Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

“This ‘conversation’ is a set-up”

Harsanyi:

My only contribution to the crumbling discourse, it seems, is believing in the tenets of classical liberalism. That, in and of itself, is a sin.

This leaves the person with two choices: revise your viewpoint or shut up. Which, of course, is the point.

The always-civil Jacob Weisberg of Slate was more forceful in this regard, claiming that, “At the core of the far right’s culpability is its ongoing attack on the legitimacy of U.S. government . . . .”

Which, as you know, should not be confused from those heady times liberals were claiming that George W. Bush was “not my president” or that we needed a “regime change at home.” That kind of talk strengthened the legitimacy of government. Just as the “far right” — and I will assume this consists of anyone not named David Frum — could probably make the case that demanding government honor its constitutional limits is a demand for legitimacy.

We can argue about those things, I know. We can cobble together stupid remarks by radio talk show hosts or union activists or congresspeople and smear half the country. We can play tit-for-tat with Tea Party banners and anti-war bumper stickers and dig up some figurative rhetoric that sounds over the top retroactively and blow it out of proportion.

But this impending conversation about civility and our climate of hate is not only a useless one, it also is meant to discourage dissent. It is a rigged talk, because not only do we — by any standard and context available — reside in a highly civil and peaceful political system, violence is almost non-existent. The Tea Party didn’t pick up pitchforks and storm the White House; they knocked off Republicans in primaries.

Now, we may want to have a conversation about our policies regarding the mentally ill or the need for more gun control (though I may disagree with the outcome) because, after all, they are relevant to the horrible events of the past week. But conservatives should be wary of any national dialogue about civility or any beer summit about the specter of political violence.

It is nothing more than a setup.

All true. But here’s the good thing: nearly everyone paying attention knows it.

And in the long run, I think the Democrats’ transparent and cynical rush to use this latest “crisis” to try restrict speech and gun ownership — that is, to immediately look for ways to abridge the first two constitutional amendments — will only harm them as more and more voters wake up to the left’s insatiable desire to restrict individual liberty and centralize power.

In the meantime, just point and laugh.

20 Replies to ““This ‘conversation’ is a set-up””

  1. LTC John says:

    “In the meantime, just point and laugh.”

    I’ll meet you half-way. I’ll point (with both middle fingers, oh, and pointing upward…) but I shan’t laugh much. Maybe at a little, but mostly I shall be either cursing or forcefully arguing.

  2. JHoward says:

    The man is good.

  3. Pablo says:

    And in the long run, I think the Democrats’ transparent and cynical rush to use this latest “crisis” to try restrict speech and gun ownership — that is, to immediately look for ways to abridge the first two constitutional amendments — will only harm them as more and more voters wake up to the left’s insatiable desire to restrict individual liberty and centralize power.

    Yup. And they’ve been foolish enough to invest everything in the destruction of Sarah Palin. Bad idea.

  4. sdferr says:

    In a sense, though a better one, so also is the other conversation a set-up:

    The subject speaks its own importance; comprehending in its consequences nothing less than the existence of the union, the safety and welfare of the parts of which it is composed, the fate of an empire in many respects the most interesting in the world. It has been frequently remarked that it seems to have been reserved to the people of this country, by their conduct and example, to decide the important question, whether societies of men are really capable or not of establishing good government from reflection and choice, or whether they are forever destined to depend for their political constitutions on accident and force. If there be any truth in the remark, the crisis at which we are arrived may with propriety be regarded as the era in which that decision is to be made; and a wrong election of the part we shall act may, in this view, deserve to be considered as the general misfortune of mankind.

  5. Big Bang Hunter says:

    – Quote of the week:

    [O’Reilly} also tried to bait Hasselbeck, asking if she ever feels ganged up on when she is tussling with the “far left” Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Behar on “The View.” Hasselbeck insisted that she never feels that way. “I have three kids under the age of five-and-a-half,” she said. “I’m used to debating them before I get into work.”

    – Exactly. Just like wide-eyed little kids.

  6. Joe says:

    These voices of the left, and their toady wormtongues of the right, so so hope that they can scapegoat the right/tea partiers/republicans by the actions of the mentally unhinged. They make me sick with their hypocrisy and lies.

