Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Friday Mini Book Review: Conservatism in America
The Mini Book Review is back. See many old ones.
Conservatism in America: Making Sense of the American Right, by Paul Gottfried (Palgrave Macmillan, 2007). Gottfried's outlook on a topic oft-addressed by many writers (this is, in fact, his own second book assessing the American right) is at least a rare and bracing one: a paleo-rightist himself who thinks most of the popular and successful manifestations of the American right have sold out its own values--quite literally sold out, in pursuit of foundation cash and job openings controlled by neocons. This is most certainly a book for deep-insiders--you couldn't really make much sense of it if you weren't already versed in reading and thinking about, in, and among the American right--but for those types, its perspective is necessary.
The heart of Gottfried's thesis? Conservatism "has developed a talent not only for presenting takeovers as the serene march of the past into the present but also for treating a general retreat from its original positions as a progression of victories." The American right has retreated from a genuine oppositional intellectual movement to one with "a situational function, that of framing policies for the Republican Party and contributing to the administrative staff of Republican administrations."
He grants, with consummate fairness and a great deal of truth, that a conservative movement more to his liking--one that "stood where....Ron Paul...does today, might well have opposed the liberal Left even less effectively than the Heritage Foundation and the American Enterprise Institute do today."
Gottfriend distinguishes the classless and unrooted, purely intellectual, American conservatism from any European roots; laments the passing of Russell Kirk (though he has his reservations about him as well) as a prime right-wing influence in favor of Jaffa and Strauss; traces the subtle shifting and occasional precarious combinations of dueling systems of "value conservatism" within the movement (while noting that nowadays it's easier for value conservatism to forgive being tolerant of gay marriage than being intolerent of endless wars for democracy); and ends with sadness that that global crusade for "democratic values" has inhabited the shell of conservative institutions, all the while tracing this more to cashflow than idea flow, and denying any modern conservative triumphalism that claims their neo-conservatism is more intellectual or ethically purer than the old variety they superseded.
In the end, noting intellectual conservatism's lack of any mass social or class base, he declares it mostly "contrived" and a "media phenomenon," and darkly suspects it functions well as an ally to left-liberals in keeping more paleo-cons, like himself, safely segregated from the public conversation. For a book undergirded to some degree by anger at what he sees as a conspiracy to subvert true conservative values, it remains dispassionate enough that even those who disagree with his thesis can do so without feeling embattled. Gottfried leaves you room to consider his thesis, even be enlightened by it, without agreeing with it, a refreshing rarity in interested assessments of political movement and theory.
Miller|9.19.08 @ 9:04PM|#
This is why we need to support Sarah Palin. McCain aside, she's the first real conservative since Reagan that's made the White House ticket, and she's a sign that the Clinton/neocon era is over and the GOP is rediscovering its roots. Of course, if B. Hussein Obama wins, it will fall further into chaos.
perilisk|9.19.08 @ 9:35PM|#
"This is why we need to support Sarah Palin. McCain aside, she's
the first real conservative since Reagan that's made the White
House ticket, and she's a sign that the Clinton/neocon era is over
and the GOP is rediscovering its roots."
Maybe's she's the conservative Buddy Christ.
TallDave|9.19.08 @ 9:39PM|#
while noting that nowadays it's easier for value
conservatism to forgive being tolerant of gay marriage than being
intolerent of endless wars for democracy
FDR and JFK would be shocked that the Wilsonians are all pretty
much on the right today.
You know, we didn't have to provoke Japan into war. Then we invaded
a country that hadn't even attacked us, and because we went in
without a plan, half of Europe ended up in thrall to
Communism.
War is a series of catastrophes that end in victory. Once upon a
time, people who understood that still thought freedom was thought
worth fighting for.
|9.19.08 @ 9:40PM|#
Follow the money
Hurry up and wait
Troops idle in the kill zone
Our USN as ducks in a bathtub
Nader/Gonzalez
McKinney/Clemente
Honor
Ron Paul
Mike Gravel
Dennis Kucinich
JFK RFK MLK Malcolm
gmatts|9.19.08 @ 9:48PM|#
"This is why we need to support Sarah Palin. McCain aside, she's
the first real conservative since Reagan that's made the White
House ticket"
What exactly has she done or espoused that makes you come to that
conclusion?
