Ready to rumble? Village Voice Author, Rick Perlstein, Here to Debate the Freeper Horde

08/03/2004 | Rick Perlstein

[dead]

Opening Statement

Dear FRiends:

I once suffered two great frustrations in being a freelance political writer. First, the loneliness: you put an article out there, and you might as well have thrown it down a black hole for all the response you get. Second, the ghettoization: when you do get response, it would be from folks you agree with. Not fun for folks like me who reliish--no, crave and need--political argument.

Then came the Internet, the blogs--and: problem solved.

I have especially enjoyed having my articles in the Village Voice posted on Free Republic by "dead," and arguing about them here. The only frustration is that I never have enough time--and sometimes no time--to respond as the threads are going on. That is why I arranged for an entire afternoon--this afternoon--to argue on Free Republic. Check out my articles and have at me.

A little background: I am a proud leftist who specializes in writing about conservatives. I have always admired conservatives for their political idealism, acumen, stalwartness, and devotion. I have also admired some of their ideas--especially the commitment to distrusting grand social schemes, and the deep sense of the inherent flaws in human nature. (To my mind the best minds in the liberal tradition have encompassed these ideals, while still maintaining that robust social reform is still possible and desirable. My favorite example is the Protestant theologian Reinhold Niebuhr, author of the Serenity Prayer and a great liberal Democrat.)

Lately, however, I've become mad at the right, and have written about it with an anger not been present in my previous writings. It began with the ascension of George Bush, when I detected many conservatives beginning to care more about power than principles. The right began to seem less interesting to me--more whiny, more shallow--and, what's more, in what I saw as an uncritical devotion to President Bush, often in retreat from its best insights about human nature.

I made my strongest such claim in a Village Voice article two weeks ago in which I, after much thought, chose to say conservatism was "verging on becoming an un-American creed" for the widespread way conservatives are ignoring the lessons of James Madison's great insights in Federalist 51 that in America we are supposed to place our ultimate trust in laws, not men.

Finally, in what I see as the errors of the Iraq campaign, I recognize the worst aspects of arrogant left-wing utopianism: the idea that you can remake a whole society and region through sheer force of will. I think Iraq is a tragic disaster (though for the time being the country is probably better off than it was when Saddam was around--but only, I fear, for the time being).

I am also, by the way, a pretty strong critic of my own side, as can be seen in my latest Village Voice piece.

So: I'm yours for the day--until 7:10 pm CST, when I'm off to compete in my weekly trivia contest at the University of Chicago Pub. Until then: Are you ready to rumble?

Respectfully,
Rick Perlstein

[FastCoyote]

Look, there is no need to read your articles (though I will eventually, just no time right now). The left has tried to disguise for the last fifteen years that it is an outright socialist philosophy, hiding it's true identity behind terms like "progressive" and "Rawlsian" ethics, etc. The reason is that the history of socialism is almost unequivocably one of death and petty revolution and you are too ashamed to admit it.

Conservatives have finally realized that you can put a dress on a pig, but you still can't take it to the prom - hence many of us no longer care to debate you or the left. You have no coherent philosophy, unlease it is to appease every leftist dictator, appease every bizarre lifestyle, appease every race baiter, etc. You have no values.

That said, I will come back later to this thread and deal you a devastating intellectual thrashing just for the pleasure of it :) Just no time right now.

[Uncle Miltie]

So your argument is that in a climate of massively rising health care costs, quality and capabilities, merely huge total increases in Vet spending that involve means testing (of which liberals approve) amounts to a cut.

Nice logic. You are welcome to give me a 10% "cut" in salary, if you first give me a pay raise of 80%, you cold hearted conservative.

[WilliamofCarmichael]

For Mr. Perlstein

RE: I detected many conservatives beginning to care more about power than principles

I think you are right. But here's one reason why, IMO.

Please see David Horowitz's, "The Biggest Liar of Them All." I have included the first paragraph.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1182110/posts

"Now we can understand why Democrats spent the last year attacking the President as someone who lied to take America into an unnecessary war and destroy brave young American lives for his corporate friends in Texas. They did it to disarm and anesthetize us, to deconstruct the very idea of what truth is or what a fact is or what is is -- and prepare us for the most shameless charade in political memory, the phoniest convention for the phoniest party ever to mount an American electoral stage."

You see, IMO it's a reaction to the left's Mau-Mauing or swarming. Plus, Mr. Horowitz has noted in the past that the "issue is not the issue" with leftists. (I interpreted that to mean "issues" are weapons. the real issue is much bigger.) Here is a case where the "issue" after "issue" of the President lying was just a flash-bang grenade to immobilize us. Examples of leftists' lies: we acted unilaterally in Iraq, no Al Qaeda - Saddam connection, Bush lied about imminent threats.

