George Will on "Democratic-manufactured hysteria"

The Washington Post columnist takes us down memory lane:

In 1964, the slogan of the Republican presidential nominee, Barry Goldwater, was "A choice, not an echo." Forty-six years on, the Tea Party is a loud echo of his attempt to reconnect American politics with the tradition of limited government.

In response to a questionnaire from a magazine, 1,189 psychiatrists, none of whom had ever met Goldwater, declared him unfit for office -- "emotionally unstable," "immature," "cowardly," "grossly psychotic," "paranoid," "chronic schizophrenic" and "dangerous lunatic" were some judgments from the psychiatrists who believed that extremism in pursuit of Goldwater was no vice. Shortly before the election, Columbia University historian Richard Hofstadter published in Harper's an essay (later expanded into a book with the same title), "The Paranoid Style in American Politics," that encouraged the idea that Goldwater's kind of conservatism was a mental disorder.

On the eve of the convention that nominated Goldwater, Daniel Schorr of CBS, "reporting" from Germany, said: "It looks as though Sen. Goldwater, if nominated, will be starting his campaign here in Bavaria, center of Germany's right wing" and "Hitler's one-time stomping ground."

Goldwater, said Schorr, would be vacationing near Hitler's villa at Berchtesgaden. Schorr further noted that Goldwater had given an interview to Der Spiegel "appealing to right-wing elements in Germany" and had agreed to speak to a gathering of "right-wing Germans." So, "there are signs that the American and German right wings are joining up."

But as Andrew Ferguson of the Weekly Standard has reported, although Goldwater had spoken vaguely about a European vacation (he did not take one), he had not mentioned Germany, and there were no plans to address any German group. Der Spiegel had reprinted an interview that had appeared elsewhere.

The relevance of this for 2010? There is precedent for the mainstream media being megaphones for Democratic-manufactured hysteria.

Related: Matt Taibbi conducts thorough investigation of Tea Partiers, and scientifically concludes: "They're full of shit. All of them."

For an actually insightful essay, re-read Jesse Walker's classic "The Paranoid Center." Reason on Goldwater 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.

  • Binky||

    Matt Taibbi conducts thorough investigation of Tea Partiers, and scientifically concludes: "They're full of shit. All of them."

    Anybody care to summarize? I just can't put myself through the Rolling Stone wringer.

  • ||

    That is the summary.

  • Robert||

    He wrote that idealists eventually must sell out to the (apparently eternal and autonomous) leadership of major political parties, and gave evidence of that happening with Rand Paul, with a concomitant shift in his base from idealists to neophobes and xenophobes.

  • ||

    Shit is full of Matt Taibbi, of at least 60% full.

  • ||

    How many Courics do you wreckon that is? 20 maybe 22?

  • johnl||

    The very same Taibbi who thinks that Bear could have stayed in business forever, losses be damned, if it were not for short sellers.

  • Daze||

    So 2010 is neither the first time Republicans have slandered Democrats nor the first time Democrats have slandered Republicans? Holy shit.

  • SIV||

    Put down the bong and RTFA.

    The Goldwater smear was by the MSM back in the "golden days" of truly objective journalism.

  • zoltan||

    So 2010 is neither the first time Republicans have slandered Democrats nor the first time Democrats have slandered Republicans? Holy shit.

    Can you read fool? Unless you're a moron (Republican/Democrat/journalist), there's never been a "golden days" of journalism.

  • ||

    Yes, because St. Schorr could never, ever, be a partisan hack.

  • Caleb Turberville||

    PZ Myers in response to the Taibbi article, "Who are the teabaggers? Cranky, ignorant old racist hypocrites who are all about me-me-me-me, deftly manipulated by the big business establishment."

    PZ Myer was a hero during my conversion to secularism. Now, I view him as a pompous, dim-witted jerk. Hours after I read his blog entry, Greg Giraldo died. All my heroes are either jerks or dead.

  • zoltan||

    PZ Myers is taxpayer leech. I love his scientific stuff and his crusade against the moronic Ben Stein was great. But he is rather confused when it comes to politics. He, like actors and musicians, should stick to what he knows.

  • The Thinking Man's NASCAR||

    Hate to break it to you, but studies have shown a strong positive correlation between self-publicizing atheism and douchebaggery.

  • Caleb Turberville||

    Maybe calling PZ a hero is a bit much. I generally agreed with his critiques of the 'publicans and buffoons like Ted Haggard. Now that his guy is in power, he can basically give less than one turd about political dissent.

