Political Promiscuities: Naomi Wolf and the "Patriot Movement"

In her monumentally stupid book The End of America, feminist author Naomi Wolf predicted that the Bush years would end in a full-blown fascist dictatorship. (I detailed the many errors of fact and logic in Wolf's book here. My favorite claim in The End of America is this one: "The Communist revolutionaries of 1917 were opposed to torture, having suffered it themselves at the hands of czarist forces.") But the interminable Bush years ended as planned—and to Wolf's evident disappointment, without a putsch.

But paranoia is a stubborn thing, and America's most successful anti-fascist is keeping hope alive. In this interview with Alternet, Wolf has kind words for the libertarian participants in the Tea Party movement, accuses President Obama of being like Hitler, and explains how she and Glenn Beck are, in fact, very different. When she says that "Obama has done things like Hitler did," she does it with an academic degree:

Every time I use those analogies, I am doing it with a concrete footnoted historical context. When people like Glenn Beck throw around the word Nazi without taking that kind of care, they are engaging in demagoguery.

For those with elephantine memories, you will remember that this was Ann Coulter's chosen line of defense when critics attacked her idiotic book accusing liberals of treason (or something). I've already pointed out that Wolf's footnotes add up to a great pile of nonsense, but couldn't Beck also claim that, using a narrowly selected group of historians sympathetic to his worldview, he too is providing viewers with verbally footnoted attacks on Obama's policies? Well yes, he could. And it too would be nonsense.

Here is another similarity between the two; a topic about they are both "just asking questions": When asked about the hysterical rumors of "FEMA camps," Wolf tells Alternet that she "can't speak of it yet," as though she isn't entirely convinced the story is untrue. "With the FEMA rumor, I have heard some suggestive first-person accounts that some good reporters should follow up on."

At Ron Paul rally in Washington, D.C., Wolf met  "a lot of 'ordinary' people, as in not privileged" and advises her fellow leftists to communicate with limited government plebs "by using language that anyone can understand even if you majored in semiotics at Yale."

Whole thing here.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Monk||

    What a cunt.

  • C UMON||

    she's not that into you either

  • Almanian||

    As someone who didn't major in semiotics at Yale, even I can understand that.

  • x,y||

    I cunt hear you, repeat por favor.

  • C UMON||

    You must be...the author of another clever remark, that I read the other day. I rather like your style.

  • marlok||

    Twat's that you say? you must have an ear infucktion. Get some penisillin for that.

  • Satan||

    Marlok, my boy. Watch out for my little apprentice;-)

  • Colonel Neville||

    Hey, stop the clamoring! Gash zooks!

  • JB||

    Beck knows a lot more about history than that cunt.

    I'm not sure that's saying much at all though.

  • ¢||

    Every comment in this thread should have "cunt" in it, so less privileged readers will fight fascism with us. "Cunt" said...

    A) Can you one major in semiotics at Yale? It sounds like something from a Coulter joke.

    2) Does the Yale mob give out concrete footnotes for snidely fake-asking how its English department names degrees?

  • hmm||

    Fuck your semiotics.

  • hmm||

    cunt

  • cunt||

    fucker

  • TP||

    Yeah, the Daily Paul did a couple posts on her. Most seem leery, at best, of her intentions, and politics. I remember someone suggested "she should learn Austrian Economics and get back to us".

  • hmm||

    Seriously. Who the fuck thinks they are so god damned superior that they need to talk down to people and actually says it. It's like proving you're a fucking retard in the same sentence you try to proclaim your superiority.

  • ||

    I didn't read that as her claiming to be superior at all. She's just saying that you should adapt your pitch to your audience, wisdom with which any successful salesperson will agree. We've all met ivory tower academics who simply cannot carry on a conversation without giving the impression of arrogance because they can't speak ordinary English.

  • hmm||

    If you don't have the presence of mind to realize who your audience is and even worse the lack of presence to understand it really shouldn't have to be advice. You are a fucking moron.

  • ||

    In that case, I know a lot of morons.

  • People Power Hour||

    Let's see; apparently everyone is born knowing exactly how to determine what their audience is and act accordingly; eh, hmm?

  • hmm||

    Social skills vary, but there is most likely a mean about which they vary very little with respect to being an arrogant douche bag.

  • ||

    Show us on the doll where the semiotics major touched you.

  • ||

    It's more tha WAY she says it.

    "a lot of 'ordinary' people, as in not privileged" and advises her fellow leftists to communicate with limited government plebs "by using language that anyone can understand even if you majored in semiotics at Yale."

    Translation: These people are retards, so use small words. Also, since we liberals circulate in more refined circles, it's highly unlikely that any of these lesser beings will read this, so I don't need to hide my contempt.

