The Other Side of the Sorba Incident
Let me begin with the very bald fact that I found Sorba’s tirade repulsive and continue to be utterly gobsmacked about the state of gay rights in American politics. How a so-called beacon of freedom manages to get away with systemic attitudes towards gay men and women that are only marginally better than many of the “Islamo-fascist” entities it berates as fundamentally evil is outrageous.
But with that said, let me take a slightly different tack on the Sorba incident.
February 22, 2010 32 Comments
Creating a New Establishment
February 22, 2010 6 Comments
Meanwhile, Back at CPAC…
So how is it that by standing up in front of the attendees of CPAC and giving one of his standard speeches did Rush Limbaugh suddenly become the leader of the conservative movement? The fact of the matter is that he didn’t, but claiming that he did made for some good chatter about the Right. Rush’s ascendancy to leadership was, almost entirely, a fiction of the chattering class. And not surprisingly, those of us who want to be on top of what is going on got caught up in the story (me included).
Rush certainly never referred to himself as the leader of the conservative movement. And in fact, Limbaugh most often referred to himself as a “part” of the conservative movement, a conservative among conservatives. Granted, Limbaugh is a particularly well known conservative whose views are well listened to, but again, there’s nothing different there than there was two weeks ago.
So, in large part, I think E.D. was right not to feel compelled to comment about Rush’s speech and the frenzy it produced. Magpie-ism is one of the challenges we must learn to overcome in our practice of politics.
Meanwhile, back at CPAC someone who once was the leader of the conservative movement and may well stand in a realistic position to grab those reins again in some form took the stage: Newt Gingrich. [Read more →]
March 4, 2009 30 Comments
The Other F-Word and Tents in the Wilderness
“We now have moved a major step in the direction of socialism,” Rep. Ron Paul (Tex.) said Friday, adding: “We are close to a fascist system where the government has control of our lives and our economy.”
Boom, just like that you’ve lost me. And frankly, you’ve probably lost a goodly portion of any audience who aren’t automatically primed to hoot, cheer, and applaud at any and every portion of your speech. Call this the reverse Godwin’s Law of political speech writing, but the more consistently a politician refers to either side of the political spectrum advancing their agenda as the steady march of American society towards a fascist state, the closer that politician’s likelihood of building a broad base of support that could conceivably govern as diverse polity as America approaches zero. In other words, saying that this development or that development in American politics means that America is on the brink of becoming a fascist society is an excellent way of ensuring you don’t ever get taken as seriously as you need to in order to have a major impact on said society.
Granted, Ron Paul has his supporters, so I’m not trying to argue that he’s a nothing when it comes to American politics. For goodness sake, he’s a US Congressman and was one of the most talked about Republican candidates for president in 2008. But the Ron Paul movement never seemed to materialize in anything truly significant and some of the people who should have at least been inclined to support, if not vote for, a libertarian leaning Republican like Paul whose analysis I trust, people like Will Wilkinson and Daniel Larison couldn’t bring themselves to do it. Why is that? [Read more →]
March 3, 2009 16 Comments