I loathe both political Parties, BTW. I do not believe in allowing selected law-breaking (immigration laws, ID theft by ILLEGAL immigrants, fraud by ILLEGAL immigrants, fraud by employers of ILLEGAL immigrants) therefore I am a "Bush-basher." The Bush conservatives care more about power (and "cheap" labor) than principles, the hell with sovereignty, the hell with nation of laws. . . .

[Southack]

Senator Kerry said in his acceptance speech for his nomination last month that he would *not* privatize Social Security.

President Bush says that he *will* privatize Social Security.

Excluding *disability* benefits and looking only at the retirement portion of Social Security that the President and Senator are discussing above, do you favor or oppose changing a system that statistically discriminates against Blacks (they average dying at 65, the first year for full SS payments, versus White males who average living to age 72)?

TABLE 4. NET LIFETIME [Social Security] BENEFITS (2% DISCOUNT) BY EDUCATION, RACE & EARNINGS QUINTILE

Alive at time of 1990-94 SIPP Survey

1931-40                                            1956-64

http://www.mrrc.isr.umich.edu/conferences/cp/cp01_carasso.pdf

          Own Rec'd Shared                  Own Rec'd Shared

MEN 12,611 14,894 28,525        (21,046) (16,310) (785)

HS DROP (3,840) (2,440) 9,825    (17,400) (12,684) (4,610)

HS GRAD 16,791 18,746 32,366    (16,611) (11,798) 2,011

COLLEGE 19,824 23,737 38,772    (32,938) (28,369) (5,351)

WHITE/NON-HIS 13,897 16,000 31,025    (24,313) (19,993) (1,952)

BLACK/NON-HIS 940 4,957 11,682        (9,058) (3,156) (342)

HISPANIC 11,435 12,993 21,600         (10,195) (4,099) 7,357

OTHER 12,502 16,187 23,156            (19,328) (13,462) (2,257)

1ST QUINTILE 2,269 22,324 19,645    15,547 39,988 30,494

2ND QUINTILE 22,459 29,522 27,459    17,910 22,911 19,355

3RD QUINTILE 16,670 17,663 22,547     3,457 5,821 10,429

4TH QUINTILE 16,292 16,578 28,624 (14,707) (13,764) 1,069

5TH QUINTILE 7,291 7,327 33,021    (80,583) (80,409) (35,171)

5 Legislative Days Left Until The AWB Expires

[gopwinsin04]

Do you know Michael Musto well? Is he as flaky in the newsroom or is he poofing it up for the cameras on E!..

[Tamzee]

You claim Bush is responsible for budget cuts to vets, the right proves that Bush increased funding exponentially for vets.... and your rebuttal is to use an article that states there is a backlog of the wealthiest veterans with no disabilities or health problems being delayed access to VA clinics?

That's not just a strawman, it also flies in the face of the liberal "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs"...

[cake_crumb]

How is congressional inability to pass adequate funding for the VA the president's fault?

[cweese]

Bump for reading after work!

[MamaLucci]

I would like to see your answers to post #77, posited by dirtboy. Thanks.

[StoneColdGOP]

It began with the ascension of George Bush, when I detected many conservatives beginning to care more about power than principles. The right began to seem less interesting to me--more whiny, more shallow--and, what's more, in what I saw as an uncritical devotion to President Bush, often in retreat from its best insights about human nature.

This much, at least, is quite true.

[Phantom Lord]

And a senator honors the constiution by fulfilling the advise and consent function of the senate in judicial appointments--which is why Republicans held up Clinton judicial opponents, no?

Can you name for us one Clinton judicial nominee that was fillibustered and required to clear a 60 vote hurdle to get a floor vote?

If memory serves me right, every single Clinton judicial nominee except one got a floor vote, and that one was withdrawn by Clinton when it was clear that the nominee wasn't going to make it out of committee.

[SunnySide]

Perslstein,"It began with the ascension of George Bush, when I detected many conservatives beginning to care more about power than principles. The right began to seem less interesting to me--more whiny, more shallow--and, what's more, in what I saw as an uncritical devotion to President Bush, often in retreat from its best insights about human nature"

((((((((((( S H O V E - I T )))))))))))))

yOURS tRULY,
Her Royal Heinous
Teresa Heinz sKerry

[Mister Baredog]

The largest segment of those entering the system are relatively high-income veterans who fall into Category 8. Principi said more than half of the 830,000 veterans who enrolled last year were classified as Category 8.

I'm confused. The VA is trying to cope with a mess created by congress by cutting back on the HIGH-INCOME vets looking for a freebie. Isn't the viceral hatred of the successful part of your creedo?