    Hey, I'm only 20. Trust me, I've learned my lesson on the false political dichotomy.

  • Ron L||

    The Thinking Man's NASCAR|9.30.10 @ 7:23PM|#
    "Hate to break it to you, but studies have shown a strong positive correlation between self-publicizing atheism and douchebaggery."
    OK, but how about the atheists who simply point out that bleevers might just as well 'pray' to the Easter Bunny and laugh.

  • Harvey Dent||

    You either die a hero, or you live long enough to see yourself become a villain.

  • RC not the cola||

    Unfortunately the quality of villains in this town is flaccid at best.

  • Vermont Gun Owner||

    Or both.

  • ||

    WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • LeSigh||

    Thank God. That's the only thing that keeps me going some days.

  • The Thinking Man's NASCAR||

  • ||

    Can we make the blanket statement that 99% of journalists are lying, lazy, pompous, biased pieces of shit?

  • ||

    Yes.

    I've never met one person who wanted to be a journalist who wasn't doing it because they really wanted to influence public opinion.

    The notion of people becoming journalists out of some sort of noble sense of duty to report the truth is a naive fantasy.

  • Robert||

    I think the part of only wanting to influence public opinion is true only of those covering certain kinds of beats. I don't think that's true of most science reporters, sports reporters, business reporters, or celebrity reporters.

    The part that said it's mere fantasy that they work from a noble sense of duty is of course true of all journalists -- and of everyone else, including volunteer workers, in all fields.

  • Ted S.||

    I don't know about the people who write up the game-day reports, but my impression is that the sports reporters who write columns are among the biggest "politically correct" bigots aout there.

  • Robert||

    They may be bigots, but is that because they want to influence opinion that way, or just that they happen to be such?

  • ||

    I'd have to say not many 'Scientists' want to be 'Journalists' or vis-versa. At least from what I've seen. Not many going into journalism, that I've met, had the attitude "I just want to objectively report facts and events." It's more like "I want to shine some light on what I pretend is a huge problem the world needs to know about."

  • Robert||

    That's so weird, because one of the things I like to do is teach lay people about science, and one of the ways I've thought about doing that is as a science reporter, mostly reporting about research going on. I proposed a column on that years ago to a little local Bronx weekly, focusing on research going on locally, but they didn't go for it.

  • Ivan||

    Hazel,
    You are perfectly correct.

  • Ron L||

    "Goldwater, said Schorr, would be vacationing near Hitler's villa at Berchtesgaden."

    Hint, hint, nudge, nudge; 'now I didn't say *THAT*!

  • Ragin Cajun||

    How old is Godwinning?

  • Ron L||

    Dunno, but at least since '64.

  • Sudden||

    Interestingly enough, it predates Hitler himself.

  • Abdul||

    I'm more glad that old fuck Daniel Schorr is dead than I'm glad that Hitler is dead.

  • Vermont Gun Owner||

    The current Cornell Chronicle has an editorial denouncing the Tea Party. I quit reading after the third sentence said that Sarah Palin claimed she could see Russia from her house.

  • Ron L||

    Vermont Gun Owner|9.30.10 @ 6:37PM|#
    "I quit reading after the third sentence said that Sarah Palin claimed she could see Russia from her house."

    This is gonna enter the lefty 'texts' along with the claim that 'Governor Reagan closed the mental institutions to save money and tossed all the inmates on the street'.

  • ||

    What about the BS that Al Gore claimed to have "invented" the Internet, or the other crap that the "MSM" wrote and said about him in the 2000 campaign?

  • SIV||

    Al Gore didn't invent the internet? I guess that lying sack-of-shit hasn't accomplished anything other than raping a few masseuses.

  • Obligatory||

    Take care of THIS!

  • Enemy Of The Revolution||

    And let's not forget that the "see Russia from my house" line came from a Saturday Night Live skit.

  • ||

    Actually understanding the tea parties would entail admitting that the debate over the size of government has not been conclusively settled in favor of European-style social democracy.

    The left can't handle that. That is why they must dismiss the Tea Party as a bunch of insane fringe wackos.

  • ||

    And the libertarians. Don't forget to dismiss us!

  • ||

    Who?

  • ||

    You know, those weirdos whose sense of individual liberty and responsibility politicians pretend to appeal to, then discard once they're elected?
    Also, they're 'pro-gay' in that they don't want to kill every fucking fag on the planet in the name of conservatism and want black people and minorities to die for 'the man' since they don't want gov't welfare programs or high taxes on everything.

  • ||

    Spot on. The last thing anyone in MSM wants is a real discussion about the issues the Tea Partiers bring up.

