What if there were a game on a playing field with a flat area in the middle where 2 teams would gather & hills all around. At random intervals ‘issue’ flags would pop up on the hills & the players on the two teams would rush to the top of the hills to be first to claim the flags. “This flag is ours,” they might say, “we claim this issue, we were here first.” Part of the game would be that they would then have a certain amount of time to formulate reasons justifying why they have a right to keep possession of the flag. Another aspect of the game would be that the opposing team who were not the first to the flag could try to formulate reasons why the flag-holders should relinquish the flag to them.

The ability of our species to rationalize any of its own behavior is immense. Since 9/11 I am like a fish that has been blown up onto the dry edge of the fish tank & is thus able for the first time to become dimly aware of the water. It was hard to breath at first but it’s getting easier. I grow lungs. Now I have to figure out what air is & learn to walk on fins. I hope eventually I’ll grow feet.

I think Bush should personally amputate one limp from 3,000 Airmen, Sailors, Soldiers, and Marines on top of the 2,000 something that have already died. This should complete the ritual apology to the Shiites, and atone for his father’s sins.

You’re right, it is time for Bush Jr. to apologize to the Shiites, as well as for messing with Al-Sadr as well.

By then I imagine your hormone levels will be so low none of you will have the balls to stand up and be a real American, that is criticise your government for being wrong,

A lot of people are like me, but unlike me they are silent. very very silent.

And what they are silent about, is the fact that they really want Bush to nuke 4 countries. France, Iran, North Korea, and Saudi Arabia.

So it isn’t that the silent killers in America don’t have the balls, it is just that they want to give Bush a chance to find a peaceful solution, they want to give the Arabs a chance to save themselves from annihilation. We’re merciful like that.

I favor abortion rights, so I automatically must oppose the war in Iraq, hate George Bush, and want to string up Republicans, ne c’est pas? I don’t have a choice, do I? It follows automatically, like a mathematical proof, doesn’t it?

Don’t project behaviors that you assume must exist upon other people. Republicans can clearly see that Michael Totten and Glenn Reynolds aren’t pro-life, jeesus. And I’m sure neo neo con can as well

We don’t live under cognitive dissonance of “Every abortionist must be against us, that is why Michael Totten, a pro-choice person, is with us”.

I think you’re stretching a bit by suggesting it is immutable the distinctions of left and right.

In reality there need not be any connection whatsoever between my views of gay marriage and my views on, say, abortion: they are independent questions.

About as independent as the principle of mass and energy has to do with fusion and boiling water.

There isn’t a straight line connection, but there is a connection.

It seems, in other words, as though there really is a degree of coherence among these fairly fundamental abstractions that give some actual substance to the label. And this is what makes the “conversion” experience (so to speak) a bit like crossing a crevasse that you can’t re-cross (Churchill was referring to changing political parties, I believe, not political philosphies).

For what it’s worth, I too have gone from left to right. And I think, despite the opinion of one the anonymouses, that, in the present historical context at least, left to right is the direction of the great majority of such changes. Which has nothing to do with any supposition that “only your side is correct”.

I have adopted the label “extreme Left” to identify, in short-hand, the Tom Hayden affinity group.

I thought Shrinkwrap’s comment was very perceptive on the logical conflict faced by (my) extreme Left. So much so that I lifted the entire comment.

Writing that post led me back into the struggle for appropriate terminology. Then, when I return to neo-neocon I immediately discover that you are having a lively discussion of just that issue!

“I don’t know, it is tempting to engage in reefer madness again and blame all my personal problems on my nation and pursue bliss in the arms of Liberalism.”

A typical American crap conservative response, when not questioning one’s sanity, maturity or patriotism they accuse a “liberal” of being a drug addict.

And who’s blaming anyone’s “personal” problems on my nation, we’re blaming the Middle East’s problems on “our” nation. If you’re not aware of our footprint on the region, our interventions and Machevallian games the last 50 years, I can assure you
the Arabs are, as was made evident today in London.

No, we haven’t done anything to deserve this. Absolutely nothing.

How on earth can you breath with your head so far up your ass?

Understand that, as a neo-neocon, my positions are not unitary, and therefore not typical of what is thought to be on the “right.” Nor, as a liberal, was I particularly typical of those on the “left.” However, for the sake of convenience, I will continue to use the traditional nomenclature (how very conservative of me :-))!

I read the Den Beste article when it originally came out, and thought it was good.

To steve d.–I, likewise, am way behind in updating my blogroll. I keep waiting till I get a chunk of spare time to do it, so I keep putting it off. Thanks! (PS–I’m never grumpy!)

It must feel comforting to think that, but it’s a bit immature to think that only your side is correct, and the rest of the world will come around eventually (if only they listen to reason!, right?). That’s certainly what I used to think as a young republican.

Since conservatives do not believe in Utopia…

What else is the conservative minimalist state? It’s a myth about rugged individuals doing without the nanny state & perfect markets self-regulating. Conservativism is positively awash in utopian mythologies.

I don’t think that’s bad, actually: in order to critique and point the way forward, there has to be a world-as-it-should-be against which the world-as-it-is can be compared.

In your rush to sound all cool and jaded, I think you missed that.

Thanks heaps for the link. Then I thought “better double check that neo-neocon is in my blog-roll, I certainly don’t want her grumpy about that…”

Since neo-neocon is SeekerBlog’s most heavily linked other blog (26 outlinks as I write), it was embarrassing to discover a glaring blog-roll error. An error that I just corrected.

The lame excuse for the missing blog-roll entry is that I try to focus the list on the best blogs that I read every day. Rather, every day when we are near enough to land to get an internet connection. When a blog-roll gets into the hundreds of links it becomes just a telephone book. It takes more care to keep a short list accurate than a long list where you just automatically append any new blog of interest.

As excuses go, that’s not much better than “The dog ate my homework…”.

I agree with you in spirit, but you have to have some point of reference in which to discuss politics. “Left” and “Right” is the existing point of reference, even though it’s not ideal.