Irony of ironies, all is irony
In the last sentence of my PJ essay I mentioned that this campaign contains many ironies.
What might they be?
To begin with, that the Democrats who bear a great deal (although far from all) of the blame for the subprime mortgage crisis are being seen by most Americans as the party best equipped to save us from it.
That it is possible that the prospect of a likely Obama Presidency may be part of what’s spooking the market, but that the more it goes down the more he benefits.
That Iraq was the biggest issue for years and it’s McCain’s strength, but by the time the election’s rolled around it’s a distant memory.
That ACORN is implicated in both the subprime mortgage crisis and voter fraud, and Obama is implicated in ACORN, and yet he is poised on the brink of becoming the next President.
Let’s not stop at this election, either. How about the two-term Presidency of one George Bush? It is bounded by two huge crises, one at the beginning at one at the end.
Bush had only been in office for a little over seven months when 9/11 catapulted him into dealing with an unprecedented large-scale attack by terrorists on American soil, dragging him into an interventionist foreign policy that was exactly the reverse of his original position. For this he has been excoriated, even though we have not experienced another attack on American soil and al Qaeda has lost power and influence in the Arab/Moslem world.
Now, at the very end of Bush’s Presidency, he is faced with an enormous financial crisis of worldwide dimensions, forcing him to use government funds to take over (if only temporarily) the debt of almost our entire financial system. For a man who prefers to keep government’s hands off the market, this is another bitter blow.
Some would say, of course, it’s his own fault—that his commitment to lack of regulation led us here. From what I’ve read and learned, this is only partly true, perhaps even less than half. It wasn’t as though Congress was crying out for reform of practices such as over-leveraging, or derivatives, or for the return of the uptick rule—at least, I haven’t been able to find any evidence of it (please let me know if you can locate any). In fact, as far as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac—the epicenters of the present quake—went, it was Bush and his fellow Republicans who were trying to regulate and Democrats who were yelling “Nay!”
But that won’t help him now, will it? It’s so much easier to blame the hated Bush and the Republicans who were in charge for the first six years. Never mind the fact that their hands were tied by the power of the Democratic minority, or after 2006 by the power of the Democratic majority. Much better to look to the new face Obama, and don’t bother delving into his own record on blocking the attempts at reform (notice I linked the same article twice in one paragraph; it’s that important, and that ironic).
[ADDENDUM: The title of this post is a riff on one of the most powerful and beautiful passages in Ecclesiastes. It might be a good idea to ponder the original right about now:
The words of the Preacher, the son of David, king in Jerusalem.
Vanity of vanities, saith the Preacher, vanity of vanities; all is vanity.
What profit hath a man of all his labor which he taketh under the sun?
One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh: but the earth abideth for ever.
The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose.
The wind goeth toward the south, and turneth about unto the north; it whirleth about continually, and the wind returneth again according to his circuits.
All the rivers run into the sea; yet the sea is not full: unto the place from whence the rivers come, thither they return again.
All things are full of labor; man cannot utter it: the eye is not satisfied with seeing, nor the ear filled with hearing.
The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.
Is there any thing whereof it may be said, See, this is new? it hath been already of old time, which was before us.
There is no remembrance of former things; neither shall there be any remembrance of things that are to come with those that shall come after.]
i also feels that the volatility of the market is due to Obama’s likely election. irony indeed.
I had said this once before somewhere but I think one of the major ironies in the closing weeks of this campaign is that we’re now turning to an everyman expert at working with septic tanks to help explain this election. Could the connection be any more blatant?
Irony has its uses.
Irony of the past: GWB in a speech while campaigning for 1st term: (paraphrase) The US is not in the business of “nation’ building… GWB is elected and proceeds to militarily depose dictator – beginning the process of “nation” building.
Irony of the present: liberal Democratic acolytes of Hillary, herself a liberal Democratic acolyte of Saul Alinsky, revenge themselves on the liberal Democratic acolytes of Obama, himself a liberal Democratic acolyte of Saul Alinsky.
