Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

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

Archives

Mike Hendrix Gets His OUTLAW On [Dan Collins] – UPDATED BY JEFF

Not that he’s ever really got his OUTLAW off. I could excerpt, but there’s no point, really, when you ought to read the whole thing.

In related news, Dan Riehl calls out Jeff.

And Obama internationalizes Republican media policy through unilateral disarmament.

*****
Jeff update: Steele is wrong. And Ace is wrong for defending him. Until we understand how important it is to hold linguistic ground, we are destined to have the ideology that protects us erode. It’s time to get existential, people: win the immediate battles, even if you don’t think you can win the war.

Here’s what I wrote in a different context, but the message remains the same: each time we cede ground, we trade a bit o of principle for what we THINK is a bit of pragmatism.

But the real pragmatism is a steadfast refusal to cede principle, because by doing so we cede the logical high ground. And it is there that pragmatism and idealism collide — because there is only one way language can be said to work correctly.

It really is that simple.

18 Replies to “Mike Hendrix Gets His OUTLAW On [Dan Collins] – UPDATED BY JEFF”

  1. dicentra says:

    Oh, this is beautiful. All my congresscritters are getting a copy of this part:

    To use Ace’s own hypothetical: no, none of us would blame McCain for disavowing him publicly after accusations of “homophobia” and “eliminationist Islamophobia” — if the accusations were true.

    But, see, that’s just it: as with so many of the incidents of yelping outrage from the Left, — against Ace, against Bush, against Limbaugh — they patently AREN’T true. And what’s worse, these accusations are not made sincerely, in good faith; they’re a tactic, a particularly underhanded and devious one. When we meekly allow ourselves to be maneuvered into the aforementioned defensive, by responding to false charges with an eye preliminarily on not offending the mushy middle — well, at that point the game is lost, and deservedly so.

  2. Joe says:

    Come on, Dan Riehl, Jeff is not on the hunt. On the road he scores Evangelical chicks only to get them to hook up with Ace and Allah (because he loves those guys and they need all the help they can get). It is a tough sell, even for committed Outlaws, usually requiring many rounds of overpriced kamakazis to close that deal.

    Meanwhile in the wee hours, just before closing hour, Roger Simon and Joe the Plumber like to sit together in a dark booth and rub each others heads and calling Michael Steele on his “private” cell number after too many Cuba Libras.

    The dirty secrets of CPAC are not pretty!

  3. Pablo says:

    But the idea that we can’t or shouldn’t say things that are objectively and obviously true is, I think, a big part of why we’re in the mess we’re in right now.

    Spot on.

    Think of it: how many of you were frustrated, by the end of Bush’s tenure in office, by his refusal to defend perfectly defensible positions and ideas against dishonest assaults from liberals, especially in the media?

    Mega dittoes.

  4. Dan Collins says:

    Is that a Drunken Negro Head Cookie?

    Yes, yes this is a Drunken Negro Head Cookie.

  5. happyfeet says:

    People what protest cookies are silly.

  6. pdbuttons says:

    where’s the drunken negro head cookie monster when u need him?
    oh-in the trash can next to groucho

  7. Priciples shminciples. The right needs to stop ceding premises.

    LEFTISTS: SO REPUBLICANS, WHEN DID YOU STOP BEATING YOUR WIVES?

    REPUBLICANS: UHHH… THURSDAY?

    It’s not like either side is being logical while the other is not, both sides are being logical—based on their differing premises about the way the world works. When the Republicans concede the premises, they concede the argument.

    yours/
    peter.

  8. George Orwell says:

    Sigh. Jeff as usual has the bull by the horns. I’ve posted it elsewhere, and I’ll post it here. Some declare it verboten to wish failure upon a President? Scheiss. Suppose I say “I reject every one of the President’s policies and hate where he wants to take this nation, but I support our President!” What does that statement resemble?

    Hint: “I reject every inch of the President’s policies, and hate what he has done with the war in Iraq, but I support the troops!”

    I want Obastard to fail. Epically.

  9. Jeff G. says:

    Peter —

    I disagree both sides are being logical, because as I’ve argued repeatedly, the linguistic premises of the left are logically incoherent — something which became apparent most recently when Ms Marcotte got herself all jumbled up trying to juggle social construction on one hand with essentialism on the other.

  10. […] speech in its entirety, I’m going to go with Mike Hendrick on this one, and with Jeff: Steele is wrong. And Ace is wrong for defending him. Until we understand how important it is to […]

  11. donald says:

    I don’t support the president, I hope he trips on a rock and busts his fucking head. Might knock some sense into him.

  12. donald says:

    OH, and Mike Steele is an affirmative action baby, and Mike Hendrix is one righteous, cool dressing, rocking mother fucker.

  13. serr8d says:

    Jeff Goldstein: Loser

    Says the man sucking the wrong end of the cigar what’s topped by a fedora.

  14. Pablo says:

    This is how it’s done politely. Concede nothing and use the opportunity to reiterate the premise. Make the argument again, and mark the flak “Return to Sender”. Nice job, Bobby. More please.

  15. McGehee says:

    But the idea that we can’t or shouldn’t say things that are objectively and obviously true is, I think, a big part of why we’re in the mess we’re in right now.

    I once got in some trouble for asking someone, “If the truth offends you, whose fault is that?”

    Evidently, it was the truth’s fault after all.

  16. rickinstl says:

    That’s exactly right Jeff. Hold the ground. Don’t give a goddamn inch on language. Never let them get comfortable in their mythologies. We don’t always have to be pricks about it, (although under certain circumstances that can be one hellacious good time), but whether you’re being civil or not, never let them define terms.

  17. […] the ongoing debate, has been a theme of Jeff G’s for a good long time. Jeff’s — and Dan’s, and my — disgust over seeing Republicans leaders roll over again and again, docilely […]

  18. Well I don’t think we really disagree at all insofar as principles are used as premises in argumentation. And that’s my point. By accepting the left’s definition of “freedom” or “justice” or what have you, they are accepting the left’s premises regarding cause and effect in the world and ceding their own.

Comments are closed.