    Just make with more of the Palin-is-a-Dimwit and Beck is an idiot jokes.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    Understanding the Tea Party entails intellectually engaging the Tea Party position to begin with, which the media hasn't shown one iota of interest in doing. Remember the Rachel Maddow interview of Rand Paul? She started from the position that Paul is a racist hell-bent on repealing the Civil Rights Act, and asked questions designed specifically to illicit a response which would then "prove" her position that he, and everyone who supports him or his politics is a racist. Hell, even left wing idols admit that perhaps they ought to, you know, pretend to listen to the Tea Party position in order to pacify the populace in the Tea Party.

  • Robert||

    I think you meant democratic socialism. The size of gov't is fairly well determined by democratic socilaism, but not by social democracy. Social democracies can have big or small gov't or medium size -- the point is that social democrats put few bounds on gov't, so that it can get very big, but it doesn't necessarily get or stay that size in a social democracy.

  • ||

    Matt Taibbi is the umpteenth pretender to the throne Hunter Thompson left at RS.

    But unlike P.J. O'Rourke or HST himself, he just has bile in place of wit and insight.

  • zoltan||

    Can't stand those wannabes.

  • Robert||

    I've liked his writing ever since it was "Blender Kitty" (or maybe that was someone else's title) in the New York Press.

  • tafurs delight||

    agree more or less, & couldn't follow'm these days, but look up anything by him in the early '00s about what a nightmare catastrophe post-911 cheneyMerica was & would be, & there's a heap of truth there...ymmv

  • tafurs delight||

    er, that was @ Matthew...

  • Tony||

    What Taibbi points out is that tea partiers are one of the most social welfare receiving groups of people on planet earth, yet their raison d'etre is to advocate for less government spending on social welfare. Hence, full of shit.

  • zoltan||

  • ||

    +1, dear zoltan. The most appropriate response to his squalling.

  • SIV||

    That's what I like hearing out of a woman.

  • filbert||

    So . . . if the slaves eat the food the owners give them, then they should STFU and not want to be free. That's pretty much Taibbi's logic, is that what you're saying?

  • Ron L||

    Tony|9.30.10 @ 6:50PM|#
    "What Taibbi points out is that tea partiers are one of the most social welfare receiving groups of people on planet earth, yet their raison d'etre is to advocate for less government spending on social welfare. Hence, full of shit."

    Parsed from brain-dead asshole speak:
    "What Taibbi points out is that tea partiers are US citizens...."
    Speaking of full of shit, I'll bet you have brown eyes.

  • Ynot||

    based on what? the anecdotal evidence of a partisan writer with an axe to grind. why don't you grab reality with both hands and provide some evidence of this.

  • KPres||

    Actually, the Tea Parties are both more educated and wealthier than the population at large.

    Also, liberal trolls who already knew that but stall made the deliberately disingenuous claim are more intellectually dishonest than the population at large.

  • Tony||

    Did I say anything about their wealth or education?

    I'm saying they're old. They're on medicare. As in, "git yer government hands off of." They do not feel they are receiving something they don't deserve. They just don't think those lazy shiftless... uh, other people deserve it.

  • ||

    Tony, they would only be hypocritical if they advocated taking away welfare from everyone but themselves.

  • Tony||

    Isn't that exactly what I said?

  • Apogee||

    Even you don't know.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    I bet the Tipperary bastards use pubic roads, too. Tipperary hyper crits!

  • .||

    I'm saying they're old. They're on medicare. As in, "git yer government hands off of." They do not feel they are receiving something they don't deserve.

    No one can get Medicare until 65 years of age, so you're saying they're all that age or older? That's ludicrous.

    And why should they "feel they are receiving something they don't deserve" - most have been paying for it all their working lives.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    And why should they "feel they are receiving something they don't deserve" - most have been paying for it all their working lives.

    Don't you get it, man? Once you use a single government service, regardless of whether you paid for it, were forced to, or even that it's something that makes sense for the government to do, you are on the hook for every dumb-assed thing that progressives think the government should be doing.

    You use roads? Then if you don't support idiotic money losing public transportation boondoggles, you're a hypocrite.

    You use Medicare? Then if you don't support nationalized healthcare, you're a hypocrite.

  • Tiger Beat||

    Tony actually reads me! That so makes my day!

  • MJ||

    Democrat politicians like FDR and LBJ had been telling everyone that SS and Medicare are types of insurance that that people paid for. Now, because its convenient to the Democrats political fortunes, its message to them now is "You are on the dole, sit down and shut up!"