[Big Otto]

"which was was Kerry's more intellectually honest vote: to authorize war OR his no vote on authorization to fund it? And why? "

Potentially neither ! To properly assess the intellectual honesty, one must first get some insight into Mr. Kerry's intentions. His set of beliefs is not that apparent.

"What was more intellectually dishonest: that vote, or the Bush admnistration's understanding that they're asking for less money than they'll really need for Iraq? "

Ahh, you obviously have tapped a source of knowledge not available to us simple conservatives. Which member(s) of the administration revealed their dishonesty to you? And, did you believe them?

[Dr Snide]

I detected many conservatives beginning to care more about power than principles. The right began to seem less interesting to me--more whiny, more shallow--and, what's more, in what I saw as an uncritical devotion to President Bush, often in retreat from its best insights about human nature.


I find this line curious after watching my former party (Democratic) continue to stand by Clinton for 8 years despite ample evidence of inappropriate behavior. After watching N.O.W. stand by President Clinton despite continued allegation of rape (whatever happened to always believing the victim, the character assassination of alleged victims, and proved cases of sexual harassment.

As opposed to your position that Republicans/Conservatives being uncritical about the president I simply am not finding such a pattern. As mentioned previously Bush has been routinely criticized here and other places for his positions on a variety of issues, but particularly government spending and immigration. However, I find that most Republicans and/or Conservatives are presently more concerned with issues of national security (although immigration should be viewed in this light) and are not finding any realistic alternative. So yes they are sticking with President Bush despite policy difference. I suspect to the degree that there is any "uncritical devotion" is a defensive reaction to the unprecedented level of partsian attacks.

[Mudboy Slim]

"I'd certainly hope that most of the money has been distributed to drug companies, because they're the only ones who can cure the existing patients..."

Great point...would the Left prefer we give wads of cash to individuals with AIDS?...sorta like we usedta do with welfare, just throwing money at the problem with no desire whatsoever to fix it.

FReegards...MUD

[Perlstein]

"...when I detected many conservatives beginning to care more about power than principles. The right began to seem less interesting to me--more whiny, more shallow--and, what's more, in what I saw as an uncritical devotion to President Bush, often in retreat from its best insights about human nature."

I noticed that you apparently slept through the 8 years of Bill and Hillary Clinton so it would be useless to discuss anything with such an open-minded individual as I'm sure you are.

Adios, my friend.
----

Hatteras, I didn't sleep through the Clinton presidency. I often opposed it--as many on the left did. one of the frustrations with my dialogues with folks on FP is that people believe some fantasy that everyone on the left adored Bill Clinton.

Here's some of my critical articles about the Democratic status quo on trade issues and others (there are many more, but how much Perlstein can a fella stand to read???)

http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0111/perlstein.php
http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0203/perlstein.php

[dirtboy]

5 - During the Cold War, liberals condemned the United States for coddling dictators in pursuit of an anti-communist agenda. Now that George Bush has taken out one of the most brutal dictators of our time, the liberals could care less. Isn't that hypocritical?

6 - After Gulf War I, liberals complained that sanctions were killing over 50,000 kids a year (when instead Saddam was diverting oil-for-food revenues for bribes, palaces and military materials). But when Bush wanted to invade Iraq, liberals suddenly wanted to give sanctions all the time necessary to work. Isn't that hypocritical?

7 - Using the 50,000/year dead child figure, liberals claim that we've killed 10-12,000 Iraqis during the conflict. However, we also don't have starving kids any longer. By my calculations, we're about 45,000 lives ahead. Do you disagree?

8 - Do you find contemptable Michael Moore's depiction in Fahrenheit 9/11 of Iraq prior to the invasion as one big happy campground?

[jackbill]

Your answer in #58 was a non-answer.

Total spending for veterans' health benefits have been increasing more under Bush than any other president, and the total number of veterans has been decreasing at a faster rate than under any other president.

We are losing WWII veterans at a rate of 1500 to 2000 per day. My fellow Korean veterans are in their 70's and leaving this vale of tears at higher and higher rates.

Bottom line: There are many more dollars available per veteran.

The letter you posted talked about "cutting access" to Category 8 veterans (which would include me if I applied). I know a lot of my former colleagues (retired engineers and managers) who did apply and are getting low cost drugs. Their average total assets is probably a bit north of $1 million. Most of us took lump sum pensions and had very generous 401-k's.

The biggest problem that most of these guys have is to make sure they have an adequate supply of drugs before they take off on their trip to Russia, China, or a safari in Africa - or when they travel to their winter homes in Florida.

The VA "spending cut" crap is a big DNC lie.

[Southack]

c#40