  • JB||

    "we liberals circulate in more refined circles"

    'Refined' according to them. I don't consider it very refined to have group-think cocktail parties and constantly mock true diversity.

  • ||

    Had you looked at the quote free of Moynihan's editing and insertion of his own opinion, that interpretation would be even more absurd than it already is:

    I was invited by the Ron Paul supporters to their rally in Washington last summer and I loved it. I met a lot of people I respected, a lot of “ordinary” people, as in not privileged. They were stepping up to the plate, when my own liberal privileged fellow demographic habituates were lying around whining. It was a wake-up call to the libertarians that there’s a progressive who cares so much about the same issues. Their views of liberals are just as distorted as ours are of conservatives.

    JS: Why do you think the sides don’t understand each other?

    NW: Frankly, liberals are out of the habit of communicating with anyone outside their own in cohort. We have a cultural problem with self-righteousness and elitism. Liberals roll their eyes about going on "Oprah" to reach a mass audience by using language that anyone can understand even if you majored in semiotics at Yale. We look down on people we don’t agree with. It doesn’t serve us well.

    Yeah, just dripping with condescension and contempt.

  • ||

    Note Moynihan's careful excision of "people I respected" before the "ordinary people" quote, and his blatantly dishonest claim that she was talking about "limited government plebs" as people who speak a different language, when she was talking about Oprah viewers. Apparently our friend Mr. Moynihan is auditioning for Michael Moore of the right.

  • ||

    Allright, I read the article last night, and I admit it doesn't come off nearly as bad in context.

  • ||

    Thank you. It's not your fault; Moynihan's presentation of the quote was highly misleading.

  • a||

    Nah, Moynihan has applied for David Frum's old job.

  • hmm||

    So liberals are extraordinary and the ron paul people are ordinary. All the extended quote does is show what's being said. Did you notice she said "We look down on people.."

    At least she recognizes it, but that's not even half the battle to solving the problem of being an arrogant douche.

  • Alan||

    Keep in mind that in this article Naomi is writing for HER audience - the educated idiots of Yale and Harvard and the like. In that context, she's right.

    Of course she still has a lot to learn, but I've got to respect that she's trying to find common ground against a common enemy, and not rejecting every Tea Partier as some God-and-Guns Racist like most of her readers presume (judging from the comments).

  • ||

    Totally agree.

  • ||

    With both Tulpa and hmm.

  • matt||

    Tulpa +1

    Moynihan is on some New Republic shit where the only people he criticizes are those who speak about the war with more integrity than himself.

  • PIRS||

    "Here is another similarity between the two; a topic about they are both "just asking questions": When asked about the hysterical rumors of "FEMA camps," Wolf tells Alternet that she "can't speak of it yet," though isn't entirely convinced the story is untrue. "With the FEMA rumor, I have heard some suggestive first-person accounts that some good reporters should follow up on.""

    I saw Glenn Beck's show about the camps. He came to the obvious conclusion that the story was bunk and a rehash of a similar story from several years ago. He wanted to investigate it to end the rumor once and for all. In other words he was being more like Snopes than anything else.

  • PIRS||

    For those who may be interested here is a transcript of that episode:

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,513024,00.html

  • ||

    I first heard about those when it was Nixon who was setting up camps "out West" for the "hippies and protesters."

  • Resident of Topaz War Center||

    I first heard about those when it was FDR who was setting up camps "out West" for the "Japanese-Americans."

  • Drake||

    Sure it never happened. Ask Moynihan, I'm sure he'll debunk it.

  • PIRS||

    Are we bitter about something?

  • PIRS||

    Drake are you upset Moynihan does not accept your favorite conspiracy theory?

  • max||

    Funny, I first heard about them when it was Jackson who was setting up camps out west for the indians, erg native americans.

  • ||

    I don't know, I've got some reservations about that.

  • ||

    If given the exclusive choice, who would you rather Japslap?

    Naomi or Glenn?

  • PIRS||

    To be honest I have no real problem with Glenn Beck. I think he overdoes the religion thing once in a while but all in all I would call him a friend of liberty. I would not have always said that. I think he has moved in a more libertarian direction in recent years. He has even started to sound skeptical of the wars he once supported. He is not "libertarian" yet but far closer to that than most libertarians seem to give him credit for.

  • Is ||

    Liberty insane too?

  • PIRS||

    OK, Mr. "Is" you can disagree with his views on this or that issue but on what do you base your implication that he is "insane"?

  • TP||

    Well, he was the host of "The Morning Zoo". Not that I would hold that against him, but isn't being insane par for the course with those radio programs?