  • ||

    huh - I'm a tea party supporter (and I've been to a rally or two). I'm 40, work, and college educated. No welfare or government checks coming my way.

    Funny thing - I used to be a socialist back in my college days - you can find some of my letters in their rags if you happen to have the back issues. Now? I wouldn't touch that odious political claptrap with a ten foot pole.

  • Jason||

    A 1968 article on the Goldwater mental illness accusation.

    He won the libel suit, but was award $1 in compensatory damages and $25,000 and $50,000 in punitive damages from Ralph Ginzburg and Fact Magazine respectively.

  • Colonel_Angus||

    Psychology is bullshit. There is something "wrong" with everyone.

  • .||

    Especially those who think psychology is bullshit. BTW, the study of mental illness is psychiatry - not psychology.

  • Enemy Of The Revolution||

    Agreed. Psychology / psychiatry is free to label as a "mental illness" whatever current conventional wisdom deems undesirable. Hence homosexuality was a "mental illness" a century ago. And now any kid who gets antsy in class suffers from a "mental illness" that requires them to take pills to make them easier to handle. Psychology rests of a shifty foundation because psychologists reflect current fashion, not reality.

  • Barely Suppressed Rage||

    I have a syndrome whose symptoms include the inability to stop thinking about women's breasts for more than a few minutes at a time. I also am easily distracted by the need to check Reason H&R every few minutes for a new blog entry or comment from SugarFree.

    I'm sure this syndrome will soon show up in the DSM, and before long there will be a pill brought to you courtesy of big pharma.

  • ||

    Taibbi's article is a fun read and he is absolutely correct in pointing out that the post-Ron Paul Tea Party movement is, well, Taibbi lays it out rather well...

    "A hall full of elderly white people in Medicare-paid scooters, railing against government spending and imagining themselves revolutionaries as they cheer on the vice-presidential puppet hand-picked by the GOP establishment. If there exists a better snapshot of everything the Tea Party represents, I can't imagine it."

  • BakedPenguin||

    Unlike those who voted for HOPE! and CHANGE! and wound up with Bush the Lesser, pt. 3. So tell me, Arnold, you hope for some change from people on street corners? Because with the assholes you and your kind are electing, that's your future.

  • ||

    Arnold, while probably a HOPE and CHANGE moron him/herself, isn't wrong about the Tea Partiers. All of these people (Tea Party, Obamatrons, etc.) want their personal shit still spent on, and only want to stop the spending on other people's shit that they don't like. It's pretty hypocritical.

  • Slut Bunwalla||

    That's right, ALL OF THEM. Every single one.

  • Ron L||

    whatyoutalkinboutwillis|9.30.10 @ 7:09PM|#
    "A hall full of elderly white people in Medicare-paid scooters, railing against government spending..."
    So we can guess he saw one person in a motorized chair and presumed it was government-furnished?
    IOWs, he made up a story based on his bias?

  • ||

    > So we can guess he saw one person in a motorized chair

    Yeah, not so much. Go read the 1st few paragraphs of his story.

  • ||

    "So we can guess he saw one person in a motorized chair and presumed it was government-furnished?
    IOWs, he made up a story based on his bias?"

    I read the article, and the whole thing seems suspicious. I mean, seriously, if *everybody* at this place fits nicely into his pre-conceived stereotype, then there weren't many people there, or he made some shit up.

  • Leroy||

    This was actually Sarah Palin speaking at the National Quartet Convention. It wasn't a teaparty rally.

    I would imagine, based on my preconceived stereotypes, that the people in attendance at the National Quartet Convention tend to be old.

  • ||

    Because they all declined to opt out of the social welfare programs they receive, right? Wait, they can't? Who invented that shit?

  • ||

    They may have been able to get away with that in 1964, but if they tried a stunt like that in 2010 they'd get their clocks cleaned by FoxNews, talk radio, and the Net. Remember Rathergate.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    What the fuck are you talking about?

    The media does it EVERY SINGLE FUCKING DAY. In fact, they do it so much that IT IS NOW THE NORM.

    They make their fucking living by smearing the political opposition, unless, that is, everyone who would dare run on a republican/libertarian/anything not democrat ticket are actually racist inbreeds and the journolistas are just reporting the truth.

  • CavMedic||

    Yes-but as a consequence they are also now one of the least trusted instititions in American society.

    The people really do know what is what (at least in this regard).

  • #||

    this is the difference now... where in 1964 people gobbled up whatever the media told them, now most people take it with a great deal of scepticism.

