From Steve Sailer:
From Reason magazine (which really ought to look into changing its name to something more appropriate, such as Smugness)
Like many things Sailer writes, I didn’t realize it was so until I read it from him. But Reason, with the notable exception of their clips from the delightful Drew Carey, has got to be the smuggest journal of opinion not written by Communists.
P.S. Having just glanced at Reason’s home page, I’m curious if anyone knows why the Ron Paul campaign spelled revolution, “rEVOLution”? Every time I saw one of those signs, I just thought it was “love” spelled backwards, but that doesn’t really make much sense, especially in light of the Paul campaign. What was I missing?
Apollo posted this at 12:46 AM EDT on Tuesday, June 24th, 2008 as Conservatism, Journalism
5 Comments »
Superb performances by both parties in this:
I have little commentary to add beyond the Anchoress’, except to call attention to her line about Colbert’s studio audience:
Observe that Colbert and the audience are actually listening, because he is saying something worth listening to, and doing it very well.
That Colbert is listening comes as no surprise; that a Colbert/Stewart audience is, is amazing. One of the few things I genuinely dislike about those shows is the audiences’ facile partisanship; they’re made up of the kind of college-grad liberals who think that no one smarter than them could possibly disagree with them. It’s wonderful to watch Will disarm them so politely and thoroughly.
Then again, it’s also wonderful to watch Christopher Hitchens bludgeon, spit on, then run over their fragile egos with a rhetorical truck (warning: NSFW).
Tom posted this at 7:42 AM EDT on Wednesday, June 18th, 2008 as Conservatism, Windbaggery, The Right Words
1 Comment »
This is perhaps one of the worst articles I have read all year. Not only does the author not understand the goals of the Reagan Revolution (the vast majority of which have become a permanent part of American Political Life; see: low taxes), he somehow completely misunderstands the culture of conservatism that surrounds giants like William F. Buckley. While a case can be made that the conservative movement is on the defensive, it would be hard to argue that it is dead as a political force.
Bonus Retarded Collectivist Points for the use of the word “counterrevolutionary”.
Jamie posted this at 1:53 PM EDT on Tuesday, June 10th, 2008 as Conservatism, Commie Recrudescence
1 Comment »
Jonah Goldberg’s call for McCain to pick a Democrat for VP is distressingly persuasive. Perhaps the best point is this: “And for movement conservatives, the next four years could be a time for much-needed rebuilding.”
If I let myself think about it, it makes me sad that Mitt Romney - MITT ROMNEY! - who denounced Reagan in 1994 - who has the charisma of unflavored room temperature yogurt - somehow became the standard bearer for movement conservatism this last year. That was wrong, and it’s plain that movement conservatives need a time out to think about things for a while. The fact that some conservative types are hyping Romney for VP emphasizes this point.
A point that Jonah didn’t make, but that I’ve been pondering for a while, is that conservatism needs plausible deniability with candidate McCain. Plainly the man is not a movement conservative, so it would be a shame if any defeat he might suffer would be interpreted as a defeat for conservatism (time to move further left: Specter ‘12!).
However, in terms of actual policy, I’m not sure how much conservatives have to gain from a McCain presidency. The only area where he’s promising radical reform is with his gawdawful cap-and-trade scheme. More open borders, same general tax structure, no major entitlement initiatives, no real prospect of tilting Washington decidedly to one party and thus enabling reform. America, domestically, after 4 years of President McCain, won’t be a much different place so long as conservative senators can fight off his immigration proposals.
His heart just isn’t in the fights of movement conservatives, or even reform-minded conservatives. He is first and foremost a hawk. And that’s fine, but we do not want whatever it is that a President McCain will do to be defined as “conservatism.” Picking a Democrat for VP seems like the only way for that to be the case.
Conservatives need to get their act together, but we should never forget the costs that can have. 1964 might have a romantic attachment for movement conservatives, but probably not so much for the tens of millions whose cities were devastated and families ruined thanks to the Great Society. A President McCain with a Democrat VP and a Republican Party in Congress that has enough room to define itself as something other than John McCain’s worker bees would be the best way to clean out the party without having to lose in Iraq and on the Supreme Court.
P.S. I miss Fred.
Apollo posted this at 12:54 AM EDT on Friday, May 23rd, 2008 as Conservatism, There Is Only One God And Jonah Goldberg Is His Prophet, Running with the antelope
2 Comments »
The High Priest quotes Peggy Noonan, a quote that I wholeheartedly agree with, and then squanders his point with a comment only a self important asshole would make:
“What happens to the Republicans in 2008 will likely be dictated by what didn’t happen in 2005, and ‘06, and ‘07. The moment when the party could have broken, on principle, with the administration – over the thinking behind and the carrying out of the war, over immigration, spending and the size of government – has passed. What two years ago would have been honorable and wise will now look craven. They’re stuck.
Mr. Bush has squandered the hard-built paternity of 40 years. But so has the party, and so have its leaders. If they had pushed away for serious reasons, they could have separated the party’s fortunes from the president’s. This would have left a painfully broken party, but they wouldn’t be left with a ruined “brand,” as they all say, speaking the language of marketing. And they speak that language because they are marketers, not thinkers. Not serious about policy. Not serious about ideas. And not serious about leadership, only followership,” - Peggy Noonan.
Some of us tried - and were vilified for it. Others chose to write books about “liberal fascism.” Over here! Over here! Shiny silver things!
Andrew, Andrew, Andrew - why do you make it so hard to agree with you?
Jamie posted this at 12:37 PM EDT on Sunday, May 18th, 2008 as Conservatism, What Ever Happened to Andrew Sullivan?
No Comments »
This is worth pondering.
The Democrat nomination would have been over two months ago, and their party far more unified, if a hundred thousand or so Texas Republicans hadn’t dragged Hillary across the finish line; it would have been over a week ago if thousands more Indiana Republicans hadn’t done the same.
Of course, most of us are probably folks who Tom would diagnose with a mental illness when it comes to the “Republican” nominee. The seeds of bitterness we’ve sown in the Democrat primary are the main hope for victory that McCain has in the fall. Politics can sometimes make strange bedfellows; in this instance, conservatives and John McCain.
Apollo posted this at 5:20 PM EDT on Tuesday, May 13th, 2008 as Conservatism, Audacity of Hype
6 Comments »