Irony of the future?: Obama’s masterpiece creation, ACORN, like Frankenstein’s monster, turns on its creator, ending his chances at being the ONE.
For two weeks I’ve been pondering the fact that the market may, in part, be discounting the future economic and tax policies of the Obama administration. The full effects of this will not be felt for a few years yet.
I continue to marvel at the profound ignorance of economics, finance, and history that abounds in our society.
The dynamism of our American economy stays alive when it is possible for new ideas, business models, and small businesses to grow larger and expand. To do this requires capital. Some of it is in the form of retained earnings (what the owners plow back into the business). Some of it comes from outside sources, such as debt financing or going public (selling shares of stock via investment banking consortia). If the business is already public, it means selling additional shares. That money, folks, is what enables our economy to grow. People get hired and begin their careers on it. Someone should tell all these recent college grads and the ones still in school all about that.
The vast majority of jobs in this economy are not provided by the large companies. When companies get large and bloated, their expenses rise, their profit margins shrink, all the while they are faced with “me too” competitors, further shrinking margins and revenues. Large companies remain successful by getting good at reversing the bloat of their organizations or, today particularly, outsourcing to cheap labor countries.
So, the critical economic and tax policies that matter are the ones that provide an environment within which entrepreneurship and smaller companies can grow.
So… why does not John McCain ram these, and other related points, home to the dopes in front of their television sets? Why does he not lash Obama with this reality?
I was a kid and young teenager during the sixties and an older teenager and young adult during the seventies. This was a period of economic stagnation in the country’s history. I don’t want to see this repeated. It was not a good time to be a young person then, despite disco, rock and roll, and sexual libertinism. It really was not a good time to be starting out in life. I cannot emphasize this fact enough with the 18-30 year old demographic that is going gaga over Obama.
Isn’t there anyone who can make this case to the kids better? And forget about the Boomers who are a few years older than I am, who are committed Leftists. They are not gonna change. In fact, this is the moment they’ve been waiting for, longing for, since their SDS days.
FredHjr:
I’m 19, and I’d say that most of my age group is apolitical, and those who are planning to vote have no conception of history before, say, 2003. Economics? No way, man, that’s hard! Finance? Only those in search of filthy lucre go into that…
If I were stupid enough to say in public that I’m voting for McCain, I’d become the class troglodyte. *shrugs* Most people learn from experience, so I guess we’re going to experience how governments can make recessions worse – I’m only pissed I have to experience it with them.
the agitprop has worked, people are so confused that they dont know at all what either stands for, or what sie stand for what… for the first time the electorate is so ignorant, and out there, that they will elect a hitler and gladly sing hosanas for him, till way too late.
Just what do people know about Barack Obama?
sistertoldjah.com/archives/2008/10/13/just-what-do-people-know-about-barack-obama/
The conclusion many of us have come to is that many voters in this country who have moved towards Obama during this crisis simply don’t know enough to make an informed decision and are swinging towards Obama simply because he’s not a member of the incumbent president’s party.
With that in mind, let’s turn to an audio clip from the Howard Stern show. No, I don’t care for Stern at all, but he did a segment today in which a guy who works for the show went out and interviewed people in Harlem and asked them about Obama and McCain. What the interviewer did was apply McCain’s positions to Obama, and asked random people questions like “”Are you more for Obama’s policy because he’s pro-life? Or because he thinks should stay in Iraq and finish this war?”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyvqhdllXgU
shows how little they konw… and i can say the same for mst of the leftists i know.. in fact, ask them to give you five facts, and they are all emoting instinctual and reflective parrots.
they continue
Now, what will probably attract the most attention from that audio clip as far as the left is concerned is the fact that Howard Stern had the guy interview only black people, in an attempt to prove that they were only voting for Obama because he is black. But the truth be told, how many people out there think that the average white voter out there would have answered any differently? I don’t think there would have been very many.
The audio clip made me feel a mixture of sadness and anger. Sadness because there are so many people in this country who (I feel) don’t know much about Barack Obama and are voting for him for no other reason than because he makes people “feel good” and because he’s “cool and hip” (shades of Bubba), and anger, because this type of lazy ignorance is very likely going to elect a man who sells Socialism with a smile on his face
and in the continuation they then post how the same ignorane is all over… not just with africans in harlem…
sistertoldjah.com/archives/2008/10/15/infuriation-nation-continued/
I’m just going to reprint his amazed e-mail about the focus group:
Reagan Dems and Independents. Call them blue-collar plus. Slightly more Target than Walmart.
Yes, the spot worked. Yes, they believed the charges against Obama. Yes, they actually think he’s too liberal, consorts with bad people and WON’T BE A GOOD PRESIDENT…but they STILL don’t give a f***. They said right out, “He won’t do anything better than McCain” but they’re STILL voting for Obama.
The two most unreal moments of my professional life of watching focus groups:
54 year-old white male, voted Kerry ‘04, Bush ‘00, Dole ‘96, hunter, NASCAR fan…hard for Obama said: “I’m gonna hate him the minute I vote for him. He’s gonna be a bad president. But I won’t ever vote for another god-d*mn Republican. I want the government to take over all of Wall Street and bankers and the car companies and Wal-Mart run this county like we used to when Reagan was President.”
The next was a woman, late 50s, Democrat but strongly pro-life. Loved B. and H. Clinton, loved Bush in 2000. “Well, I don’t know much about this terrorist group Barack used to be in with that Weather guy but I’m sick of paying for health insurance at work and that’s why I’m supporting Barack.”
I felt like I was taking crazy pills. I sat on the other side of the glass and realized…this really is the Apocalypse. The Seventh Seal is broken and its time for eight years of pure, delicious crazy
fredhjr,
Large companies remain successful by getting good at reversing the bloat of their organizations or, today particularly, outsourcing to cheap labor countries.
great commentary as usual fred…
but if you dont mind i add:
they also remain successful because they funnel profits to peopel who arent shareholders, in exchange for returns. so they get minimum wage to rise, corporate taxes to be high (but they get a rebate), etc..
normally when an animal gets too big and sluggish, something else comes a long and causes its demise…
but in this fascistic system, the state bloats the companies and protects them as its easier to control one large fat sow that needs you desperately to survive, than it is to try to direct and cajole a ton of independent companies that are not beholden to favors.
most of the policies of the left, are sold on a premise, but a faulty in principals..
ideologic people can work on premises, so they can understand fake rules like vampires as a system… but they dont understand principals, the basis for the premisis of the real world!
Fred, if you want to get really depressed, ask anyone under 40 what the Republican Party ever did for blacks (or, conversely, which party was responsible for segregation and Jim Crow).
The typical response to learning the truth: “No way!”
And that’s really depressing.
Elena,
My son is just a little younger than you and going nuts because “everyone around me is voting for Obama.”
This might be so. Or it might not.
I’m in an artistic field, where the leftists wear buttons and give political speeches on professional occasions, and I keep my mouth shut because I’d like to continue working — yes, this has been discussed here before, but in fields where everyone is a contractor it really IS that raw. You speak and contracts dry up. I’ve seen it happen. (And, facing the inevitable, I have ordered Roger L. Simon’s Blacklisting Myself, hoping for insights to what happens when I blow up.)
This said, I’ve seen a new generation starting to come into positions of power. The thing is, like gay people in the bad old days, we’ve developed ways of picking up the “tells” and we all find each other and know each other — eventually. (One of the things interestingly are that we are the generation who came in after the boomers — no, we’re not boomers, no matter how they try to cram us in, our life experiences are totally different and we trend anti-authoritarian government — the ones who came of age for Reagan’s first run, or for his second. Not all. There are a lot of boomers who woke up after 9/11 and a lot who never fell for the marxist cr*p. But a lot of the people now getting reins of power are, for lack of a better term, “my people.”) And I can see the replacement taking place, all but invisible to the people still holding most of the power. People whose entire identity is bound up in justifying stopping the vietnam war which they believe the ultimate evil, are being replaced by people who see that stopping the vietnam war — the way they did — was surrendering to evil.
(Mind you, I think I’ve blown it more than a few times and they’re onto me, because I can keep my mouth shut, but I can’t vocally endorse their pet causes. My soul, I’m sorry to say, has a higher price than that. The thing is, they’re not sure. So they’re not enthusiastic about me, but they keep hiring me, because I AM the most competent for what they need. I have to be. I don’t get that extra boost of being their buddy.)
Sometimes I sit in a lecture room or banquet hall, while the person who can write checks is up there frothing at the mouth about the evil Bush, and I look around and I think “I wonder if you know more than fifty percent of the people you’re talking to are on the other side?” (And I hope the take over happens fast, because heaven knows we’re losing the public at a fast clip.)
My hope, Elena, is that it is true of yours and my son’s environments as well. That a lot of those people who say they’re going to vote for Obama, actually aren’t.
Naive? Perhaps. But you see, I believe in humanity. I look at history and I see that despite some completely disgusting periods, by and large, we move forward.
Of course, I also see this is because of the US who literally introduced the cause of individual human freedom to the world, and who keeps it burning bright. And I hope very hard we don’t go quietly into that not so good socialist night.
I love your cite of the ironies, and of Ecclesiastes as a tonic to possible despair. I immediately flashed on Ecclesiastes 2:24, where King Solomon begins to break from his sense of despair:
Here’s what I flashed on: has Senator Obama really enjoyed good in his labour?
Senator Obama cannot look at his professional labor and say, with satisfaction: it is good. Senator Obama’s labor at networking contacts has opened doors for his advancement. However, Senator Obama’s professional labor has not produced notable accomplishment. Actually, Senator Obama’s record of professional labor is notable for lack of accomplishment. Senator Obama’s professional actions, his professional labor, have not measured up to his words. When I thought of Ecclesiastes, I thought of 2:24, and of that aspect of Senator Obama.
The Left was happy to term Bush as an “idiot” until September 11, 2001. At that point, he showed true leadership and had to be destroyed by the Left. Withg his help, they were successful. As a result, he cannot show any credible leadership now, when it is truly needed. Politics is a damn shame.
fredhjr
I continue to marvel at the profound ignorance of economics, finance, and history that abounds in our society.
I think i am beyond marveling. I live in NY.
though on this subject, i dont think people realize whats going on, even those that are a bit more savvy.
this is a CREDIT slam, not an EQUITY slam. the others before this were all equity except for the great depression.
the way businesses run today, they use credit to be flexible.. but like a tsunami, this is not the only wave thats going to hit. the credit card wave is going to hit next… probably after the election…
we have 3-5 years of hard times, and 7 or more years before thinks pick up again… i just saw all my business plans and hopes go up “poof!” realizing this.
those that are like me who live below their means, save, dont have credit card debt, will do much better thant he average joe when the credit blowout occurs. chapter 11s then will weaken the banks, and its going to be tight. lots of jobs lost as marginal firms fall and only the most efficient ones remain standing…
on the bright side… if your company is still standing in 5 years, your ready to surf the upboom. but a guy like me who was hoping to find capital to build a new medical device will be SOL.
school loans, education loans, car loans and such come after that…
so if Obama gums the works, your looking at a dark well to climb out of… at best its not going to be that pleasant from as i see it.
party over, hangover time… “toot!”
As a teenager myself I cannot profess to have ever felt to be part of any vast liberal majority among my fellows… Despite doubts on the part of some of the readers here I am in fact Alaskan, and the political surroundings around here are red red red- and not because of Sarah Palin either. More like in spite of her here in southeast. But I digress. I spent this morning arguing in my government class as one of only four students who believed a constitutional amendment banning flag desecration would be wrong- I really do not feel like a conformist ignorant high schooler. Don’t think the whole oppression of the minority dynamic works just one way.
Anyways, I have two more things:
Firstly, I guess it’s too bad Bush was pushed into Iraq by 9/11. He was against nation building before, but then with the changes 9/11 brought… hey why not just go where Al Qaeda is, let’s go to Iraq too.
Secondly, foreign policy and the war in Iraq may well be McCain’s “strong point” but I doubt that would drastically change the trends for this election. Even if Iraq were still the focal point of the American public the general consensus (fueled by the MSM, right?) would probably still be that it’s time for the Democrats to ascend and for the war to be ended. When McCain and Palin have talked about Iraq in the debates those squiggles on CNN always seemed to go down… And the squiggles are very reliable. 😀
I forget the author’s name, but a great book was written, “Friendly Fascism”. It can be found in the libraries. With the government buying failed business with one hand, and going socialist with the other, we may be up against a new type government in this nation. That is, unless we put our foot down – hard.
While I still believe (until at least 90% of the polls are closed) that a McCain – Palin win will occur, I suppose I can handle it if they do not.
But if and when they do, they are in for a tough row to hoe. Capitol Hill is up again in two years. We’ll make some more changes then, also.
The curtain is going to tear down the middle at some time. It seems forgone. And as many are speaking
(myself included) people are getting fed up forking over hard earned money to the government and other “non- producers” – and ending up as we are at this time.
If we as individuals screwed up as much as congress, how many would still be employed, or owning their own business?
Peter the Alaskan Kid:
“Firstly, I guess it’s too bad Bush was pushed into Iraq by 9/11. He was against nation building before, but then with the changes 9/11 brought… hey why not just go where Al Qaeda is, let’s go to Iraq too.”
Probably the best way I can think of to enforce the “Iraq Liberation Act of 1998” (Coming up in the 10th anniversary of), signed into law by William Jefferson Clinton. Using force to rid Iraq of Saddam Hussein also seemed to be a great idea to 30 prominent democrat politicians at the time, including Hillary Clinton, John Kerry and John Edwards among others.
I know you know this Peter. I often have to wonder why we need to chase this round and round. Why cant you and other liberals just practice a little honesty?
As for the issue of Iraq today, you’ve missed your own irony and therefore I feel responsible to point out your own clues.
You said:
“Even if Iraq were still the focal point of the American public the general consensus (fueled by the MSM, right?) would probably still be that it’s time for the Democrats to ascend and for the war to be ended. “
The war isnt the focal point is it? No, it isnt. Why isnt it?
Isnt the societal progress in Iraq as interesting to the press as the multiple deaths used to be? Not as sexy. But the surge was highly successful. There’s no need to exercise a “willing suspension of disbelief” .(H Clinton), about the real progress that has been made. Anymore, the milestones pass largely un-noticed now that they are not “grim” milestones and the progress Iraq has achieved towards a more pluralistic society are largely shrugged off.
Back in World War 2, planting democracies in place of brutal regimes was seen as an achievement. In fact, it still is. That’s why, in part, the success is ignored. After all, it is election time and progress in Iraq is a billboard for the McCain candidacy, not Obama’s. But who owns the billboards? I think you already know who.
Which leads me to my second clue on your comment:
If ending the war in Iraq was preferable to you, it should be pointed out that the candidacy bringing about the best scenario for a withdrawal was, and is, John McCain, and not Obama. Not unless you were perfectly willing to execute a fighting withdrawal in the face of the enemy for the pure sake of hatred of GW Bush. And although I’m sure you would very much like for Obama to step in and claim credit for other peoples sacrifices, (he loves doing that), its dishonest. It just isnt his work. Obama, as you should be reminded, wanted us out regardless of outcome.
These are things Pete, you want to take an honest look at the next time you broach the subject. It will make things easier on all of us here.
Thanks.
Peter,
I was in favor of the Iraq invasion and I believe it to be a success. Even during the dark days when the MSM was splashing the enemy’s IED’s and Iranian shaped charge mines attacks, the suicide bombings done in order to foment a civil war. Why? Because the information I was getting about the metrics of battle – where our forces were actually on ops and in fights with the enemy – were all showing that we were kicking the enemy’s asses. But it was a fluid environment and the enemy will play his hand where he can gain the most. What the Baathist Fedayeen, the Iranian al Quds, and the al Qaeda thugs all wanted was to create enough mayhem, splashed on our hostile MSM and newspapers, to cause us to politically throw in the towell. Peter, it almost worked, but we would have, just as I vividly remember us having done the same back in 1974-74, snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.
Thank God for Gen. Petraeus and the surge strategy. Also, as we were building up the Iraqi armed forces, which in itself has been quite an achievement.
I supported the war because the Babylonian Baathists were training, arming, financing, and supporting Islamic terror groups. And they did have chemical and biological weapons programs. It was only a matter of time before the U.N. inspection regime would be ended and these things could be resumed full blown.
Now we have a government in the Middle of the Middle East that is not a terror sponsor and is astride the most terrorist regime in the region, Iran. We need that air space, if it comes to having to finish unfinished business with the Islamic Republic. Business they started back in 1979.
Afghanistan remains a problem, but I believe we can have success there too. We have the finest military in the history of the world. Not since the Roman legions has there been a more talented and awesome force, and it is a force for good in the world.
I too am not one who is given to the concept of nation-building, but sometimes the world can force issues on us that we ignore at our peril. We should have learned from the Thirties that appeasement of thugocracies does not work. There is such a thing as evil and it does stalk history, whether we are willing to acknowledge this or not. It’s there. It’s real. And it has and will take a horrific toll. Therefore, sometimes you have to break something apart in order to put it back together again with what you hope is a better basis.
For being courageous in a context of shocking hatred towards him, President Bush undertook unpopular measures to protect the American people. That’s his job and his oath of office. He now leaves office a hated man by all save a few, and I am one of the few who do not hate him. And we cannot fairly rate his performance right now. Ten or more years from now a lot of things will be more clear and historians will begin to dissect this period. Maybe some day you will change your mind about him and his policies.
Islam is every bit as dangerous a totalitarian enemy as it was 1,400 years ago. Right now, most Americans are focused on the economy as the most important issue. I can assure you it is not, because you cannot put a price on human life. And if the lives of millions may hang in the balance, to talk about a bear market is obscene (and I’m an investment professional!). I remain utterly convinced that President Obama will only make this a more dangerous and unstable world, because he is promising to dismantle and stop the ballistic missile defense shield program. At a time when nuclear proliferation is a grave issue.
I care about these things, Peter, because I am a father and I also care about all children everywhere, even those who live in countries like Iran. If Iran gets the hydrogen bomb put on the Shebab medium range missiles and lets loose, Iran will be obliterated – totally annihilated by BOTH the dying gasps of the Israeli state’s several hundred nuclear ballistic missiles and the hundreds from our boomer subs that let loose upon Iran. And Iran’s nuke or two dropped on Israel will slaughter millions of Arab neighbors too. And they don’t care about this, because they believe that out of this chaos the 12 Imam comes back and ushers in the Mahdi.
We have to STOP this insanity, and it may mean we have to pre-emptively strike at the sites where Iran’s nuclear weapons’ program are scattered and compartmentalized. I have absolutely no faith that Barack Obama has the will or the courage to do this. I wish he did possess these things. I don’t want him to screw up when he’s in office. Honestly. But my long experience in life tells me otherwise.
And that is why I care so much about this election. My retirement savings took a hit this month too. I have time to make it up and keep on investing wisely. If the American economy can remain reasonably strong, the American people can keep on with their “can do” spirit. But I am far more concerned about human life itself. It was the reason why I once wanted to be a Jesuit priest. That very Catholic anchor called the holiness of life.
Good discussion guys, I feel better coming here.
Another irony for you, neo – the puma (hillbuzz) describes how Obama knocked off the first opponent, by checking and discounting her voters signatures… now we have ACORN and his own Achilles Heel. He has to be worried. he thinks if he stays quiet people will turn their heads and forget about it, but if they stay on the voter fraud, and find it all out, he is undone.
I work in a university, but I left the teaching side of things long ago for the world of fundraising. Because we deal with external constituencies, most of my colleagues are not the extreme left-wing reactionaries one finds among the teaching faculty, but most of them are decidely left-leaning. Most of them are also women, and the number of them who hate Sarah Palin is striking. My desk is in a shared office with two women (one who is quiet about politics, and another who voted for Bush in 2004 but now mouths conventional liberal views) and two other men. Both of the men claim, as I do, to be independents, but one is voting for Obama and the other one is leaning towards voting for him, but he also maintains he is still undecided. The men talk about politics quite a bit, and I mostly keep my mouth shut. What’s striking, though, is how their beliefs about Obama keep them from believing or looking into the implications of his questionable associations. They seem not to want to get too much information which might shake their irrational faith in the Obamessiah…
Kurt,
Is it possible that any of the people in your office could be posturing so as not to be found out to be not liberal or Left-leaning? I know people who are on my side of things (and they work in education, I don’t) and at their places of work they mouth whatever they have to in order to not put a bulls eye on their backs. They tell me that it’s safer that way, since education environments are very catty and backstabbing. If you stick out, they will find a way to make your life miserable and find ways to make you look bad to the boss.
I don’t have to posture like this where I work. But I have found myself in situations in other environments where I kept my mouth shut and smiled while people mouthed some of the most inane and foul things about McCain and Palin, while praising Obama to his Heavenly Realm.
My wife has too. And she has seen women attack other women because they publicly state that they are not voting for Obama.
I think that what is happening in academia is a microcosm of what can happen if the Left gets all the power. They are thugs who brook no opposition. It’s pretty bad what the kids in the schools and universities have to put up with.
Portia:
Now you’ve reminded me that it could always be worse. It’s true I go to a pretty liberal school – at least, liberal by Texas standards, anyway – but even though the faculty is largely liberal, the only problem departments are the usual suspects: History/Sociology/Government/English/etc. I’m an economics major, and they are much more open there – my first semester, two girls in my first economics class got into a bitch-fight over the practical applications of Nozick, and if you’ve never seen that, you’re missing out. I’m just bitchy because I’m taking a class in the aforementioned History department, and I do worry about my grade in that class due to the same problem you have – I can’t fake it very well.
But I think I’m better off than you at this point. I just won’t take another class with the History dept. after this semester. You gotta work with people like that every day!
You’re probably right about the new generation. I was was loudly and proudly conservative/libertarian all through high school, and at least once or twice a semester, after a particularly nasty argument in English or History with five or six (or seven, or eight…*sighs*) other students regarding our differences of opinion on ideology, another, quieter student would approach me and thank me for telling the truth and defending conservative ideas. At the time, I was sort of annoyed at them for not speaking up – it’s not fun being the target. Now it just reminds me that every time I deal with someone who thinks “Bush = Hitler” and America is the worst country in the world, and no one except me will speak up, there’s someone else who won’t speak up for fear of seeming “mean” or “racist” or whatever term is in vogue today.
FredHjr: I’ve gone to public schools my whole life, and I have to admit, my history and lit classes in high school uniformly sucked. On the other hand, most of my classmates knew they were awful – so maybe that mitigates the damage?
Peter:
Well, I’m glad you were arguing against a flag-burning amendment – I generally feel that someone burning our flag is a badge of honor these days, and I’d like to see more of it. *amused* Does my heart good to see terrorists roasting Old Glory over a burning wreck…
They’re just pissy because their grand plan isn’t working out.
Fred,
I think that’s completely possible in the case of the guy who claims to be undecided. The other one who claims to support Obama really does support him. He lived in Chicago at the time of the last election and voted for Obama for the Senate then and is something of an Obama fan. The woman in my office who voted for Bush in 2004 may be posturing this time. I’m not sure.
I mostly keep my mouth shut and don’t let anyone know my thoughts about political matters. I have said a few more things to hint at my thoughts this time than usual, simply because I can’t stand all of the unquestioning Obama worship.
Another irony I noted a few days ago.
A friend was talking about Rush Limbaugh and the groups that pushed to have conservatives “infiltrate” and vote in the Democratic primaries in an attempt to get the easier to beat candidate in. While the conversation was in other directions it occured to me the following:
This lead to the most liberal of the Republicans (and person they all truly hate) getting the nomination. Had most of those stayed on the side they normally voted for McCain would not be the one running and Obama still most likely would have gotten the nomination.
So, by trying to play a game that they *never* should have tried to play (the system is WAY to complex to control to that extent) they got nothing of what they wanted – in fact they may get their (and my) worst nightmare because of it.
I do agree that Obama was the easiest of the bunch to beat, Hillary would have beaten *all* the competition once out of the primaries by a large margin. I can’t say who would have been the strongest candidate on the republican side (Thompson if he had even shown half the fire he does now – but he obviously didn’t want it and was pressured into it).
However I can assure you that the number of people that crossed over to screw with the democrats are many of the same ones ranting over McCain and it is nothing but their fault. Of course there are many that are ranting that did what they were supposed too (vote in their own primary) and it still may be that McCain is the strongest of the republicans – however that doesn’t negate the irony that the hard line conservatives who crossed over caused the two most liberal candidates from both sides to be our nominees.
To that end it just strengthens what I have always felt about politics – the presidential primaries are the most important part of the whole process. People treat them as a joke and as irrelevant. It is the only place you can truly “vote your conscious” and not feel strong pressure to cast a vote against someone instead of *for* someone. If people spent the time in the primaries that they do in the general then I think we would be in MUCH better shape (or even better swapped their focus – no candidate is very truthful in the general and even if they are they are promising more than a president can deliver).
That’s not completely the case strcpy. The Rush Limbaugh campaign didn’t start with any seriousness until it was clear that McCain’s lead in the Republican primaries was large enough that Romney wasn’t going to overtake him. And as I understand it, the purpose was to prolong the chaos of the Democratic primaries by helping Hillary beat Obama in many large states. Of course, there was some risk that the Limbaugh strategy would backfire and that Hillary would be the nominee, but it had nothing to do with the fact that McCain was already on his way to securing the nomination.
I want to confirm that what Kurt says is true.
Operation Chaos was not declared until long after the GOP Primary was a fait accompli.
The purpose of Operation Chaos was not to select a candidate from the Dems, but to prolong their identity politics – fueled war.
Limbaugh’s strategy did work- in Alaska’s Republican primaries. Alaska liberals worked “Operation Chaos” quite well towards their own ends. We’ll just have to see if it matters come the general election.
(see http://peterstanton.blogspot.com/2008/09/triumph-young.html )
That link mentions nothing about any sort of Chaos like activity
On to the next talking point eh, Peter? How typical.
The glove didn’t fit, so they had to acquit.
The S.S. numbers don’t match, so they shouldn’t be allowed to vote.
That ain’t rocket science.
The utmost irony is that conservatives were urged to support a candidate who in no sense is a conservative – not neocon, not paleocon, not traditionalist; simply, a man without any sherds of ideology or some cogerent worldview. Yes, he is a decent person, a honorable and honest. But all this simply is not enough to fight a culture war against a smart demagogue, whose weak points are all of ideological nature. I would without hesitation trust McCain to lead a platoon in a deadly mission – but his ability to lead a nation is dubious at best.
And neither candidate looked presidential; it was even hard to believe that both were, indeed, senators: one, using Hollywood casting crew standards, looked as a frontier one-street town sheriff, other – as a cross between mafia’s lawyer and a travelling snake oil salesman. Both very parochial. How the two giant party machines came out with such un-presidential looking candidates?
Here is the 2nd time concerning come across your blog within the last few weeks. Appears like I should notice it.