  • ||

    What the others said, but also keep in mind that most people do not get their news from newspapers or the traditional broadcast media anymore.

    In part, that's why their bias has become so blatant recently -- they're catering to their audience, which consists mostly of aging liberals who haven't fled elsewhere yet. It's the same dynamic as FoxNews et al telling conservatives what they want to hear, it's just that FoxNews is new so they can't legitimize themselves by appealing to a supposedly objective past like NBC can.

  • ¢||

    You missed the paranoid hook here. The Goldwater-goes-to-Bavaria fable and Taibbi's completely fucking made-up "Rand Paul's secret midnight visit to the Creation Museum" thing are diagnosably alike.

    And— You hang with a bunch of JournoListas, right, Welch? Bringing us the "election theme: cracka peril" memo they recently hear-and-obeyed would be newsy. You on it? All deep-throatin' that shit?

    Of course you are.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    To be fair, Paul wouldn't have to go far to the Craetion Museum.

    I've often been curious to go there just to see and laugh (being that it isn't far from my house), but then I'd have to financially support that fucking nonsense, and I just can't have that.

  • ||

    I remain steadfast that real conservatism since the Great Depression has always been about opposition to the New Deal, and everything like it that sprouted in its wake.

    Cultural conservatism as we know it today is an artifact of the Reagan Coalition--mostly surviving in the South. George Bush would have been a Democrat just like Lyndon Johnson if it hadn't been for Reagan...

    And anybody who thinks the Reagan Administration was all about cultural conservatism should get off the keyboard and go read a book.

  • ||

    I take it you never heard about the Will Hayes office?

  • ||

    No, and neither has anyone else.

    I have never once heard anyone say they opposed Ronald Reagan or Barry Goldwater because of the Will Hayes office.

    But I did hear Reagan and Goldwater go apeshit on the Welfare State.

  • #||

    The thing is Reagan wasnt about social conservatism, but that wing of the party grew under his years. He effectively gave the religious right just enough lip service and then spent all his energy elsewhere.

  • ||

    Exactly.

    ...we invited the religious right over for dinner and they WAY overstayed their welcome.

    Cultural conservatives used to be the core of the Democratic Party going back to the days of the Dixiecrats and further back than that. As recently as the '80s, the Moral Majority wouldn't endorse a political party--only candidates. That was the push behind Tipper and Al Gore... They were at the forefront of the Moral Majority's push from within the Democratic Party.

    There's hardly ANY meaningful distinction between pre-Reagan Southern Democrats and George W. Bush. From Johnson's push to escalate Vietnam in the name of democracy to George W. Bush's expansion of Medicare to cover prescriptions--George W. Bush was a Southern Democrat as sure as Lyndon Johnson was...

    Bush the Lesser sure as hell wasn't a conservative in the mold of Goldwater and Reagan!

    I used to catch so much hate around here from Bush supporters--hatin' on me for denouncing Jr. as a liberal in every way that mattered...

    His foreign policy was liberal, his fiscal policy was liberal... He EXPANDED Medicare! Created whole new classes of entitlements.

    He was a Southern Democrat who would have run as a Southern Democrat if Reagan hadn't drawn so many cultural conservatives into the big tent for the Reagan coalition.

    Before George W. Bush--going back to Roosevelt, really--conservative foreign policy wasn't about Wilsonianism and American neocons policing the world. It was about pragmatism, realism and quasi-isolationism--see Reagan in Lebanon as an example. See the Powell Doctrine! And fiscal policy? There wasn't anything conservative about Bush Jr.'s fiscal policy--at all. His fiscal policy is indefensible from a conservative standpoint.

    What we're seeing with the Tea Party is a realignment back to the Grand Ol' Conservatism of the '80s. Ronald Reagan would have seen this Tea Party movement for exactly that. He'd have shaped it too...into something better than it is.

    The problem I see is that there isn't anyone out there who's anything like a Reagan figure--or a Goldwater even. I don't even see a Jack Kemp or a Phil Gramm. Hopefully, if the cycle continues, we're at about 1978 right now, and leaders will emerge.

    Ronald Reagan, however, hasn't shown up yet--maybe he (or she) is a CEO somewhere instead of a governor.

    I don't know. But the country's starving for capitalist leadership, and, yeah, that tends to happen after recessions.

    Our president right now doesn't seem to have a clue about what makes economies grow. He's just clueless. He's one of the dumbest political figures I've ever seen--from a pure performance standpoint--he doesn't know how to save his own ass, much less how to make the economy grow.

  • Prescott||

    George Bush would have been a Democrat

    Over my dead body he would have been!

