to be more moderate than most have expected, on both the left and the right.
PAUL adds: I don’t see how anyone on the “right” can be “delighted” with the selection of Rahm Emmanuel, Tom Daschle, and (if it happens) Hillary Clinton. As John says, were they expecting Bernadine Dohrn?
I continue to believe that Obama won’t tack hard to the left on both the foreign and domestic fronts at the beginning. His initial focus, I think, will be a leftist domestic agenda. He has plenty of leeway, as John suggests, because the economic situation is so grim now. I don’t see Obama playing “small ball” here. I question whether his fear of being a failure will be sufficient to deter him from attempting to have a grand presidency.
In terms of foreign policy, look for Obama to provide the trimmings of a moderate policy. And don’t expect transparent softness. But be fearful that, over time, Obama will bring the U.S. into the “international fold” through the International Criminal Court, the Law of the Sea Treaty, etc. And don’t think that, if she becomes Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, the liberal internationalist, will attempt to prevent these assaults on our right of self government.
From Powerline this morning:
“JOHN adds: One point I didn’t make that should be part of the mix is that Obama, because of his own lack of experience, had little alternative to staffing his administration with veterans of Bill Clinton’s two terms. Victor Davis Hanson makes the point very clearly. To the extent that Obama’s moderation is manifested by surrounding himself with Clintonistas, necessity is a more persuasive explanation than ideology. But it also fits with the risk-aversion that I posited above.”
The more moderation, the better.
I will live with a moderate Dem: Clinton didn’t destroy America.
An extremist?
?
Whoops, didn’t all paste.
That’s from today’s Powerline…
THOR IS EVERYWHERE. Do you dream about him, too, SBP?
THOR IS EVERYWHERE.
Well, it certainly seems like he/you have nothing better to do with your life than stalk me, thor.
Trollhammered.
“Comment by Greg Craig on 11/21 @ 11:56 am #
THOR IS EVERYWHERE.”
So is dog shit.
How do you tell the difference?
Dogshit is kind of ambiguous, when you live in a part of town that’s planted heavily with gingko trees. Certain time of year, you see people madly trying to scrape nonexistent shit from their shoes.
“Interesting. What book would that be?
Wikipedia, incidentally, says:
The Whig Party was a political party of the United States during the era of Jacksonian democracy. ”
I was referring to the British Wigs from whom the American wigs took their name.
[…] PROTEIN WISDOM: “Well, if Bill Ayers can airbrush history and claim he was never a terrorist… I can […]
While stating for the record, again, that I am not Thor. I am Greg. But I can answer this question:
with “maybe it’s time for a little housecleaning, you obtuse, angry little man.”
Instead of hanging out and droning on, counter-factually, about Nazis being lefties and modern democrats being “the party of secession, segregation, and socialism,” you could, I don’t know, clean up the yard? How can I trust the spittle-flecked nuggets of rage you leave around here, if you can’t even clean up your pets.
Per thomasD and Sgt York, though, you better hurry up and get it done by January 21st. The difference between a re-education camp and a summary execution may just be dog feces on a Federal Agent’s shoe. There will be hell to pay, crazy dude.
It’s not just their name. It’s their economic policy — straight socialism. If a corporation didn’t play along with their diktat, they took control of it. The ownership was in name only.
“Instead of hanging out and droning on, counter-factually, about Nazis being lefties and modern democrats being “the party of secession, segregation, and socialism,â€Â
I didn’t post that today, thor.
FOAD.
Oh, and thor?
If 4 S’s:
slavery, secession, segregation and socialism.
Arrgh
It’s 4 S’s:
slavery, secession, segregation and socialism.
PIMF.
5 S’s — You forgot ‘surrender’
HA!
All four are the same thing you piled your yard with, N. Slavery, segregation, and secession were conservative Southern views, which we were smart enough to kick out of the Party in the 60’s. Take a look at the election map, you know the one Spies was so wrong on, and check out what Party Southern whites prefer now. Or, ask the ghost of segregationist Strom Thurmond why he liked your party so much. So much that the symbol of secession and segregation still flies over Southern Republican dominated states today.
Your profanity and inanity aside, you support the party of segregation, secession, and (thanks to bail-out and govt ownership of banks) socialism.
It is to laugh, O’Brain
By this same logic, National Socialists are Socialists, no?
I was referring to the British Wigs from whom the American wigs took their name
Which, Wikipedia has to say about British Whigs/Tories:
Democrats are obsessed with dividing everyone along racial lines, and we’re the one’s who are racist?
OK, my mother taught me to never argue with an idiot, as observers won’t be able to identify the idiot.
So, I’m done here…
What the hell? Who called you a racist? I remarked the home of the former lovers of segregation and secession are Republicans now and you ran with “racists”?
What the hell is that? No one called you a racist, sparky. Might want to knock that chip off your shoulder.
The irony is that a) if noting the home of segregationists and secessionists is Republican means calling Republicans racists, then b) you have no problem when N calls Democrats “racists,” despite the fact that Obama’s vote was 43% white and the rest Hispanic and African-American. it’s a funny kind of racism you see over here, Sarge. once in which all races participate.
Strange site, we got here.
Um, no. They’re dead.
I’m not whoever Greg Craig is, idiots.
He is correct. Di, Spies and P’Brain have hate-rot infected heads. It’s a form of extreme immaturity, as far as I can tell.
Re: #235,
It could be that the appointments that seem “moderate” (they don’t look moderate to me but do to some) may be for show. They will be ‘flack-catchers” and the real power will be the #2 or #3 at the department.
I’m not…
Hammer hits nail.
And you’re something of an expert in the area, so you should know.
Hammer hits…
Duuh strokes keyboard.
Hammer’s twit.
Here you see the two choices that all under the wonderful heel of the socialist get, the Gulag or the nine grams of lead.
Nice Party ya got there sparky. It’s a real shame that a few million eggs will get cracked before we all see how rotten the cooks are.
Named for that turd lawyer that sends little kids into slavery. Bet that’s a conversation piece.
In China, you don’t get the choice, and your family is billed for the cost of the cartridge. So, you see, it could be worse.
Ah, China. Making the Germans look inefficient.
As someone here remarked a few days ago, the margin of error in estimating the deaths due to Mao is larger than the number Hitler had murdered.
Probably why they charge, the ammo cost alone would be enormous.
I don’t know if it’s quite that easy, geoffb. I think it’s more that Mao killed more people by accident than Hitler did on purpose.
“both might be termed conservative by modern parameters. ” (British Wigs and Tories)
Dave: Well, yes. Ever here the expression “conservatives worship dead liberals?” Things that were once radical, sometimes become common place. True democracy where EVERYONE gets a vote was considered too radical by far. Extending the vote meant giving it to a few more white male landowners.