"and she's a sign that the Clinton/neocon era is over and the GOP
is rediscovering its roots"?
You're confident enough in her foreign policy positions to make
that statement?
This is a person that has had exactly 3 - 3! - TV interviews in
which to make her views known to a national audience. (And one of
them was with Sean Hannity so I don't think it counts)
Here's an example: This is an interview she did with Time magazine.
Please read it and tell me if you gain any insight at all into her
overall philosophy on gov't and governing.
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1837536-1,00.html
Mad Max|9.19.08 @ 9:58PM|#
Neocon logic: The conservative movement has been co-opted by
Wilsonians and New Dealers, and "This is why we need to support
Sarah Palin."
"You know, we didn't have to provoke Japan into war."
Neocons have a perpetual feedback loop of the Rape of Nanking and
the Munich Accords playing in their pathetic excuses for brains.
They can't even get an erection unless they're jacking off to a
copy of Winston Churchill's *Gathering Storm.* American soldiers,
and foreign men, women and children, pay the price.
Kolohe|9.19.08 @ 10:07PM|#
FDR and JFK would be shocked that the Wilsonians are all
pretty much on the right today
You underestimate the lure of foreign interventionism to the left
(esp once actually in power; Weigel covered it pretty well earlier
today). And underestimate (but less so) the schism on the right
that Bush's wilsonianism has caused. There's always been, and
always will be, a little bit of team blue team red cheerleading
that determines a 'just' war
But, the most important element, as Patton, or at least George C.
Scott said, is "Americans love a winner and will not tolerate a
loser"
Mexican, Spanish American, World War 2? Gulf War 1? Good wars
Vietnam? Bad war.
1812, WW1, Korea? Meh Wars.
100 years of Latin america interventions? There was a War?
Iraq? TBD War.
(not necessairly saying my personal judgement, just the
conventional wisdom - which is of course what counts in politics
and elections)
|9.19.08 @ 10:21PM|#
Palin has no fixed philosophy. Her "libertarian" record is simply a reflection of her political calculations in libertarian-leaning Alaska. She doesn't have any coherent, organized political worldview, even moreso than McCain (who at least has his proto-fascist obsession with gov't-led national greatness) The only thing that matters to her is fame and power. She's a political genius and a policy idiot, and even if McCain wins I rate her chances of ever becoming President as much lower than average for a VP. And it's not because of her gender.
|9.19.08 @ 10:25PM|#
I like Gottfried, a truly academic conservative. One thing you
can't say about him is that he is a hired gun or a hack...
"And underestimate (but less so) the schism on the right that
Bush's wilsonianism has caused."
Maybe among pundits and such, but is that true for rank and file
folks who consider themselves "conservative?" I though they backed
the War on Terror (Bush verion) strongly. I notice McCain strummed
that chord and became the nominee.
Famous Mortimer|9.19.08 @ 11:02PM|#
When exactly did this Republican Party exist? I would love to
know, since so many fiscal Conservatives lament its passing as if
it actually existed outside of an Ayn Rand screed.
Republicanism, in its modern incarnation, has always been propped
up by the Religious right, and not too long ago, by straight up
racist ideologues. Some would even say that it still has legs with
the "white man's burden" angle.
Even Ron Paul understood this in his newsletters, and adjusted them
accordingly to try and attract an important demographic.
Palin was brought in to counter the "progressive" image of Obama's
campaign, but she has absolutely played up the robotic,
Conservative roll of being all about God, Guns, and Log Cabins.
Lefiti|9.20.08 @ 12:41AM|#
As free-market fundamentalism bites the dust, it's fitting to retreat into theolgical ruminations. Leave Palin to the masses. We libertarian intellectuals have other fish to fry. We have to get our bearings, to regain some ideological certainty. It won't be easy, but we will keep the faith intact. Onward Libertarian soldiers!
adina |9.20.08 @ 12:51AM|#
Even speaking as someone who identifies most with Gottfried's brand of conservativism, I still think it's a bit intellectually lazy to insist that the explanation for the rise of big-government and pro-war conservativism is due to the formation some conspirational workings with liberals to keep paleo-conservatives disempowered. It's the whole "What's the matter with Kansas?" argument for libertarians: that people have identified with the Republican Party only because they've been snookered, rather than because they've come to see the world as a dangerous place, with nobody putting forth a reliable plan (yes, that includes libertarians like myself) for grappling with distinctly modern dangerous, such as increasingly easy capacity for developing nuclear weapons. Although I don't really identify with the types of conservatives of which he writes, I hope to see more analyses from people who treats their arguments and ideas with seriousness.
Lefiti|9.20.08 @ 12:56AM|#
"I hope to see more analyses from people who treats [sic!] their
arguments and ideas with seriousness."
I hope to see more people who understand verb/subject
agreement.
Kolohe|9.20.08 @ 1:02AM|#
Maybe among pundits and such, but is that true for rank and
file folks who consider themselves "conservative?" I though they
backed the War on Terror (Bush verion) strongly. I notice McCain
strummed that chord and became the nominee
Strictly, you are right. But I think the people who consider
themselves 'conservative' has dropped considerably.
It depends on what an updated version of this
table says.
If those "slightly conservative" and "conservative" numbers are
lower like I think they are, then I think my point stands. If not,
then you're right, it's just among 'opinion leaders'.
I think, but cannot find, that the big drop off you see between '02
and '04 in 'conservative' continued, and that uptick in 'slightly
conservative' over the same period gave up its gains and also
declined.
And Giuliani and Romney and Huckabee (really everyone but Paul)
strummed the cord as strongly, McCain was just able to play GWOT
Guitar Hero a little better, being a hero and all. (and I do not
think that it was the principle reason he was the last man
standing, but it helped)
---
"and Log Cabins."
I thought 'Log Cabin Republican' meant something very different.
Although it would certainly be another game changer if Palin was a
switch hitter. Or to use the metaphor from the appropriate sport,
if she plays like Bill Durnan
|9.20.08 @ 2:24AM|#
Andy, well said on Palin. An empty skirt.
Wow, how substantive! Dazzle us with that mean intellect.
|9.20.08 @ 3:42AM|#
Andy, well said on Palin. An empty skirt.
Wow, how substantive! Dazzle us with that mean intellect.
Yet, since you apparently could think of nothing of any importance
to share, you do something just as dumb, dazzle us with arrogance.
Lovely.
|9.20.08 @ 3:57AM|#
Lefiti, I've since noticed that I made a few other grammatical errors in my post. However, you better catch them quickly. So many other spelling and grammar mistakes all around the internet that demand your corrections! Good, productive work, thus far!
alan|9.20.08 @ 4:24AM|#
What's the Matter with Kansas? I wonder that every time Sebelius
speaks.
My problem with Sarah is that she now has the mantel of the
presumptive 2012 nominee and will likely get in the way of a very
talented individual Bobby J. down Louisiana way.
If Obama wins and governs according what is coming out of his mouth
at this time (a huge assumption, he is likely more shrewd and
pragmatic than that), he'll get four years, and an opportunity for
a younger generation of Republicans to have a fresh start. Palin
with her demonstrable acquiescence to the NeoCons, can only stand
in the way.
I don't know what value the term 'Conservative' has at this time.
B. D. goes into the schism between paleoconservatives and neocons,
but their is also one between the libertarians and the
evangelicals. What connection can an anti-collectivist libertarian
have to the Mike Huckabees in the GOP?
I caught his speech at the convention where he repeated a favorite
story describing a teacher (obviously psychotic) who started a
class without any desks and to shame the kids into submission she
had military veterans walk in with the desk in their hands.
Congratulations Teach, you have reduced American patriotism to the
thoughtless synaptic impulses of any damn resident of any other
damnable nation, and you completely misunderstood this nation's
founding in the process.
How to make common cause with those who bend their knecks before
the office of the presidency (so long as it is GOP) and obey their
government without question?
You can't.
alan|9.20.08 @ 4:35AM|#
Hey adina, tell him to deduct it from whatever he is paying
you.
He use to go under another name and write poems with lines like,
'our free market, thou art in wall street', but I would have to go
back to the archives, it was pretty much forgettable as well.
Did you catch the homonyminal error in my post above? I'm sure you
did. Go with Marketspeed, good man.
|9.20.08 @ 7:29AM|#
Brian, good to see you back. Were you on sabbatical or something? Why the long absence?
l. ron hoover|9.20.08 @ 7:50AM|#
Ditto on the "Welcome Back" sentiment, sung in John Sebastian's voice.
Warty|9.20.08 @ 9:30AM|#
Lefti, while you were busy correcting grammar, I was getting laid. Ponder that, fucktard.
Lefiti|9.20.08 @ 10:05AM|#
Here's a question for you free-market fundamentalists: how old
is the earth...oops, no, the question for you is the
following:
In the current financial crisis, if we let the market punish those
who acted irresponsiblly, everything is so intertwined
systemically, won't the market inevitably punish nealry everybody,
including those who did nothing irresponsible? Sorry if this long
question has left you with sore lips.
The Recording Angel|9.20.08 @ 10:10AM|#
This is why we need to support Sarah Palin. McCain aside,
she's the first real conservative since Reagan that's made the
White House ticket, and she's a sign that the Clinton/neocon era is
over and the GOP is rediscovering its roots.
Tell
that to Paul Gottfried.
gmatts|9.20.08 @ 10:43AM|#
"In the current financial crisis, if we let the market punish
those who acted irresponsiblly, everything is so intertwined
systemically, won't the market inevitably punish nealry everybody,
including those who did nothing irresponsible?"
No. If we go forward w/ what the gov't wants to do, and is doing,
then not only will people that had nothing to do w/ this mess get
punished, but people who did do something wrong will get off the
hook. Take me for example; I pay my bills on time, whenever I've
applied to take out a loan or line of credit I've read the terms
very carefully. Then, I've taken the time to reflect on whether
these terms made economic sense to me and whether or not I can
afford them. Alot of people it seems did not do this. Yet those
people who blindly signed on the dotted line are essentially being
let off the hook while everyone else has to pick up the tab. If
these idiots hadn't signed on for mortgages that a monkey would
have known they couldn't afford, all this bad debt wouldn't have
been able to filter into the financial system leavign us where we
are today - with the gov't being the final repository of a massive
amount of IOU's.
So the market didn't really punish anyone that acted irresponsibly,
which is what it should have been allowed to do in the first
place.
VM|9.20.08 @ 10:55AM|#
Sorry if this long question has left you with sore lips.
lol
people who have that "the 'market' will punish them" attitude are
teh silli.
|9.20.08 @ 11:23AM|#
Conservatism in America?
There's hardly enough material there for a decent short story.
|9.20.08 @ 11:49AM|#
Andy wrote "even if McCain wins I rate her chances of ever
becoming President as much lower than average for a VP. "
Nah, if he wins, I bet the GOP base starts agitating for McCain to
step down - but not until Palin would be eligible to finish
McCain's term and still run for two of her own. (Assuming there's
some kind of restriction on that and McCain can't just step down
the day after the inauguration.)
|9.20.08 @ 12:42PM|#
It isn't clear from Doherty's book review whether Gottfried gets
this, but the fact that modern conservatism is "contrived" and
a "media phenomenon...a situational function, that of framing
policies for the Republican Party and contributing to the
administrative staff of Republican administrations." was a
deliberate project begun in the late 60s. The effort to create a
"counter-intelligensia" in the form of phony think tanks and
publishing houses - which is where most modern conservative thought
comes from - was quite openly described by its architects.
It turned out to be a good move politically, as it helped to win
elections and build a movement, but it's left the Right
intellectually bereft. They don't bother to ask "What is true? What
is right?" anymore. They just put out propaganda for whatever the
party line is at the moment.
tarran|9.20.08 @ 1:21PM|#
They just put out propaganda for whatever the party line is at the moment.
Not to mention providing hilarious John Stewart clips. Remember the
juxtapostiion of Karl Rove dissing Delaware as being puny and
inconsequential and then a few weeks later expounding on the
awesomeness of Wasilla?
BTW, I would like to welcome Edward/MK2/Leftiti back to Hit and
Run. There is a rule of thumb that a guy who keeps changing his
name on a message board is probably full os hit; the only way he
can get people to listen to him is to change his name and start
fresh. I ask my fellow HNR denizens to not apply this rule the EML.
Because
1) His posts are teh funny,
2) Having acquired Urkobold by means of his vicory in the libel
lawsuit, Edward could shut them down in a fit of pique.
The potential loss of Urkobold worries me most. How else will I
keep up on the activities of monkeys, Mr Sulu, and the evil physics
types?
So really Edward.. I mean Leftiti, we love you baby. Please don't
go away.
BDB|9.20.08 @ 1:37PM|#
Neocons have a perpetual feedback loop of the Rape of Nanking and the Munich Accords playing in their pathetic excuses for brains. They can't even get an erection unless they're jacking off to a copy of Winston Churchill's *Gathering Storm.* American soldiers, and foreign men, women and children, pay the price.
Mad Max, we disagree a lot, but that comment wins.
Notice how they totally wipe any lessons that might be gleamed from
July, 1914 out of their brains as well.
BDB|9.20.08 @ 1:40PM|#
Or, for that matter, October 1962.
TallDave would have been like Curtis LeMay and begging Kennedy to
start invading Cuba.
|9.20.08 @ 3:45PM|#
At least all us proles get the chance to line up for urine
purity tests, so teh evil dope fiends can't get a job to pay taxes
to bail out the lying, greedy cocksuckers who took our nation for
trillions (thousand billion) of dollars. Hooray for free
markets national socialism.
Privatize the profits and socialize the losses so the bastards who
sold our nation down the river can renew their country club
memberships and buy some expensive wines. At least they weren't
smoking cannabis, so it's OK.
This is the only reason I'm glad I'm underemployed, I'm paying a
fourth of what I did 2 years ago in taxes. It's a struggle, but I
didn't destroy anyone's life like these bastards and I can sleep at
night.
I voted Libertarian every election since 1992, but the nomination
of Bob Barr has caused me to question my loyalty to people who do
not care about individual liberty. These sorry cocksuckers have
convinced me to vote for Obama.
I don't make enough money to pay much in taxes, so I'm willing to
take handouts from the government, It's good enough for the pin
stripped bandits, it's good enough for me.
Miller|9.20.08 @ 5:36PM|#
@zig zag man:
Typical loser Obama supporter. Since when did teenagers get the
right to vote? Have fun buying dope with my tax money. Idiot.
Miller|9.20.08 @ 5:54PM|#
@The Recording Angel:
He seems to agree that Palin is a good candidate. Maybe she was
selected to win back a certain demographic that had been lost.
That's politics. (Picking a candidate that appeals to voters -
imagine!) Weren't you paying attention when Obama suddenly came out
of nowhere, with no real ideas, just because he was selected by the
Illinois machine and the media? At least Palin has libertarian
principles. I am a libertarian, and I think she's a hell of a lot
better than Barr.
Palin is the governor of Alaska, the most libertarian state in the
nation. She's strong on guns, defense, self-reliance, family,
offshore drilling, and freedom to believe what you want, even if
it's - gasp - Christianity. If you buy the whole "white-trash
nutjob" scenario, you've bought into another liberal smear
campaign. She may not be "seasoned" like that corrupt idiot Biden,
but she's a true outsider, and that's what we need in Washington.
What's wrong with a candidate that resonates with the south and the
heartland? Are we all "white trash"?
@gmatts:
Do you even watch Hannity?
Listen, granola munchers. We didn't start the war on terror, al
Qaeda did, and we can't just call it off. We're in Iraq, and no
matter what BHO thinks, we need to win this thing. This war against
Islamic fascism will get a hell of a lot more expensive if we
decide to lose it. McCain is a military strategist, and Palin is a
military mom. Unlike the Obamabots, they both want to win quickly
and with honor.
McCain isn't the best Republican candidate, but Palin is excellent,
and anything is better than Obama. We need to realize that we ARE
conservative. We are the future of the conservative movement. This
is our time, and, as the Palin nomination shows, things are going
our way. But if we can't back a winner, we'll end up in Obamastan.
Your conspiracy theories have nothing on the reality of the damage
that idiot would do to our country.
|9.20.08 @ 6:01PM|#
Palin's swirling the bowl. It's funny watching the people most given towards the assumption that they represent "real Americans" end up so marginalized from what actual Americans think.
Elemenope|9.20.08 @ 6:04PM|#
We didn't start the war on terror, al Qaeda did, and we
can't just call it off.
O rly? At the risk of being seen as anti-American or un-Patriotic
or what-the-fuck-ever, I think untangling cause and effect and
fault and first movement on "Terror" is too difficult to just say
"IT'S ALL THEIR FAULT! RRAUGH!"
America has been fucking with small countries for a long time. We
depose unfriendly democratic rulers and replace them with friendly
(to us, not to their people) dictators. It would be *shocking* to
me, as a historical thing, if someone from one of those anthills
hadn't by this time came over and tried to bite us in the
heel.
This does not in any way mitigate the evil of terrorists, blah blah
blah, standard disclaimer and all that. But it shocks me just how
much historical ignorance goes into a statement like "We didn't
start the war on terror, al Qaeda did". I don't think it is a
helpful habit to be in if one wishes to actually confront
terrorists and win. It is always nice to know what *Actually*
motivates one's enemies, what grievances they nurse in their black
little hearts.
Elemenope|9.20.08 @ 6:06PM|#
joe,
Idiot redneck trailer trash are Americans too. Your comment seems
to argue that they aren't, and that's no more fair than saying that
latte-sipping limp-wristed green obsessed Vermonters are not also
American.
;)
Elemenope|9.20.08 @ 6:11PM|#
Do you even watch Hannity?
It's a sad world when O'Reilly can outclass you on decent
interviewing of candidates.
Compared to O'Reilly's grilling of Obama, Hannity's brown-nosing
performance with Palin was disgraceful.
zoltan|9.20.08 @ 6:16PM|#
Miller is the new Neil, right? Hit & Run has definitely
honed my fake poster alert skills.
And is anyone else annoyed by Gottfried's article on Palin--and
also the Buchanan one that was linked? They call her Sarah like
she's their fucking sister or something. Show some fucking respect
and call her by her goddamn last name.
Kolohe|9.20.08 @ 6:44PM|#
since when did teenagers get the right to vote?
Um,
July 1, 1971?. Some of them, at least.
|9.20.08 @ 6:50PM|#
"Typical loser Obama supporter. Since when did teenagers get
the right to vote? Have fun buying dope with my tax money.
Idiot."
What constructive criticism. I am in awe of your articulate
response and await more of your wisdom on how the Republicans are
going to allow the economy to fix itself with its hands off
approach to the market give handouts to all of their rich
corporate contributors.
I'm 46 years old, not some teenager, I served 8 years in the
service, got a Masters of Science Degree and held a job for 15
years after that.
I'm sick of the damned republicans telling me that they are the
party of smaller government and no handouts while saying that a
non-violent, victimless activity that I enjoy makes me a criminal.
At least with Obama, you know what you are in for, bigger
government (like we don't have that already) and more taxes for the
rich cocksuckers who can damn sure afford it.
Kolohe|9.20.08 @ 6:52PM|#
McCain is a military strategist, and Palin is a military
mom.
This cracks me up. I'll give McCain some credit as I think he went
to a war college as most officers that achieved his rank do.
But 'military mom?' So, everything she knows is from her son's
basic training experiences retold at Christmas dinner?
Miller, keep up the good work. Although the Hokies didn't blow it
this time, so I didn't need the cheering up, I might need it when
they choke in the future.
Kolohe|9.20.08 @ 6:55PM|#
We are the future of the conservative movement. This is our
time,
Oh, your that dude from Goonies. Weird, I thought you'd be left of
center.
Kolohe|9.20.08 @ 7:01PM|#
but she's a true outsider, and that's what we need in
Washington.
Unlike McCain?
Oh, that's right, you put McCain aside, the dude that is *actually*
running for president of these here united states.
Elemenope|9.20.08 @ 7:11PM|#
Oh, that's right, you put McCain aside, the dude that is
*actually* running for president of these here united
states.
To be fair, everyone has been distracted on both sides of the aisle
by that lustrous empty object, Sarah Palin. Next to her, it really
is hard to pay attention to McCain again. Watching her is like
watching a really nice sports car crash into a tree in slow
motion.
|9.20.08 @ 7:44PM|#
The McCain campaign insisted they change the rules of the Vice
Presidential debates to make them easier for Sarah Palin.
You know what's funny? Nobody has accused me of panicking in
days.
|9.20.08 @ 8:16PM|#
"Andy, well said on Palin. An empty skirt.
Wow, how substantive! Dazzle us with that mean intellect."
OK TAO, I'll expand: she's uneducated and not very bright, offering
no well thought ideas of her own to the race. Does that help?
And, uh, the comment was agreeing with Andy Craig who set out the
substantive point I was agreeing with about three posts above mine
you quote. I know you are an intellectually lazy man TAO, but
certainly you can figure out how to scroll up...
|9.20.08 @ 8:17PM|#
"The McCain campaign insisted they change the rules of the Vice
Presidential debates to make them easier for Sarah Palin."
joe that is like, sexist or like elitist or something. Reform!
First dude! I've shot a gun!
SIV|9.20.08 @ 9:25PM|#
MNG
A 4 year degree from a State college is "uneducated", no matter
what she has read and learned outside an educational
institution?
Kind of elitist aren't you?
SIV|9.20.08 @ 9:31PM|#
I'm sure calling anyone without a graduate degree
"unqualified" will go over real well with the American voters. They
revere their betters and don't want any commoners making decisions
for them.
BDB|9.20.08 @ 9:32PM|#
SIV, the day the Republican Party endorsed John Edwards-esque populism with Sarah Palin is the day they jumped the shark.
|9.20.08 @ 9:48PM|#
"I'm sure calling anyone without a graduate degree "unqualified"
will go over real well with the American voters. They revere their
betters and don't want any commoners making decisions for
them."
SIV
Unlike yourself I'm not trying to shill for the Dems or anyone
here, I don't think my comments are going to sway anyone to vote
for who I prefer. So I can just honestly say what I think about
someone like Palin, namely that her educational accomplishments are
less than impressive.
About 1/3+ of Americans have a B.S. That does not make Palin stand
out much, now does it?
But to be honest I don't think she's dumb for that reason alone,
plenty of intellectual giants have had less formal education. But
when you hear her talk do you really think "wow, that lady is a
thinker?" I mean, Lynne Cheney, that's a smart conservative woman.
Palin? Get real.
Brian Doherty|9.20.08 @ 10:07PM|#
Episiarch---Yup, I was on a sabbatical from March-Sept, writing
a book on the Heller case that will be out in November, Gun Control
on Trial. Pre-order now!
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1933995254/reasonmagazineA/
gmatts|9.20.08 @ 10:10PM|#
"@gmatts:
Do you even watch Hannity?"
Yeah, occasionaly I do. And sometimes I'll even put his radio show
on if I'm in my car and am in need of a laugh. If you're a big
Hannity fan - maybe you're even "Hannitized" - perhaps you can help
me sort something out about him. I'm having a hard time deciding
which line of questioning of his I like more. Is it a) the way he
asks a 2 minute question and then demands a yes or no answer, as if
he's conducting a Scantron exam. Or is b) the way he has the answer
he desires first, then just has to work on the questions?
You're a great American.
"Listen, granola munchers. We didn't start the war on terror, al
Qaeda did, and we can't just call it off. We're in Iraq, and no
matter what BHO thinks, we need to win this thing. This war against
Islamic fascism will get a hell of a lot more expensive if we
decide to lose it. McCain is a military strategist, and Palin is a
military mom. Unlike the Obamabots, they both want to win quickly
and with honor."
I think that my JV football coach in high school gave me that same
type speech many years ago.
SIV|9.20.08 @ 10:15PM|#
If McCain wins Sarah Palin is next in the line of Presidential succession.After the Alaska Governor is the likely Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.Can anyone argue that Ms Pelosi is any more "intellectually qualified"?
BDB|9.20.08 @ 10:28PM|#
Pelosi went to Trinity University IIRC. But hey, she was the
daughter of Baltimore Mayor Tommy D'Alesandro, the most politically
crooked SOB this side of the Mississippi. That must qualify her for
something!
Seriously, D'Alesandro was the Team Blue Spiro Agnew.
Miller|9.20.08 @ 11:00PM|#
And sometimes I'll even put his radio show on if I'm in my
car and am in need of a laugh. If you're a big Hannity fan - maybe
you're even "Hannitized" - perhaps you can help me sort something
out about him.
I agree that the show is funny, but probably not for the same
reasons you do. It's a tough crowd, and lot of lightweights can't
take it. His questions are long because he needs to let them know
that he understands their positions. (Most of them come on the show
thinking he's an idiot.) Then he goes in for a quick kill. He's an
attack dog. I don't always agree with him, but he's got a point of
view, and substance. And he's a big success because of the free
market. Can you say the same for the "objective" liberal
(N)PR?
As for the Palin interview, do you really think calling her a
"pinup queen" is objective journalism? No politician in our time
has EVER gotten as much flak as Palin. (I wonder why?) I'm glad
someone finally gave her a platform without a trap door.
I think that my JV football coach in high school gave me that
same type speech many years ago.
Did you listen?
gmatts|9.20.08 @ 11:38PM|#
"No politician in our time has EVER gotten as much flak as
Palin"
Really? She's been on the nat'l stage for about 5 minutes and has
made no attempt to make her views about things known. Perhaps your
definition of "in our time" would be of use.
"I'm glad someone finally gave her a platform without a trap
door."
After watching Hannity interview Palin was there anything new that
you learned about her, or more importantly her positions (besides
her desire to "shake things up" and "ruffle some feathers")?
|9.21.08 @ 1:23AM|#
Conservative, Liberal, Republican, Democrat, Whats the
difference. We need a proven leader that can LEAD the country. All
we have are politicians that LIE, cheat and STEAL. When are the
Sheeple going to say enough is ENOUGH?
Jiff
www.anonymize.us.tc
Ha!|9.21.08 @ 4:34AM|#
His questions are long because he needs to let them know
that he understands their positions.
Man, I can't even think of anything clever to put in the name
field, that shit is so funny.
|9.21.08 @ 9:46AM|#
A 4 year degree from a State college is "uneducated", no
matter what she has read and learned outside an educational
institution?
Fair enough. I mean, didn't she just dazzle us all with her
impressive intellectual scope during that Charles Gibson
interview?
Can anyone argue that Ms Pelosi is any more "intellectually
qualified"? Yes, rather easily. It takes about five minutes
worth of video showing each of them speak. It is a testament to
your blinders that you would consider it good idea to draw that
comparison.
BDB|9.21.08 @ 10:06AM|#
Oh come on joe, Palin showed a lot of brains in this answer.
If you can't see how brilliant she is there, you must be one of
those EasternElites Mitt Romney talked about
/sarcasm
|9.21.08 @ 11:31AM|#
BDB
I tend to think that when someone is on the campaign trail speaking
every day even the brightest people will fumble now and then and in
our media scene it will be caught and played over and over, and so
such moments are not very defining.
But man, that was funny! Thanks
BDB|9.21.08 @ 11:36AM|#
MNG--
That wasn't a slip up ("fifty-seven states"), that was called
Bullshitting. And she's not very good at it.
|9.21.08 @ 7:48PM|#
I once shit the bed at a public event like that, and my boss had to come up and rescue me. He looked exactly like John McCain did in that video clip - he had exactly the same expression on his face.
BDB|9.21.08 @ 9:14PM|#
Joe-
Yeah, but were you speaking on a subject you had been touted as an
"expert" on?
|9.21.08 @ 9:52PM|#
No, BDB, I was a rookie being sent out for my first test run, and not in any sort of senior position at all.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245