  • GILMORE||

    The Will piece was, as usual, spot on. I have such a mancrush on that little nerd.

  • ah||

    He's really smart, and even when he employs sarcasm, he does so with restraint. I love a writer who can do that consistently.

  • Max||

    "Forty-six years on, the Tea Party is a loud echo of his attempt to reconnect American politics with the tradition of limited government."

    What a crock of shit. The tea partiers want an underclass with a severly limited chance of ever being anything else. For themselves they want a big generous state and all the goodies it hands out from Social Security to Medicare, and they don't want any fucking Chinese getting jobs their grandkids might want.

  • Max||

    ANd before any of you fucking winguts reply to this, actually read what i wrote. But you probally cant because you were home schooled instead of getting a reel education at a evil public school.

  • Masturbatin' Pete||

    About that reel education that you got: was it primarily focused on saltwater fishing, or fresh?

  • Max||

    Go suck Ron paul`s dick

  • Masturbatin' Pete||

    I don't think Dr. Paul is a homosexual.

  • Bruno||

    Confirmed.

  • Slut Bunwalla||

    To be fair, that doesn't mean you can't suck his dick. Max didn't say he had to enjoy it.

  • ah||

    ha ha!

  • Restoras||

    winguts or wingnuts?
    reel or real?
    i or I?
    ANd or And?
    a evil public school or an evil public school?
    cant or can't?
    probally or probably?

    Seriously Max, all you are doing here is making yourself look like a total buffoon while providing endless amusement for the rest of us.

  • radar||

    SSSSSHHHHHHH! Don't try to stop him! I enjoy the entertainment.

  • RC not the cola||

    The lp solution to that would be to reform education so the underclass would have a fighting chance to get out.

  • JoshINHB||

    The tea partiers progressives want an underclass with a severly limited chance of ever being anything else. For themselves they want a big generous state and all the goodies it hands out from Social Security to Medicare, and they don't want any fucking Chinese minorities getting jobs their grandkids might want.

    FIFY douchebag.

  • MNG||

    Look, there was quite a few segregationists who flocked to Goldwater under his "states rights" rhetoric. It's of course possible, indeed highly likely that Goldwater meant his constitutional objections to much of the civil rights agenda, but he also had to know what he was attracting. It's not exactly clear that he didn't look the other way on this...And joking about lobbing a nuke into the Kremlin in 1964 was sure to make some folks a bit nervous about his election...

  • Mr. Chartreuse||

    If he wasn't looking the other way (I'd like to think he wasn't), the racists were. He desegregated his Arizona Air National Guard unit in 1947(and also worked on other desegregation issues in Arizona). This was several years before the US armed forces were integrated and I believe this was somewhat well known in the '64 election. I'm not sure if the racists would have been pleased with that, even with his stance on the CRA.

  • Ron L||

    MNG|9.30.10 @ 8:54PM|#
    "It's of course possible, indeed highly likely that Goldwater meant his constitutional objections to much of the civil rights agenda,"
    And we'll assume MNG has the least notion about what Goldwater had in mind.
    Bullshit, MNG.

    "but he also had to know what he was attracting."
    And please tell us of the Reverend Mr. Wright and what Obama 'had in mind'
    Your bullshit stinks.

  • ||

    Why is it that only Republicans are supposed to be concerned about what kind of support they are attracting?

    As if there we're totally fucking Stalinist dipshits RUNNING the anti-war movement for the first three years.

    Jesus, can you get a bigger double standard? Every time I bring up the outright Marxists who tag along with every "grassroots" left-wing rally, I get "We don't have to denounce anyone!" style reponses from progressives. I can only presume they are either total fucking hypocrites or they don't feel that avowed communists deserve denunciation.

  • Apogee||

    They're total fucking hypocrites.

  • ||

    "I can only presume they are either total fucking hypocrites or they don't feel that avowed communists deserve denunciation."

    Both.

  • Tony||

    Even supposing that there are actual Marxists, and not just people you're calling that, do you think that being a marxist is equally bad as being a racist? I mean it's just an economic point of view.

  • ||

    And racism isn't a point of view?

    The idea that the white race is superior to all other races is not absurd a priori; it has only been proven wrong by history and human experience.

    Just like Marxism!

  • ||

    Has it though? Seems that even the idea of white non-supremacy is a creation of white people.

    And it looks like it was created with the express purpose of teaching everyone that racial prejudice is not a really good idea.

    So far, that idea has only really caught on with white people. Everyone else mostly pays lip service to the idea because the dangerous white people want them to.