  7. Joe says:

    And I thank Mr. Harsanyi for saying things that Jeff (and a few others) been saying for some time. The voices in the wilderness are starting to be heard.

  8. happyfeet says:

    President Obama seeks to comfort the nation over the Arizona shootings while riding a surge of popularity.*

    that’s probably because he’s so fucking awesome

  9. happyfeet says:

    yup. Propaganda whore Viv Schiller’s National Soros Radio confirms the exceedingly high awesomeness factor

    A lot of pundits are opining on what President Obama should say at Tucson’s Wednesday evening memorial and show of support for the victims of last weekend’s shooting and a coming together for the community and the nation.

    Given that as a candidate Obama successfully pulled off one of the most difficult rhetorical assignments in U.S. history with his March 2008 Philadelphia speech about racial anger and distrust in America, he likely doesn’t need much advice.

  10. Bob Reed says:

    I too agree that the lefties overplayed their hand this time; too many people are “tuned in”. Which is why his speech in Tuscon better be as awesome as it’s already been built up to be by his devotees, because Sister Sarah’s will be a hard act to follow.

  11. John Bradley says:

    Ooh, I remember the March 2008 speech about racial anger! That was the one where he said… well, err… he said something or other… but I distinctly remember that we were all very impressed by it at the time, whatever it was!

    I don’t know, maybe it was the complete absence of “negro dialect”, or perhaps his trousers were particularly well-creased, but it was truly a Legendary Speech, to be enshrined in the Halls of Speechdom, of that there can be no doubt!

  12. Slartibartfast says:

    Fascism comes wrapped in a whole bunch of quote misattributions, remember.

  13. sdferr says:

    Federally defunding CPB, PBS and NPR, while not pressing urgencies themselves, ought still to be on the first four-month to-do list. Let the Congress remember to get around to the job eventually.

  14. dicentra says:

    Slightly OT: If you’re not following @badbanana on Twitter, get the hence and do it now. I mean, how can you risk missing out on gems such as “It’s that time of year in Nebraska when the ground is too frozen for shallow graves and your irritating neighbor knows it.”

    Also recommended, Lord_Voldemort7 (Unlike the other poser Voldemorts on Twitter, this one appears to be The Real One): “I nominate @lord_voldemort7 for a Shorty Award in #humor because the dark lord puts the FU in Funny. Enough Said.”

  15. Slartibartfast says:

    Oh. Linky.

  16. cranky-d says:

    I hope you’re correct, Jeff, because for some reason this latest incident of progressive lying really set me off. I have no idea why it bothered me so much this time, when I’ve seen it all before, but I got to the point of thinking it might be time to take a break from engaging in any political stuff. Nothing like this should ever affect one beyond a certain point.

    If people really are paying attention, and there is a backlash that is felt on the left, then it might be worth waiting to see it happen.

  17. Squid says:

    I have no idea why it bothered me so much this time, when I’ve seen it all before…

    Because this time they’re calling us accomplices to murder?

    I think Monday morning was the first time I’d been accused of a felony by a neighbor. And after my backlash, she backpedaled real quick and insisted that of course she didn’t mean me, merely everybody who thinks and speaks like I do. Silly totebaggers better learn real quick that when you accuse me and mine personally, we’re gonna take it personally. Judging by how they’re reacting to getting called on their shit, it’s becoming obviously that they really didn’t think this one through very well.

    Get in their faces. Punch back twice as hard. Teh Won says so!

  18. happyfeet says:

    In the campaign here on the Republican side, they were talking about taking [Giffords] out. A rational person knows what that means, but you don’t know how an irrational person will act.

    Mike Hellon, a former chairman of the Arizona Republican Party

  19. Big Bang Hunter says:

    – If he really isn’t able to parse this whole Lefty BS circus he should step aside or join the howling moonbats feets.

    – It;s exactly that sort of spineless crap, knuckling under to the crapolla narrative that changes with every passing moment that we have to be especially cognizant of, and tough on them when they do it.

    – They use blood libel – We get in their faces and call them out for what they are. Liars, and opportunists, and political bigots.

Comments are closed.