  • PIRS||

    Not in a literal sense, no. "Crazy" or "loco" in the sense of entertaining and off the wall, yes. But not insane literally which people who oppose him have claimed.

  • Ms Is||

    He is insane.

  • PIRS||

    And on what do you base this claim?

  • TP||

    Yeah, well, that's his shtick. If your on air persona is insanity (to a degree) some people will think that you are actually insane. But that's all these these "personalities" are, just a persona and a shtick. Nothing of substance from any of them. Just something shiny to wave in front of the American people to keep them occupied. The first one that reports on the bombshell that was dropped at he CFTC meeting last week, will have my respect for life. The silence is deafening.

  • PIRS||

    "But that's all these these "personalities" are, just a persona and a shtick. Nothing of substance from any of them."

    Before you assume this about Glenn Beck, I would suggest you listen to his radio show a couple of times. Seriously, he does have a great deal of substance. His slogan is “The fusion of entertainment and enlightenment” and it describes his radio program quite well. Whether you agree or disagree with his position on a given issue it is obvious that what he is doing is using the entertainment skills he learned from his “Morning Zoo” period in Florida to explain substantive issues in a meaningful way. He is like a cross between Groucho Marx and William F. Buckley.

  • William F. Buckley's ghost||

    Fuck you

  • Groucho Marx 's ghost||

    fuck you too, with my cigar, a la Clinton

  • PIRS||

    For the record I do not believe in ghosts.

  • Revenant||

    Boo!

  • Prince Hamlet ||

    That's what I thought

  • PIRS||

    Do you think I am easier to be played on than a pipe?

  • yes||

    http://www.philtulga.com/Panpipes.html

  • TP||

    “The fusion of entertainment and enlightenment”

    Entertainment = Persona

    Enlightenment = Sthick

    He's an entertainer. No different than Jon Stewart, Rachel Maddow, Lou Dobbs, etc. For enlightenment, I'll stick to Cato, Mises, C4L, LRC, thank you.

  • PIRS||

    I do like Cato, Mises, C4L, and LRC but his show does have substance. Again, you can disagree with his point of view but his show is substantive with a twist of entertainment on the side.

  • ||

    I would say entertainment with a twist of substance om the side. I'll stick with Reason and Cato. Any other suggestions for sources of enlightenment?

  • PIRS||

    "Any other suggestions for sources of enlightenment?"

    I like the Voluntaryist

    http://www.voluntaryist.com/

  • Drake||

    Certainly wouldn't include Cato, which is fundamentally an arm of the Republican Party. Reason is too detached from what is going on, more like 'radical' Rotarians than libertarians.

    That leaves LRC and Mises on the forefront of the libertarian movement.

  • PIRS||

    Drake,

    I have nothing but praise for the LvMI and they do wonderful work spreading knowledge of the ABCT and the true history of the free market movement. Great work and I greatly appreciate that they provide PDFs of many hard to find works that can be freely downloaded. But both Reason and CATO also have their place. Just as the economy has a “division of labor” so too do intellectual movements. Reason is the part of the movement that attempts to popularize these ideas by presenting them in an entertaining way. That is why they have people like Drew Carey on board. That is why Reason Magazine is formatted the way it is. CATO is the division that tries to get politicians to actually listen to what we have to say, that is why they have guides for members of congress. The LvMI is the division that is intended for deep thinking and long term planning. Each of these “divisions” has its place. I have donated to each of these organizations at one time or another. Each one is needed. They may not all share the same methods but they do all share the same goal. It is short sighted to look down upon one or the other.

  • ||

    Never heard of the voluntaryist, C4L, LRC(not Lew Rockwell, is it?). But I do know Lv Mises very well. Thanks I'll check them out.

  • ||

    I wouldn't agree with either of those opinions on reason or Cato. I don't see how Cato is an arm of the Republican party. They seem to focus on free market economics, which Republicans pretend to support. But they seem pretty damn anti war and socially liberal to me.

  • PIRS||

    "I don't see how Cato is an arm of the Republican party. They seem to focus on free market economics, which Republicans pretend to support. But they seem pretty damn anti war and socially liberal to me."

    I agree with you on the AA. I can understand how an anti-free-market leftist might view Cato as an arm of the Republican Party but I do not understand how a libertarian would make that mistake.

  • ||

    Never mind, C4L, Ron Paul. I'll have to brush up on my acronyms.

  • PIRS||

    "Never mind, C4L, Ron Paul. I'll have to brush up on my acronyms."

    No problem, I did not know what LRC meant at first either. C4L is campain for liberty. C4SS is the Center for a Stateless Society. LvMI is the Ludwig von MIses Institute. LRC is Lew ROckwell's site lewrockwell.com. STR is Strike-The-Root and FDR depending on the context either means Franklin Delano Rosevelt or Free Domain Radio. FTL means Free Talk Live.

  • PIRS||

    Oh, one more - ABCT is Austrian Business Cycle Theory.

  • ||

    Thanks, I did need the lesson! :)

    I love C4L, and Ron Paul. And LvM and STR. I loved the voluntaryist too, thanks for that. I would also probably like C4SS and ABCT. But I do not like Lew Rockwell all that much. I don't know why, but I don't.

  • ||

    You're not alone. His website has some good posts every now and then, but it also has posts from less-than-savoury characters. Plus, Rockwell himself kind of rubs me the wrong way.

  • magnanimous bombastic||

    "No problem, I did not know what LRC meant at first either." We all didn't at first.

  • Drake||

    You don't know the history of the division between Cato and the Mises Institute. Cato gets much of its funding from the Koch brothers, and follows their agenda.

  • Drake||

    Cato certainly was NOT anti-war on the invasion of Afghanistan. And not so much on the begging of the Iraqi invasion either.

  • ||

    Wasn't Murray Rothbard instrumental in the creation of Cato? And as far as I remember they were somewhat in favor of the Ahghan war, but not so much Iraq. But at least they can take a complete 180 and admit it was a mistake, as I know they have now.

  • Drake||

    Too little too late. They couldn't justify their stand on libertarian terms, as I pointed out in emails to them at the time. The wars are a good way to weed out the real from the phony libertarians, Cato falls in the phony category as do many at Reason.

  • JS||

    Seriously? “The fusion of entertainment and enlightenment” sounds like a complete self-important uber-douche, which is exactly how the condescending dirtbag speaks to his audience. You can have him.

  • Colonel_Angus||

    During the several occasional minutes that I actually watch Beck, he never seems to acknowledge a lot of good economic or practical arguments that would help him get his points across. Which is the same problem that "fiscal" republicans have.

  • ||

    Completely agree. Which is why most Republicans are completely useless.

  • PIRS||

    During the several occasional minutes that I actually talk to a profesional chef, he never seems to acknowledge a lot of good nutricional advice that would help him make his meals more healthy. Which is the same problem that "cooks" fast food restaurants have.

  • ||

    But the chef isn't forcing you to eat his food. Republicans who know jack shit about economics are making policy decision we all have to abide by. And its "nutritional," not "nutricional."

  • PIRS||

    Glenn Beck does not force you to watch or listen to his programs. Glenn Beck was highly critical of the TARP bill signed by Bush as well as the Stimulus bill and other anti-free market measures signed by both Republicans and Democrats.

  • ||

    I think I heard him say he was for the bailouts a stuff at first, then changed his mind. Just sayin'...

  • PIRS||

    "I think I heard him say he was for the bailouts a stuff at first, then changed his mind."

    I have been a regular Glenn Beck listener for several years. For a couple of days right after the crash in 2008 he was. When a say "a couple of days" I mean that quite literally. He initially thought the purpose was to provide a “soft landing” and supported that idea. But he learned more about what was actually in the bill and discovered that what was being said about the economy by many politicians was simply not true. He quickly changed his mind.

  • ||

    Oh. I don't get my news from T.V., just sports and cartoons, maybe Discovery and Food Network every now and then. I think I just heard him say that while passing by Fox and stopping to hear him for a moment.

  • zoltan||

    So he still supports the idea of "soft landings" or government handouts to soften the blow of a difficult economic time. Still a fucking thief and statist.

  • Almanian||

    I'd slap the cunt.

    So I guess that's a "yes".

  • Uncle Pervy's advice ||

    You must have forgotten the last knee to your shriveled groin. The girl can take care of herself. Have fun!

  • Almanian||

    Project much? Have fun!

  • Almanian||

    Cunt

  • 2 responses a minute apart||

    Did I make you mad?:-(

  • Almanian||

    I just forgot that adding "cunt" was mandatory in this tread

  • Ok||

    cunt:-)

  • ||

    Can I get a 2fer?

    oops . . . CUNT

  • Alan||

    Beck. No question.

    (I'm assuming Japslap means to do something bad to him?)

  • ||

    "In this interview with Alternet, Wolf has kind words for the libertarian participants in the Tea Party movement, accuses President Obama of being like Hitler, and explains how she and Glenn Beck are, in fact, very different."

    A broken clock tells perfect time twice a day.

    Two out of three ain't bad.

  • Brian E||

    Even a stopped clock gives the right time twice a day.
    Even a stopped clock gives the right time twice a day.
    Even a stopped clock gives the right time twice a day.
    Even a stopped clock gives the right time twice a day.

  • PIRS||

    Unless it is digital in which case it does not give the time at all or if it is a 24 hour clock like German rail-stations used to have in which case it is right only once per day. I should also point out that a clock that is set to the wrong time but running is constantly wrong.

  • Colonel_Angus||

    How about a mechanical clock that doesn't have the hands set at the correct offset? How about a sundial not oriented in the correct direction?

  • PIRS||

    Or an Ancient Greek Water clock that contains no liquid?

  • ||

    I wasn't talking about any of those clocks. I wasn't talking about clocks at all really.

    It was a metaphor. I made it up myself.

    The "two out of three ain't bad part"? I got that from Meatloaf.

    Anyway, she might be wrong about everything some of the time, and she might be wrong about some things all the time, but even she's right about some things some of the time.

    ...but there ain't no way that I'm ever gonna love her, but don't be sad.

    You know the rest.

  • Sam Grove||

    And certainly there are worse, can't think of her name, but I'm sure it will come, you know, that other Naomi.

  • PIRS||

    I kwow it was a metaphor - I was just having fun.

  • ||

    I invented it independently.

  • ||

    a man with two watches, never knows what time it is.

  • ||

    The coolest clock I've ever seen* had a plate with sinuous grooves in it. A ball bearing rolled back and forth taking one minute to complete the course.

    Then the plate flipped and the ball bearing went back and forth again for another minute. This drove a conventional clock display (no second hand).

    * Greenfield Village or the Henry Ford Museum, I'm unsure which.

  • ||

    "Every time I use those analogies, I am doing it with a concrete footnoted historical context. When people like Glenn Beck throw around the word Nazi without taking that kind of care, they are engaging in demagoguery."

    Translation:
    "I'm an edumacated ignoramus!"

  • skr||

    I actually read the interview and I have to say, she sounded fairly reasonable in the first half. Which was quite surprising. Then she hit the Nazi road bump and veered off course.

    She does basically say the elitist lefties treat normal people like douchebags by talking down to them.

  • ||

    That right there is a self-awareness deficit so profound, not even light can escape.

  • TallDave||

    At least Ann's Venona claims have some basis in fact.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VENONA_project

  • Brian E||

    There are a large number of people who should have disappeared from American political discourse for not owning up to being duped by the Soviets after the complicity of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg was established. Then again, if there was a list of pundits not to take seriously for indiscretions like these, it would pretty much look like the cable news prime-time roster.

  • ||

    Most of the interview is her being nice and understanding of the Tea Party. She hearts them Ron Paulites. She wants to ride the states rights train like Jenna on Rocco. IMO, she slagged the other libtard cunts a lot more.

  • ||

    predicted that the Bush years would end in a full-blown fascist dictatorship.

    Yeah, i guess it's not that bad yet. Might be a bit early to claim she was completely wrong. And of course she left out the part how it would end up taking the cooperation D's and R's together to accomplish such a lofty goal.

    Predictions are tough. But she could've been way further off the mark: "I predict that when Obama gets elected, Unicorns will become real."

  • James||

    Why does it seem like the loudest screamers about FEMA camps are the same people who would have no problem deporting millions of illegal immigrants - which, of course, would require things like massive camps.

  • alan||

    Why do birds sing so gay, James? Answer that one!

    Women in the 50's use to throw themselves at Liberace so the answer may be more cross species than the question I ask would have it.

  • ||

    Why do you need camps for that? You don't have to gather all 10 million+ before you start sending them home. One busload or planeload at a time would work fine.

  • Kolohe||

    yes but logistics 101 says it's more efficient to concentrate your efforts.

  • alan||

    Why do these people even need historical analogies to describe Obama policy? It is bad as it is without having to contextualize it within a social milieu that no longer exist.
    I don't care if it is 1/10th as bad, 1/100th as bad, 1/1000th as bad as BushHitlerRooseveltReagan, I know that as it stands in the framework of my life and livelihood expectations, it is shitty, and I don't want any part of it.

  • Al Gore||

    "a lot of 'ordinary' people, as in not privileged"

    I'm glad I grew up poor!

  • Any Kennedy family member||

    Same here!

  • Nancy Pelosi||

    Are you seri- oh, wait...

  • John Fitzgerald Kerry||

    Sometimes, you have to marry your way into wealth and power.

    I'm just saying.

  • John Edwards||

    Hey, if you're rich and powerful, you can cheat on your cancer-ridden wife and still have lotsa money left over.

  • Entitled Slacker||

    Yeah, but since your old lady probably has a hairy ass was it worth it?

  • Bill Clinton||

    Why do you think I cheat on Hillary?

  • Godwin||

    Can we get back to me, please?

  • PIRS||

    This thread has been pre-Godwined for the convenience of commenters. So, sorry guy, you are out of luck on this one. When a certain evil historical figure is mentioned in the article itself the thread is pre-Godwined.

  • ||

    You're as bad as Hitler, Godwin. Worse, even.

    It just occurred to me that meta-Godwinning is nearly as prevalent as Godwinning, at least round these parts.

  • ||

    You know who really liked to Meta-godwin his real life buddy Godwin?

    Hitler.

    (Meta-Meta-Godwin'd)

  • Hitler||

    Ahem...

  • Jeremiah Wright||

    GodWIN America!

  • Barack Hussein Obama II||

    This is the kind of thing I never heard in your church while I went there for as long as I did.

  • Colin||

    My favorite claim in The End of America is this one: "The Communist revolutionaries of 1917 were opposed to torture, having suffered it themselves at the hands of czarist forces."

    When Gorky complained to Lenin about the bloodletting in the aftermath of the Revolution, Lenin calmly explained, "Revolutions aren't won wearing white dinner gloves."

    Ali G vs. Naomi:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dyLSstqMvH8

  • ||

    but couldn't Beck also claim that, using a narrowly selected group of historians sympathetic to his worldview

    Yeah cuz a broad consensus based understanding of history would make everything as clear as mud.

    Also

    In her monumentally stupid book The End of America, feminist author Naomi Wolf predicted that the Bush years would end in a full-blown fascist dictatorship.

    Well to be fair Obama did become President at the end of the Bush years and we are now living in a full blown fascist dictatorship.

  • ||

    So fascism/corporatism is essentially a more colorful, complex version of socialism?

  • ||

    Pretty close; a bit less deadly to the population, but pretty close.

  • ||

    So I guess we'll just stick with "statism/statists" then. It seems a little less hyperbolic, and can be taken more seriously.

  • ||

    Sure about that?

    Might want to check the mortality rate of imprisoned drug sellers in the US.

  • ||

    A "bit" less deadly. But still deadly none the less.

  • ||

    Bottom line: Who do you think is better for liberty, Moynihan or Wolf?

    Moyniham is so patently envious, it is so funny. Intellectually, he couldn't not hold her panty liners. You just know he's jealous of her acclaim and success.

    He's as bad as Boston's John Denis and Gerry Callahan of sports radio 850 WEEI. The two of them constantly berate and ridicule Chris Berman, Joe Morgan, John Madden, Charles Barkley, Marv Albert, Mark Jackson, Tom Jackson, Dan Patrick, Jim Rome, Troy Aikman, Tony Kornheiser and Dicky V-all of whom are nationally recognized and all of whom have achieved an excellence of one sort or another that Denis and Callahan have not.

    Although Denis and Callahan have been on the air for 12 years and have enjoyed generally very good ratings, they are still local, not regional and certainly not the big time. You can hear their envy when they bash all of the above. Good luck expressing the view that Dicky V. sucks as a broadcaster. Or that Joe Morgan does not know what he is talking about. Please.

    At least Wolf acknowledges from whence she came culturally, politically and socially. I may not like some of that, you know, FDR, medicare and federal government solutions, but she appears to be engaging in an honest, reappraisal of such things.

    Can we say the same for Moynihan?

  • ||

    Weird analysis. Don't think that is good criticism of the article.

  • Jim||

    Libertymike really does not like jews.

  • ||

    i do. I have to say, even when the dumbest things come out of her mouth my panties get a little bit wet.

  • ||

    Moynihan is a Jew?

    That makes it doubly hilarious that Brad Delong was calling him a Nazi sympathizer.

    Either way you have to give him props for that. When was the last time Wolf got Brad Delong to pull an unjustified "Your nazi" quote.

  • ||

    Convenient that she forgot that FDR actually imprisoned 100,000 american citizens.

  • marlok||

    What pro-liberty effect has Wolf had, exactly?

    "she appears to be engaging in an honest, reappraisal of such things."

    Look harder

  • ||

    I thought Wolf was the cool feminist.

    ie she believes in women rights without having to condemn all men as rapists.

  • zoltan||

    She still writes stupid shit about how our horrible culture instills body image issues and punishes female promiscuity. Yawn, ever the victim, eh feminist?

  • ||

    I'm not terribly familiar with Wolf, but in this instance at least Moynihan is playing some seriously dirty pool. He manipulates the quote about "ordinary people" to make it sound like an insult (in context it's anything but) and then flat out lies about who she was saying needed to be talked to "in words everyone can understand". She was talking about Oprah viewers, not limited government supporters.

  • ||

    Joe Morgan knows the game but he has no business doing national broadcasts. And it's too bad because he was a great ballplayer.

  • Warty||

    Every time I use those cunts, I am doing it with a concrete footnoted historical cunt

    Yeah, I'll bet you are, you dirty little broad.

  • ||

    Haha, thats pretty funny dude, I mean seriously.

    Lou
    www.anonymous-surfing.us.tc

  • ||

    She actually thought the Bush administration was intercepting her daughter's letters from camp. Riiiiight.... Still, of the all lefty loons, she's among the most boinkable (but she'll have to be careful not to blimp out as she gets older).

  • ||

    I think she's old enough to have cleared the blimpy-risk phase.

  • FreeView Documentaries||

    Great SITE for Documentaries check it out

  • Hitler||

    Racist

  • ||

    hey at least she is still coming around. I remember she used to hate guns until the conservative crowd got to her. Give her a chance.!!!!

  • Mike||

    Doesn't Wolf get some kudos for being an equal opportunity nutbag?

  • PIRS||

    Yes, on that front she is less annoying than either Al Franken or Ann Coulter.

  • ||

    I am attempting to limit my swearing, but she does make me think of a word that rhymes with that thing football teams do on 4th down, and they're out of FG range.

  • Satan||

    Go ahead, Jesus gives you a pass this weekend.

  • .||

    Ssshhh! He's still sleeping.

  • Satan||

    Wrong! We've been playing poker. It looks like a three day game.

  • Valerie Jarrett||

    I'm all in.

  • Satan||

    Sorry, I can even trust a Chicago lawyer not to cheat.

  • Satan||

    *can't

  • Valerie Jarrett||

    Are you calling me a cant, Satan?

  • Satan||

    Since the phraseology fits, wear it disciple:-)

  • Valerie Jarrett||

    Kinky!

  • Satan||

    Even more than you think!

  • Satan||

    Why do I get the distinct impression that you are the only one with a tail.

  • Valerie Jarrett||

    Oh, the tails I could tell.

  • Hellboy||

    No shit! Her tail is bigger than mine! Her dick is bigger and redder too!

  • Valerie Jarrett||

    The Boss seems to like it.

  • Satan||

    Democrats make better lovers;-)

  • Valerie Jarrett||

    Here's a little secret: we enjoy teabagging. At least I do.

  • Satan||

    I'll watch;-)

  • ||

    Wolf ... advises her fellow leftists to communicate with limited government plebs "by using language that anyone can understand even if you majored in semiotics at Yale.

    But those Symbology majors from Harvard, nobody can understand them.

  • &||

    Will H&R rise again tomorrow and sit upon the right hand of Murray Rothbard?

  • ||

    I agree with Mike, she is making a good-faith effort to overcome some of her misconceptions and ignorance. Check out this interview with Lew Rockwell for proof of this:

    http://www.lewrockwell.com/lew.....cist-coup/

  • ||

    Naomi Wolf has a lot more credibility than Mr. Moynihan, who is a first-rate neocon. She is a member of the principled Left, like Glenn Greenwald. Their numbers have dwindled under Obama, so we should appreciate the ones who are left.

    Can anyone doubt her claim that increased centralization into the executive branch, police state measures, and a warfare economy are ill omens for the republic? Moynihan doesn't actually refute anything she says.

    HE IS THE CUNT!!!!!

  • ||

    I think it's safe to say we are all cunts now.

  • MSNBC||

    I know we are.

  • Fox News||

    We have the bigger market share on cuntiness.

  • MSNBC||

    You wish! We're literally dripping with it over here.

  • Rachel Maddow||

    Ahem, *that* was me douching!

  • Middle American||

    I thought I smelled fish.

  • Satan||

    Fag

  • Masturbatin' Pete||

    You lost me at "a member of the principled Left, like Glenn Greenwald."

    Ellison/Ellers/Ellensburg/whatever wouldn't know principle if it shacked up with him in a Brazilian cabana.

  • You lost me at ||

    Masturbatin'

  • Sean||

    Last night I had an idea that everyone was much smarter than they acted.
    Then I realized it was true.

    Then I cried for a long time.

  • rctl||

    Last night, I had a dream that Sean was going to type something idiotically perspicacious...still waiting;-)

  • ||

    Naomi Wolf reminds me of the hypochondriac who had "I TOLD YOU I WAS SICK!" inscribed on his tombstone.

  • Al Swearengen||

    Loopy fucking cunt.

    She must think I'm a fucking dog, forgives the blow first friendly scratch at the ear.

  • You had me at blow||

    You blew Naomi?

  • ||

    She actually makes a lot of sense dude.