  • Tony||

    And libertarianism! Ergo, libertarianism = racism.

  • Jordan||

    An economic point of view which necessitates secret police and outright slavery to function.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    There ARE actual Marxists, Tony. Wake the fuck up.

  • Old Mexican||

    Re: MNG,

    Look, there was quite a few segregationists who flocked to Goldwater under his "states rights" rhetoric.

    Is this what passes for logical discourse with you, MNG? Guilt by Association, and Poisoning the Well?

    Besides this, is there any LOGICAL argument against segregationism, besides the cookyness of "They want slavery back" and "the war [Argumentum ad baculum] settled matters long ago"?

  • MNG||

    And the Tea Party has produced some truly screwed up candidates. Paladino, Angle and O'Donnell are pretty screwed up by nearly everyone's standards.

    Of course I grant the media is pretty selective in focusing on those three admitted nutjobs when there are other Tea Party endorsed candidates without the nuttiness running this year.

  • ||

    Well MNG, I honestly don't consider any of those people any nuttier or screwier than Reid, Pelosi, Boxer, etc. So why should I worry about their (O'Donnel et als) screwiness more than Pelosi's?
    -K

  • KPres||

    Seriously, Harry Reid called Barack Obama a negro. What is he, stuck in 1955? Pelosi? Jesus Christ, botox.

    These people are nuts.

  • Apogee||

    And the Tea Party has produced some truly screwed up candidates.

    Says the Staunch Democrat.

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

  • MJ||

    And the left wing opposition to George Bush produced lunatics like Alan Grayson.

    What's your point?

  • Fatty Bolger||

    Nutjobs. Who is VP again? Oh, right.

  • Leroy||

    MNG,

    Please explain how the candidates you mentioned are screwed up?

    They haven't made it by my standards, and I'd like to hear the argument by yours.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    I wouldn't vote for Paladino, but I do like how he defended his kid, who SHOULD be off-limits to the press.

  • Leroy||

    After seeing the video of his altercation with the NY post reporter, it seems to me that Mr. Paladino was fairly reserved, and the reporter was antagonizing.

    However if photographers were taking pictures of my child inside their home by sneaking up to the windows, I'd be livid as well.

  • Leroy||

    After seeing the video of his altercation with the NY post reporter, it seems to me that Mr. Paladino was fairly reserved, and the reporter was antagonizing.

    However if photographers were taking pictures of my child inside their home by sneaking up to the windows, I'd be livid as well.

  • ||

    You know, I don't think a card-carrying member of a political party that elected Joe Biden to the Senate for countless millenia, and then made him its vice presidential nominee, really has a lot of room to talk about the purported screwed-uppedness and nuttiness of Tea Party candidates.

  • ||

    Liberals set up an unsustainable program and force people to participate at gunpoint.

    People do as the liberals demand they do and participate in the program liberals force them to

    This results in liberal idiots like Taibbi concluding that people who are doing what power hungry idiots like Taibbi force them to are the problem.

    Someone needs to tell Matt Taibbi that Medicare isn’t a voluntary program


    Of all the arguments liberals bring up against the Tea Party, this has to be the stupidest.

    Not only have millions of seniors and their employers paid billions of dollars into the Medicare system — 2.9 percent on every dime they’ve worked for in their entire life — but the program’s very existence has dried up whatever market there once was for old-age medical insurance.

    Our Medicare system, as President Obama never fails to point out, is unsustainable, and yet thanks to the government, very few senior citizens have any alternative.

    Oh, I see. So who does Taibbi think votes for Democrats? Do they win on the back of the college professor vote?

    Or is it on the back of ominous, threatening and false rumors that Republicans will take away Social Security, let old people die in the streets, then bury them in segregated cemeteries so that their bodies can be covered in toxic sludge until the oil companies decide they want to drill there?
  • .||

    + 1000

  • AlmightyJB||

    I don't believe I'm the first person who gets to say RACISTS!

  • Draco||

    The really funny part is that Hitler had as much claim to being a Leftist as a Rightist. Erik von Kuehnelt Leddihn made a great case for Hitler and Nazism as leftist phenomena in Leftism Revisited. Even so, I think that in truth there were elements of the Right and Left in Hitler and Nazism, which is maybe why they did so well in Germany at that time. They had something for everyone!

    Peikoff's book The Ominous Parallels is a very entertaining read showing the similarities between today's left wing statists and the Nazis.

  • Ron L||

    More mainstream is Weinberg's "A World at Arms". If deniers wish, I'll dig up page numbers, but Hitler was at the level of Lenin; the government takeover was planned for several years hence.

  • tafurs delight||

    didn't jonah goldberg recently do vastly inferior version of same? for my money, cheapskate i am, teh Hitler was the precise nadir of the circle right & left are on...
    stalin was same, left to right, & our present perdickamint is the indirect results...
    'nuf to make a good classical liberal republican puke

  • ||

    He did. And it was pretty good pop writing but not serious history. What is funny is that the connection between fascism and communism has been pretty much taken for granted among historians for about 50 years now. It is nothing new. Paul Johnson made the same point in a popular history book back in the 1980s in Modern Times. But the media is so uninformed and stupid they treated Goldberg's pedestrian restatement of the obvious as some kind of crazy new idea.

  • radar||

    One of the more interesting things about the formative years of the Nazi party is the push-and-pull between the leftist and rightist elements of it. There was a time when Goebbels denounced Hitler as "petty bourgeois", and several prominent Nazis (such as Alfred Rosenberg and the Strasser brothers) were former Communists. Germany in the 1920s was one helluva fucked-up place (obviously). Hitler tried to synthesize leftist popular appeals to the masses while at the same time reassuring his wealthy supporters that he was really in their corner. Unfortunately, he was pretty good at playing that game.

  • Robert||

    Yeah, everything I know about him tells me that Hitler was really a great politician. Stalin had a different political talent, not of putting together factions, but of taking personal advantage of every cx & situation, to make others beholden to him. So Hitler was able to elevate an obscure bunch of people to prominence, earning their respect (of a sort) for doing so, while Stalin was able to rise high from an obscure position within organized crime and later in gov't.

  • Robert||

    Hitler was everyone's apparent pathway to everyone else in influence, while Stalin was the personal price you had to pay to get access to anyone and anything else.

  • Holy Cow||

    Waaaahh! Tea Parties make Marxists cry in their govt.-approved beer. In fact, according to science-y folks

    ....

    Sorry about that. I trailed off there. I've been sighing all day.

    Once again, I was caught up, enrapted with thoughts of Saint Cindy Sheehan of the Ditch. Ahh, that blessed woman.

    And the media back then. All-star coverage of that woman! All-star, I say! Thorough! Hard-hitting! No stone left unturned! Her motives questioned at every turn! Or something like that!

    Gosh, that old white woman who wanted the government to "do something" with her tax money. She wanted redress because she felt government had become too bloated in one or two specific areas. The National Policy Institute of

    ....

    Sorry, drifted off again. I think it's that sulfur odor trailing Max. Makes my head hurt. Anyway, where was I? Oh, right, now see, the Average Tea Partier....

  • ||

    Matt who? Oh yes: the little creep who's currently one of Don Imus' faves and formerly of the New York Press in its great Russ Smith days...

  • ||

    A hall full of elderly white people in Medicare-paid scooters, railing against government spending and imagining themselves revolutionaries as they cheer on the vice-presidential puppet hand-picked by the GOP establishment. If there exists a better snapshot of everything the Tea Party represents, I can't imagine it.

    Maybe he should have gone to the Mall for the rally there. You know, an actual Tea Party event. With lots of actual Tea Party people. Most of whom do not fit his stereotype of elderly welfare cases.

  • ||

    Paladino, Angle and O'Donnell are pretty screwed up by nearly everyone's standards.

    Compared to Cuomo, Reid, and the Bearded Marxist, I'd say the TP candidates don't look so bad.

  • Barely Suppressed Rage||

    I actually felt a little bad for having a little twinge of schadenfreud when I heard the news of Mr. Schorr's death.

    His "news analysis" on NPR always used to end up with me screaming at the radio. They presented him as some kind of uber reporter - replete with the title "senior new analyst" - as if he was some wise and noble elder, who was benevolent enough to bestow upon us his words of genius and explain for the rest of us - who clearly are too stupid to understand it ourselves - the true impact of what happened each week.

    And they acted as if he was impartial. The guy was such a screaming lefty, it was almost embarrassing to listen to the way they revered him.

  • Michael||

    "The scooters are because of Medicare," he whispers helpfully. "They have these commercials down here: 'You won't even have to pay for your scooter! Medicare will pay!' Practically everyone in Kentucky has one."

    It's difficult to imagine that this person wasn't completely fucking with a Yankee city slicker like Taibbi. I also can't imagine that Taibbi gave any consideration whatsoever to the possibility that people in Kentucky just might be able to afford such amenities without assistance from their benevolent DC overlords.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

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

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement