It’s been clear for a long, long time that as far as the progressives are concerned, the laws that exist are to be used as a club against anyone they deem their opposition. The media reporting from the lead-up to the 2008 election and since then jumped the shark in what is reported on and how. I think the progressives themselves have been surprised at what they can get away with. Opposition to the war ceased to exist once their man was in office. There have been more military deaths under this administration (not to mention loss of equipment, etc) and where are the daily numbers on the front page? Destroying any gains that were made in the Middle East could not have been more effective if it was the number one planned policy. And here we are. As long as ideologues carry the day among the Democrats, nothing will change.
Not an atheist like the questioner, but I could ask questions like that 30 years ago.
Rubio is playing for the Christian vote but he’s Catholic like me. That’s very different from the evangelical Christianity that is big in Iowa. Ted has that segment wrapped up because that is his background. His dad is a pastor.
John Hinderaker at Power Line had a very persuasive endorsement of Rubio. I might even change my mind it was so good. One of John’s point is that Marco is a good guy. That shows through in that video. Also optimistic.
If only Marco had gone to a Jesuit school, I would definitely switch. 🙂
Wrong post.
I say, “Give Hillary the Petraeus treatment and then the Scooter Libby treatment!”
What may sink her is Bernie Sander’s terrific new ad.
Ann,
Its not the schmaltzy ad in and of itself but rather the emotive (and schmaltzy) comments. People who would vote for feel the bern based on this ad belong on a planet in a different galaxy where unicorns roam and the money is free.
I don’t understand how two of the worst people in the country are considered their parties’ presumptive nominees. It makes no sense. There’s a rule I need to remember, and it’s something that conservatives understand: people are messy and unpredictable. You can’t guess what they’re gong to do. The talking heads had predicted this race, and they’ve been wrong about everything, and now they’re talking about how strong Hillary and Donald are, and the voting public is just waiting to jump out and startle them. Again. I’ve got no idea what’s going to happen. God willing it’ll come down to Cruz or Rubio versus, I don’t know, Lieberman or something. No idea.
Nick:
I’ve been thinking—now, when we are in need of candidates with wisdom and integrity and strength, we get the two worst candidates (at least, in my lifetime and my memory) ever. Why; how?
I think it’s not surprising, in that the reason the country is in such bad shape is that the wisdom and integrity of its citizens has declined. We are apparently getting the candidates we deserve.
I hope we end up deserving better, and getting better candidates.
Not to worry, Nick — Joe Biden will be the Dem nominee.
We, collectively, get the type of candidates and government that we deserve. That thought should keep you awake at night.
“Americans always do the right thing after they’ve tried everything else.” — Churchill
The bright side of that is, we eventually get it right.
Neo:
“I’ve been thinking–now, when we are in need of candidates with wisdom and integrity and strength, we get the two worst candidates (at least, in my lifetime and my memory) ever. Why; how?”
That’s easy to answer.
The Iraq intervention, especially the COIN “Surge”, under Bush was both exemplary modern presidential leadership (not perfect, but exemplary) and paradigmatic of strong-horse American leadership of the free world.
Yet OIF has been stigmatized together with the paradigms of American leadership and presidential leadership that manifested with the Iraq mission.
On the law and policy and the facts, America and President Bush were right on Iraq. But if the prevailing consensus is the US and the President were wrong on Iraq, then what is right is socially evaluated as wrong and what is wrong becomes socially evaluated as right.
“Why; how?” That’s why and how.
The Iraq intervention is epochal. The fundamental principles of American leadership were invested in the mission. As such, re-normalizing the paradigms of American and president leadership that you prefer requires de-stigmatizing OIF. Re-righting the course for the American nation demands setting the record straight on OIF at the premise level of the Narrative contest for the zeitgeist.
Eric:
I sort of agree and I also disagree. I agree that the Iraq war (and the propaganda war against it, and the public’s finally becoming anti-Iraq war) was a turning point. But I disagree that it caused all of this to happen (that is, if I understand what you’re driving at). I think the public’s reaction was a symptom that it already had happened. That is, the Gramscian march had prepared the ground in term of a rejection of logic, and a rejection of many traditional American values, and replaced them with a lack of straight thinking (people couldn’t follow the issues involved) and a lack of the ability to understand what was actually going on. This made too many American susceptible to the propaganda of the left.
Something somewhat similar happened during the latter part of the Vietnam War, only this time it was worse (and I believe more permanent) because of the change in values and education. Reagan reversed some of what had happened post-Vietnam. But not enough, and the march continued, and here we are now.
Neo– You once mentioned Leonard Peikoff’s 1982 book The Ominous Parallels. The answers to “Why, how?” are in there. From Chapter I, pg. 12-16:
We dare not brush aside unexplained a horror such as Nazism.
Many writers have noted similarities between America today and Germany before Hitler, then have shrugged off their own observations…
The similarities, however, cannot be shrugged off. Our crisis is real. The crisis is the fact that our country, the United States of America–the freest, the most productive, and the most moral country in the world–is now moving in Hitler’s direction.
America is moving toward a Nazi form of totalitarianism. It has been doing this for decades. It has been doing so gradually, by default, and for the most part unknowingly, but it is doing so systematically and without significant opposition. In every cultural area–from science and education to art and religion to politics and economics–the trend is now unmistakable…
…We need to look for something deeper than practical conditions, something that dictates men’s view of what constitutes the practical.
In an advanced, civilized country, a handful of men were able to gain for their criminal schemes the enthusiastic backing of millions of decent, educated, law-abiding citizens. What is the factor that made this possible?…
…The Nazis could not have won the support of the German masses but for the systematic preaching of a complex array of theories, doctrines, opinions, notions, beliefs. And not one of their central beliefs was original. They found those beliefs, widespread and waiting, in the culture; they seized upon them and broadcast them at top volume, thrusting them with a new intensity back into the streets of Germany. And the men in the streets heard and recognized and sympathized with and embraced those beliefs, and voted for their exponents.
Does this last sentence sound familiar?
Gee, I’m starting to post like artfldgr. Where has he been, anyway?
Hillary could have sex with a goat in Macy’s window while eating aborted baby parts – all captured on live TV – and 40% of America would vote for her
Why would treason sink her? Most Democrats hate AmeriKKKa and want it destroyed. Why shouldn’t she endanger the lives of its defenders and make a buck on the side by selling classified information? It’s all to the good, according to Democrats.
I wouldn’t go quite as far as ErisGuy did, but then again, Dems do have a soft spot in their heart for Snowden, Manning, and Assange.
snopercod:
By the way, only about a little over a third of Germans voted for the Nazis even at their peak (until they seized power and coerced people into doing it by a few things like banning other parties).
Artfl is on vacation; he mentioned it in a couple of comments.
Eric/Neo
I date the lefty turning point earlier than Iraq. I think the left, never too sane to begin with, completely lost it over Bush II’s election over Al Gore. They absolutely went bat$hit crazy and it has never let up. Iraq was just another excuse to indulge their sanctimonious, vindictive, tribal, bigotry against Bush II in particular, and non-lefties in general.
Hillary could have sex with a goat in Macy’s window while eating aborted baby parts — all captured on live TV — and 40% of America would vote for her
Surely only 20%, the hardcore, would qualify. The other 20% would have to be in a cult to adhere to that…
snopercod:
I think we really went wrong when we allowed ourselves to be snookered into believing that Hitler’s fascism was something entirely different from Stalin’s Communism, when they were both just variants of Marxism, eventually both leading to 1984’s totalitarian state. McCarthy was on the main totally correct as the Venona papers and later confessions or convictions of those he accused eventually proved.
Instead of being vigilant against the covert incursions of both strains in our own country, we focused only on stopping one. We were hoodwinked by the NY Times Walter Duranty, the spies planted throughout our own government at high levels, the “academics” of the Marxist Frankfurt School and hordes of useful idiots in Hollywood and the media to believe in the idyllic potemkin villages they described in Russia while tens of millions of its citizens were slaughtered, starved and worked to death in slave labor camps.
By ignoring and even praising Communism, while slandering anyone who tried to raise the alarm as McCarthyites, we allowed its subversive undermining of our institutions, culture and values on their long march to where we are now.
Orwell only got two things wrong: the year, and the ethnicity of Big Bro’.
geokstr:
Please clarify your remark “the ethnicity of Big Bro.'”
In 1984, the book and the movie, Big Brother is white, IIRC. In our current reality version of 2016, he’s only half-white, which is why I call him Big Bro’.
It’s sarcasm.
geokstr:
That one went over my head, I guess.
Leave a Reply
HTML tags allowed in your
comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>
It’s been clear for a long, long time that as far as the progressives are concerned, the laws that exist are to be used as a club against anyone they deem their opposition. The media reporting from the lead-up to the 2008 election and since then jumped the shark in what is reported on and how. I think the progressives themselves have been surprised at what they can get away with. Opposition to the war ceased to exist once their man was in office. There have been more military deaths under this administration (not to mention loss of equipment, etc) and where are the daily numbers on the front page? Destroying any gains that were made in the Middle East could not have been more effective if it was the number one planned policy. And here we are. As long as ideologues carry the day among the Democrats, nothing will change.
Not an atheist like the questioner, but I could ask questions like that 30 years ago.
Rubio is playing for the Christian vote but he’s Catholic like me. That’s very different from the evangelical Christianity that is big in Iowa. Ted has that segment wrapped up because that is his background. His dad is a pastor.
John Hinderaker at Power Line had a very persuasive endorsement of Rubio. I might even change my mind it was so good. One of John’s point is that Marco is a good guy. That shows through in that video. Also optimistic.
If only Marco had gone to a Jesuit school, I would definitely switch. 🙂
Wrong post.
I say, “Give Hillary the Petraeus treatment and then the Scooter Libby treatment!”
What may sink her is Bernie Sander’s terrific new ad.
Ann,
Its not the schmaltzy ad in and of itself but rather the emotive (and schmaltzy) comments. People who would vote for feel the bern based on this ad belong on a planet in a different galaxy where unicorns roam and the money is free.
I don’t understand how two of the worst people in the country are considered their parties’ presumptive nominees. It makes no sense. There’s a rule I need to remember, and it’s something that conservatives understand: people are messy and unpredictable. You can’t guess what they’re gong to do. The talking heads had predicted this race, and they’ve been wrong about everything, and now they’re talking about how strong Hillary and Donald are, and the voting public is just waiting to jump out and startle them. Again. I’ve got no idea what’s going to happen. God willing it’ll come down to Cruz or Rubio versus, I don’t know, Lieberman or something. No idea.
Nick:
I’ve been thinking—now, when we are in need of candidates with wisdom and integrity and strength, we get the two worst candidates (at least, in my lifetime and my memory) ever. Why; how?
I think it’s not surprising, in that the reason the country is in such bad shape is that the wisdom and integrity of its citizens has declined. We are apparently getting the candidates we deserve.
I hope we end up deserving better, and getting better candidates.
Not to worry, Nick — Joe Biden will be the Dem nominee.
We, collectively, get the type of candidates and government that we deserve. That thought should keep you awake at night.
“Americans always do the right thing after they’ve tried everything else.” — Churchill
The bright side of that is, we eventually get it right.
Neo:
“I’ve been thinking–now, when we are in need of candidates with wisdom and integrity and strength, we get the two worst candidates (at least, in my lifetime and my memory) ever. Why; how?”
That’s easy to answer.
The Iraq intervention, especially the COIN “Surge”, under Bush was both exemplary modern presidential leadership (not perfect, but exemplary) and paradigmatic of strong-horse American leadership of the free world.
Yet OIF has been stigmatized together with the paradigms of American leadership and presidential leadership that manifested with the Iraq mission.
On the law and policy and the facts, America and President Bush were right on Iraq. But if the prevailing consensus is the US and the President were wrong on Iraq, then what is right is socially evaluated as wrong and what is wrong becomes socially evaluated as right.
“Why; how?” That’s why and how.
The Iraq intervention is epochal. The fundamental principles of American leadership were invested in the mission. As such, re-normalizing the paradigms of American and president leadership that you prefer requires de-stigmatizing OIF. Re-righting the course for the American nation demands setting the record straight on OIF at the premise level of the Narrative contest for the zeitgeist.
Eric:
I sort of agree and I also disagree. I agree that the Iraq war (and the propaganda war against it, and the public’s finally becoming anti-Iraq war) was a turning point. But I disagree that it caused all of this to happen (that is, if I understand what you’re driving at). I think the public’s reaction was a symptom that it already had happened. That is, the Gramscian march had prepared the ground in term of a rejection of logic, and a rejection of many traditional American values, and replaced them with a lack of straight thinking (people couldn’t follow the issues involved) and a lack of the ability to understand what was actually going on. This made too many American susceptible to the propaganda of the left.
Something somewhat similar happened during the latter part of the Vietnam War, only this time it was worse (and I believe more permanent) because of the change in values and education. Reagan reversed some of what had happened post-Vietnam. But not enough, and the march continued, and here we are now.
Neo– You once mentioned Leonard Peikoff’s 1982 book The Ominous Parallels. The answers to “Why, how?” are in there. From Chapter I, pg. 12-16:
Does this last sentence sound familiar?
Gee, I’m starting to post like artfldgr. Where has he been, anyway?
Hillary could have sex with a goat in Macy’s window while eating aborted baby parts – all captured on live TV – and 40% of America would vote for her
Why would treason sink her? Most Democrats hate AmeriKKKa and want it destroyed. Why shouldn’t she endanger the lives of its defenders and make a buck on the side by selling classified information? It’s all to the good, according to Democrats.
I wouldn’t go quite as far as ErisGuy did, but then again, Dems do have a soft spot in their heart for Snowden, Manning, and Assange.
snopercod:
By the way, only about a little over a third of Germans voted for the Nazis even at their peak (until they seized power and coerced people into doing it by a few things like banning other parties).
Artfl is on vacation; he mentioned it in a couple of comments.
Eric/Neo
I date the lefty turning point earlier than Iraq. I think the left, never too sane to begin with, completely lost it over Bush II’s election over Al Gore. They absolutely went bat$hit crazy and it has never let up. Iraq was just another excuse to indulge their sanctimonious, vindictive, tribal, bigotry against Bush II in particular, and non-lefties in general.
Hillary could have sex with a goat in Macy’s window while eating aborted baby parts — all captured on live TV — and 40% of America would vote for her
Surely only 20%, the hardcore, would qualify. The other 20% would have to be in a cult to adhere to that…
snopercod:
I think we really went wrong when we allowed ourselves to be snookered into believing that Hitler’s fascism was something entirely different from Stalin’s Communism, when they were both just variants of Marxism, eventually both leading to 1984’s totalitarian state. McCarthy was on the main totally correct as the Venona papers and later confessions or convictions of those he accused eventually proved.
Instead of being vigilant against the covert incursions of both strains in our own country, we focused only on stopping one. We were hoodwinked by the NY Times Walter Duranty, the spies planted throughout our own government at high levels, the “academics” of the Marxist Frankfurt School and hordes of useful idiots in Hollywood and the media to believe in the idyllic potemkin villages they described in Russia while tens of millions of its citizens were slaughtered, starved and worked to death in slave labor camps.
By ignoring and even praising Communism, while slandering anyone who tried to raise the alarm as McCarthyites, we allowed its subversive undermining of our institutions, culture and values on their long march to where we are now.
Orwell only got two things wrong: the year, and the ethnicity of Big Bro’.
geokstr:
Please clarify your remark “the ethnicity of Big Bro.'”
In 1984, the book and the movie, Big Brother is white, IIRC. In our current reality version of 2016, he’s only half-white, which is why I call him Big Bro’.
It’s sarcasm.
geokstr:
That one went over my head, I guess.