    Lou
    www.anonymous-surfing.us.tc

  • ||

    short summary of wolf:

    'I'm jewish, beck is a mormon.
    only jews may invoke hitler.
    we have proprietary rights.'

  • wickEd||

    She is allowed to use the Hitler analogies because she reads books, whereas Beck is not allowed since he does not?

    And the person most wrong in her opinion is someone who makes a visual representation (the poster) of what basically, both her and GB (and so many others) are saying verbally?

    What was it again that she was saying about leftist elitism...? Hmmm.

    What is completely moronic in all the Hitler-as-adjective-poop-slinging is the fact that the methods used to exercise brute political force are not Nazi or Stalinist inventions, but something that had been used, as a type of action, long before the 20th century. If you wanted to use maximizing brutal force and political manipulation, you would use the exact same methods. And same PR. And your opponents would use the same "Reductio ad Hitlerum" to paint your actions. Hitler and Stalin are "just" the easiest ones to paint a fast picture.

    It is all such bullshit.

    I live in Serbia, and felt the real power of a highly corrupted government and judicial system, of police brutality and overall non-existence of freedom. People were beaten, publicly destroyed and, some, even killed for verbal criticisms of government.

    I am *not* saying that Ms Wolf should be grateful for the freedom of speech and the fact she wont get killed by the secret police for her opinions, or that she should let go of other political issues that endanger the political freedoms, but, hey, please put things in a little perspective. The arguments will just sound more plausible. The Hitler one is wearing thin - and this goes for all sides.

    [note: I dont give a shit about GBeck, since his voice is not heard here. But her's is, and it is very annoying that she "helps" make even more misguided quasi-leftists than there already are here]

  • ||

    Justice Stevens to leave while Obama in office

    Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens says he "will surely" retire while President Barack Obama is still in office, giving the president the opportunity to maintain the high court's ideological balance.

    Stevens said in newspaper interviews on the Web Saturday that he will decide soon on the timing of his retirement, whether it will be this year or next. Stevens, the leader of the court's liberals, turns 90 this month and is the oldest justice.

    Is it me or is it a serious breach of decorum to publicly admit to rigging your retirement so as to ensure your replacement is similar politically?

  • Valerie Jarrett||

    All bets are off. This is a new era. We won the election. Desperate times call for desperate measures. Polly want a cracker. Awwk!

  • Kolohe||

    I think both O'Connor and Souter timed their retirements so that they would be replaced by someone more or less in political agreement with themselves, although may not have been explicit about it.

    And besides those two, Thurgood Marshall (who was in any case in pretty bad health) has been the only justice since the Kennedy administration to not take the eternal celestial dirt nap the same year they retired.

  • ||

    Souter, yeah. Not so sure about O'Connor -- Alito doesn't really match her ideology that well.

  • ||

    ...he will decide soon on the timing of his retirement, whether it will be this year or next.

    Not only is he subtly implying that he wishes to maintain the ideological bent of his post, it can also be inferred that he does not wish to retire until he has offered opinion on issues that might make it to the SCOTUS before he retires.

    A cocktail of hubris, partisanship, and a breach of etiquette comparable to breaking loud wind during the pianissimo refrains of La Traviata.

  • ||

    Ann Coulter's Treason is a fine book, and Moynihan is an idiot for saying it's idiotic. Her conclusion that those who support treason are treasonous is a fucking tautology, yet too nuanced and complex for Moynihan to grasp.

    Joe McCarthy wasn't perfect and abused his power, but no worse than Dick Durbin, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Barack Obama, Ted Fucking Goddamned Kennedy (you cunts here think anything Joe did compared to the Borking?) and many more.

    You people let Walter Duranty create what will be written as history then complain when a hero like Ann screams "STOP" as the tsunami of bullshit history comes closer and closer to shore.

  • Middle American||

    I think you have the wrong address.

  • Sean W. Malone||

    An Ann Coulter "conclusion" is nuanced? Wtf?

  • Warty||

    TEAM RED TEAM RED GO TEAM GO TEAM R-E-D RED RED RED

  • zoltan||

    You malign the name of real heroes everywhere.

  • ||

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venona_project

    Buy Treason today and get a real education mixed with prose worthy of the vast audience Ann has earned.

    "But you know something? I don't get the feeling they'd be eager to re-ignite the free speech wars on a nuclear scale. Think of Ezra's and my appearance in the House of Commons, and then imagine the scene when Miss Coulter testifies."- Mark Steyn

    I did imagine it, and it was good. It highlights Ann's wit and comfort on the world stage.

  • zoltan||

    Wit, LOL. More like scathing, bitter harpyness. That passes as wit for some people though.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement