Rep Mack to the insufferable, twee Piers Morgan, (who, as a sober, balanced journalist, asserted that Sarah Palin was an accomplice in the shooting of Gabby Giffords, and once compared Tea Party supporters to Nazis and fascists, confused, evidently, about who it is who calls for a civilian defense force, or who has nationalized student loans, healthcare, a couple car companies, and keeps Jeff Immelt on speed dial): “You’re making your show a joke.”
Here’s the thing, Piers: we haven’t yet had our fun. Our “fun” comes when the progressive hacks you champion are pulled out root and branch from our Congress, the White House, the bureaucratic support structure, and our non-governmental institutions, then piled up in the sun, sprayed with beer, and left to compost.
Your 20% is no longer going to control me and mine. One way or the other, our “fun” is coming. And were I you, I’d prepare an exit strategy — because being on record as a willful propagandist for those trying to enslave our children and grandchildren is no way to set yourself up for success in the coming Great Awakening.
— Though if you behave, I might keep you around as a butler. I hear you pretentious English prigs can starch the shit out of an oxford.
(h/t Rightscoop)
I find it tough to take the guy seriously when he judges a dance show. Plus he’s such a toffee nosed git. And twee.
Sometimes I want to forsake my vow against running for office, just so that I might have the chance to tear Piers (and his fellow travelers) a new one. Unfortunately, the price is divorce, and that ain’t worth it.
…then piled up in the sun, sprayed with beer, and left to compost.
I strongly protest this course of action, as wasting beer is a guaranteed ticket to Hell. Cover them with something no one cares about, like kerosene-soaked copies of Obama’s speeches.
Their own flop-sweat will suffice as a medium for the bacteria to grow.
It’s bad beer, Wraith.
Word
I hear you pretentious English prigs can starch the shit out of an oxford.
Hardly. Prigs like this need experts to do such work for them. Piers is good for little more than enriching overrated vintners, and for fondling the grandnieces and grandnephews.
Insufferable ass. He and his filk are due a reckoning.
link
From Meade’s essay (my emphasis):
This seems to me one serious problem with Meade’s analysis. Is this true simply, that “the roots” of “the progressive ideal” were set in a time when “Americans had an eighth grade education or less”?
Actually, no, it is not true. The “roots” of Progressivism were born in the work of Condorcet in 1795, and of others in his generation round about that time. That was a time when there was no such thing as an American “eighth grade” education.
But why does this matter? It matters because Meade and other Democrats with him do not identify the roots of Progressivism, do not return to examine the origins of Progressivism to see whether something about those origins themselves was incorrect.
Instead they too often look to derivative thinkers in the Progressive tradition, or merely inadequate politicians attempting to implement the “ideals” of Progressivism and thus never get to the roots, and therefore never confronting the stark problems of the ideal best expressed at its birth.
And here I was thinking that Sharon Osborne was the biggest dumbass to serve as a judge on America’s Got Talent.
“Sketch for a Historical Picture of the Progress of the Human Spirit”, sdferr?
I assume as much. Any chance you have a link to that text (translated) online?
Nevermind, just found it.
At the Online Library of Liberty
http://oll.libertyfund.org/index.php?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Fperson=3971&Itemid=28
Heh, I commented first for once. Still, thanks.
bh, an aside, but see how your link would code into “it”. Mine wouldn’t, for some reason, so I had to just dump it in as it came. WordPress is funny that way sometimes.
Fair enough on Condorcet and roots of progressivism. But I think Mead’s point is that those roots took hold in American soil during our Progressive Era.
The bigger sin, in my opinion is slighting a late nineteenth/early twentieth century eighth grade education. I for one would be willing to bet that the average eight grader had more practical knowledge —and almost certainly more knowledge about economics and civics— a century ago than does today’s high school graduate.
Mead’s point is inadequate to the problem then. Or I don’t know what else to say. But he follows this same pattern a lot I think, which in the end does a disservice to his readers, and for all I know, himself (actually, I suspect he knows what the true roots are, but doesn’t see why he should examine them in detail).
I conclude from watching that clip that British and American English have diverged so much in recent times that common words have arrived at nearly opposite meanings.
Actually, I’d go back to Sir Thomas More’s Utopia for the roots of progressivism. Lord Clark noted that 19th century progressives believed and acted on almost everything proposed in it. Now, I suppose we could have a discussion on whether Sir Thomas More was serious or satirical, but that’s another topic.
Thomas More was a Platonist, and fully ironical. I don’t see how he’d help.
The only real problem I have with Mead’s article is that, while acknowledging the lack of actual success progressive programs have, their real sin is that they haven’t done a good enough job of publicizing and selling the wonderful things they do, or want to do
tofor us. Kind of like Obama and Obamacare.It is also important to recognize the imprint of Puritanism that infects progressivism, which is especially ironic coming from the so-called reality-based community.
Charles may be on to something here. Could it be that the problem with Leftists is that they’re completely literal in their earnestness? Utopia as a blue print? Orwell’s “Politics and the English Language” as a primer in obfuscation, Animal Farm an instruction manual?
Secular Puritanism is a pretty good desciptor of Progressivism.
here’s some thoughts on shrinking fed govt
link
Defending the indefensible never seems to be a problem for them.
Largely because we’re too busy justifying ourselves in front of their bar. Time to put them in the dock.
The Great Dissuader
Throwing another faggot on the fire.
homophobe
bassoonophobe more like
I think Piers and his audience would be better served if he would invite a true conservatives on the show who are willing to discuss important issues without all the unnecessary surly comeuppance.
Isn’t David Brooks available?
Q: Why does every orchestra have a couple of oboes?
A: Kindling for getting the bassoons burning properly.
heh, that’s the ticket
maybe they can get it going strong enough to melt a couple of french horns while they’re at it? channel the trombones in lieu of a bellows?
Silly rabbits; most bassoons and oboes are made out of resin.
Which just means you have to chop up a bunch of violins to get them really going.
Fuck Piers. The British didn’t dig us much last time either.