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

[alisasny]

Clearly Perlstein needs your master list of women abused by one BJClinton.... his email is a few posts above : )

[Phantom Lord]

Couple things before I run off...

1) John Kerry has been in the Senate for 20 years now. Could you please list for me his legislative accomplishments?

2) You wrote above, "He believes in some basic liberal principles that I believe in concerning economics: that corporations can't be trusted to regulate themselves, for example."

Of course some regulation is needed, no one disputes that. But, regarding corporate power, no corporation has the one tool that government does have to make people do what they want done, and that is the power for force through the use of arms. No business can force me to do anything, but government can. Shouldn't government and the power it weilds be far more concerning to citizens that the supposed "power" that a corporation might have?

[Perlstein]

Lately, however, I've become mad at the right, and have written about it with an anger not been present in my previous writings.

Anger originates in fear and fear is most often caused by a loss of control. In as much as your emotions are a reaction to a reality that your ideology has lost control, its not surprising you are even more angry as it becomes clearer that the loss in control is permanent.

What is surprising is that the author lets his emotions color and change his previous beliefs.
----
Well, I'll quote John Maynard Keynes. ""When the facts change, I change my mind. What
do you do, sir?"

How have I or my ideology lost control, may I ask?

[68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub]

If you recall the media tried to give FL to Gore in 2000
VNS was a private consortium owned by
ABC News, The Associated Press, CBS News, CNN, Fox News, and NBC.
4 of the 5 of the networks and cable newsrooms
(only ABC waited till both time zones closed)
"announced" Gore had won
BEFORE the 2nd time zone in FL had closed.
This cost President Bush votes in the FL panhandle.

I was at a friends house and the State of FL election website results showed President Bush was winning

In fact, the networks which called Florida for Gore did so early in the evening—before polls had even closed in the Florida panhandle, which is part of the Central Time Zone. NBC called Florida for Gore at 7:49:40 p.m., Eastern Time. This was 10 minutes before polls closed in the Florida panhandle. Thirty seconds later, CBS called Florida for Gore. And at 7:52 p.m., Fox called Florida for Gore. Moore never lets the audience know that Fox was among the networks which made the error of calling Florida for Gore prematurely. Then at 8:02 p.m., ABC called Florida for Gore. Only ABC had waited until the Florida polls were closed.

About an hour before the polls closed in panhandle Florida,
the networks called the U.S. Senate race in favor of the Democratic candidate.

The premature calls may have cost Bush thousands of votes from the conservative panhandle, as discouraged last-minute voters heard that their state had already been decided;
some last-minute voters on their way to the polling place turned around and went home. Other voters who were waiting in line left the polling place. In Florida, as elsewhere, voters who have arrived at the polling place before closing time often end up voting after closing time, because of long lines. The conventional wisdom of politics is that supporters of the losing candidate are most likely to give up on voting when they hear that their side has already lost. Thus, on election night 1980, when incumbent President Jimmy Carter gave a concession speech while polls were still open on the west coast, the early concession was blamed for costing the Democrats several Congressional seats in the West, such as that of 20-year incumbent James Corman. The fact that all the networks had declared Reagan a landslide winner while west coast voting was still in progress was also blamed for Democratic losses in the West; Congress even held hearings about prohibiting the disclosure of exit polls before voting had ended in the any of the 48 contiguous states.

Even if the premature television calls affected all potential voters equally, the effect was to reduce Republican votes significantly, because the Florida panhandle is a Republican stronghold. Most of Central Time Zone Florida is in the 1st Congressional District, which is known as the "Redneck Riviera." In that district, Bob Dole beat Bill Clinton by 69,000 votes in 1996, even though Clinton won the state by 300,000 votes.

So depress overall turnout in the panhandle,
and you will necessarily depress more Republican than Democratic votes.

A 2001 study by John Lott suggested that the early calls cost Bush at least 7,500 votes,
and perhaps many more.

At 10:00 p.m., which network took the lead in retracting the premature Florida win for Gore?
The first retracting network was CBS, not Fox.

Over four hours later, at 2:16 a.m., Fox projected Bush as the Florida winner,
as did all the other networks by 2:20 a.m.

At 3:59 a.m., CBS took the lead in retracting the Florida call for Bush. All the other networks, including Fox, followed the CBS lead within eight minutes. That the networks arrived at similar conclusions within a short period of time is not surprising, since they were all using the same data from the Voter News Service. (Linda Mason, Kathleen Francovic & Kathleen Hall Jamieson, “CBS News Coverage of Election Night 2000: Investigation, Analysis, Recommendations” (CBS News, Jan. 2001), pp. 12-25.)

The big 5 media TV and Cable newsrooms are the real threat to the 2004 election.

..."Early on Tuesday, November 7th 2000, TV stations and various media based in Florida reported that Gore has won Florida which was a big surprise for everyone because of strong republican support. Bush's brother Jeb is governor there and Florida usually gives support to the Republicans. Some of them questioned that and during the night CNN showed 52% Bush's lead over 46% for Gore. It is almost impossible to believe that media could have been that blind and biased to report Gore's victory."...

[FourtySeven]

Source material. (note to self only)

[KJacob]

Kerry strikes me as smart and competent and thoughtful. That's a start. He was very brave in leading the investigation of the way the Reagan Administration negotiated with hostage-takers in Iran; I admired that, certainly. He worked hard with McCain to try to heal the wounds of Vietnam; he didn't have to do that, and it didn't help him politically. He believes in some basic liberal principles that I believe in concerning economics: that corporations can't be trusted to regulate themselves, for example. That's a few things. I'd better move on, though.

sound like a ringing endorsement to me

[Phantom Lord]

I have a right to post in protest to this liberal spammer Perlstain.

He is not a liberal spammer, he was invited to debate here.

[Perlstein]

Since I agree with the president on everything you seem to be 'mad at' and disagree on things you'd probably fight to the death to defend: I don't see much coming from any discussion.
I might suggest using words like "church", "Jesus", and "divine" a bit less in your titles - might be showing a bias there.
And, in summary:
9/11, bad
Iraq 2, good but not as good as it might be
John Kerry, contempt, which I understand goes both ways
An American president willing to take action when the world knitting society chose not to do so - priceless.

PS: you might do better by setting out a topic, omitting the words "divine", Etc.
----
Norton, those who have followed my threads here know that i often find the titles the Voice gives my articles, which I have no control over, idiotic.

[4CJ]

"I will do everything I LEGALLY can to keep this traitor from being elected."

Bump. What I would like to know from Mr. Perlstein, is at what point do the actions of Americans - regardless of political stature or media credentials - rise to the level of treason? Are the statements by Hollywood leftists, Michael Moore (and dims in general) of support for Sadaam and bin Laden and against our troops and the current war treasonous? How would folding tents and caving to terrorists prevent future attacks?

As an aside, I found it ludicrous that Hollyweird rescheduled it's award show immediately after 9/11 due to fears that they would be attacked. Yet Hollyweird is the one true friend of the Taliban and Sadaam Hussein - they have nothing to fear.

[68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub]

John Kerry "Proud" Of Voting Against Troops
http://frontierwebdesign.com/stopjohn/archives/2004_07.htm

Kerry Says He's "Proud" That He And Edwards Voted Against $87 Billion
In Funding For U.S. Soldiers. "Here is the value that John Edwards
and I will put in place. I'm proud to say that John joined me in
voting against that $87 billion when we knew the policy had to be
changed." (John Kerry, Remarks at "Women's Voices: A Luncheon with
John Kerry," Boston, MA, 7/12/04)

Kerry Had Characterized A Vote Against That Funding
As "Irresponsible." Doyle McManus (LA Times): "If that amendment does
not pass, will you then vote against the $87 billion?" Kerry: "I
don't think any United States senator is going to abandon our troops
and recklessly leave Iraq to – to whatever follows as a result of
simply cutting and running. That's irresponsible." (CBS, "Face the
Nation," 9/14/03)

Sen. Joseph Biden Said Kerry Was "Dead Wrong" To Vote Against
$87
Billion For Troops And Reconstruction In Iraq And Afghanistan.
ABC's
George Stephanopoulos: (Off Camera) "He [Kerry] said first I
voted
for it, then I voted against it. How can he justify voting against
that $87 billion?" Sen. Joseph Biden: "Well, I don't, I
advised him
to vote for it and I think by the way let's make clear what he
meant
when he voted for and against it. He didn't say it very well. I
added
an amendment saying it should be paid for out of the tax cut. He
voted for that. So in a sense, had that passed he would have voted
for the $87 billion. I think it's, look, I think what John Kerry
..."
George Stephanopoulos: (Off Camera) "Even though it didn't
you still
voted for it." Sen. Joseph Biden: "I absolutely still voted
for it
and I think John was dead wrong." (ABC's "This Week,"
3/21/04)

Senators Kerry And Edwards Are Two Of Only Four US Senators Who Voted
For The Use Of Force Resolution Against Iraq And Against The $87
Billion Supplemental Supporting Our Troops.




Supplemental Funding Bill Kerry And Edwards Voted Against
Provided "Extra Money For Body Armor For Soldiers …" (S. 1689, CQ
Vote #400: Passed 87-12: R 50-0; D 37-11; I 0-1, 10/17/03, Kerry
Voted Nay; "Highlights Of Iraq, Afghanistan Measures," The Associated
Press, 10/17/03; S. Rept. 108-160, Conference Report On S. 1689,
10/2/03)

Supplemental Funding Bill Kerry And Edwards Voted Against Provided
Increased Combat Pay For Troops. (S. 1689, CQ Vote #400: Passed 87-
12: R 50-0; D 37-11; I 0-1, 10/17/03, Kerry Voted Nay; "Highlights Of
Iraq, Afghanistan Measures," The Associated Press, 10/17/03; S. Rept.
108-160, Conference Report On S. 1689, 10/2/03; "FY 2004 Supplemental
Request For Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF), Operation Enduring Freedom
(OEF), And Operation Noble Eagle (ONE)," U.S. Department Of Defense,
9/03)

Supplemental Funding Bill Kerry And Edwards Voted Against Provided
Health Benefits For Reservists And Guardsmen Called To Active Duty,
As Well As Support For Their Families. (S. 1689, CQ Vote #400: Passed
87-12: R 50-0; D 37-11; I 0-1, 10/17/03, Kerry Voted Nay; "Highlights
Of Iraq, Afghanistan Measures," The Associated Press, 10/17/03; S.
Rept. 108-160, Conference Report On S. 1689, 10/2/03; "FY 2004
Supplemental Request For Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF), Operation
Enduring Freedom (OEF), And Operation Noble Eagle (ONE)," U.S.
Department Of Defense, 9/03)

Kerry Offered A Tortured Explanation Of His Vote Against The $87
Billion To Support Troops In Iraq. "I actually did vote for the $87
billion before I voted against it." (Richard W. Stevenson and Adam
Nagourney, "Bush's Campaign Emphasizes Role Of Leader In War," The
New York Times, 3/17/04)

[SunnySide]

"I don't think it helps the Conservative cause to be nasty about gays"

Surely you jest. The "male" gays are every bit nasty in the most passive aggressive manners towards heteros, mostly women who they so wickedly refer to as "breeders". It isn't your job to police my mind.

[TheBigB]

I have a right to post in protest to this liberal spammer Perlstain

Actually no, you do not. This is a private forum, privately owned by one Jim Robinson. Were he to decide that your posts were inappropriate, they could be deleted posthaste with no infringement on your rights.

That said, you are a big waste of Carbon.

[dirtboy]

I have a right to post in protest to this liberal spammer Perlstain. Are your sensitivities offended? Too bad, grow a spine. I MUST have touched your feely liberal nerve eh.

Perlstein has a slow connection. Spamming in posts makes it even slower for him to respond.

[Perlstein]

Would you describe yourself as a classic Lockean liberal or the current bastardized version of what a liberal stood for circa 1776?
---
The latter, Abundy. And would you describe yourself as a conservative in the sense of what that word meant in 1776--when the defining conservative theorist, Edmund Burke, argued that people were naturally born into social ranks that should and must be considered like castes, passed from parent to child forever?

I'm guessing not.

[Taliesan]

Nobody but you thinks you're accomplishing anything. STOP SPAMMING THE THREAD WITH GRAPHICS.

Write sentences and act like an adult, or go paint dirty words on railroad cars.

[68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub]

Why do the TV and Cable Newsrooms
hide Hanoi Kerry's past?

[Peach]

I haven't read the entire thread and gather you haven't been responding very often but I'll throw this out there anyway.

#1. Don't you think it's hypocritical of Kerry to espouse the UN and France and Germany now as terribly important considering that in 1997 he was on Crossfire and said that Clinton would show leadership if he dealt with Iraq regardless of the UN Security Council, France or Germany?

#2. Don't you think it's terribly hypocritical of Kerry to vote FOR the war in Iraq and then refuse to fund it?

#3. Don't you think it's terribly hypocritical of Kerry to say in the days following 9/11 that we would deal with the problems as we found them in the WOT and if we had to, would do so alone, regardless of the international community?

#4. Don't you think it's terribly hypocritical of Kerry to have said repeatedly during the 90's that Iraq posed a danger to the world and to the United States directly but now seems to think we should not have dealt with that danger?

#5. Don't you think it's terribly hypocritical of Kerry to say that Bush hasn't done a good job when he, Kerry, has been absent for the majority of Intelligence briefings and hearings in the last 8 years?

#6. Don't you think it's terribly hypocritical of Kerry to say he will be strong on national defense when he has voted repeatedly to slash both defense and intelligence budgets for the last 20 years?

[TN4Liberty]

Debating with a liberal.

The liberal insults, accuses, and attacks the conservative.
The conservative patiently explains why the insults and accusations are unfounded.
The liberal insults, accuses, and attacks the conservative about something else.

do i = 1 to exhaustion;

[Perlstein]

Thank you fer the opportunity to pick the brain of an unabashed Lib'ral...are you in any way related to the New Republic's Perlstein?

"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.)"

Presently, the Federal Leviathan has a budget of more than $2.5 Trillion (which is almost 25% of the Gross Domestic Product). Dubyuh has increased discretionary domestic spending by 8% per year, yet all I hear from Kerry and the Lib'ralHorde is that Bush is short-changing the little guy. If Kerry--the most Lib'ral Senator in office--wins in November, I can only see spending increasing even more (unless the House can save US). My question to you is, how much is enough?! At what point do you believe Federal spending is too large and too wasteful? What could a good "liberal" have against devolving Power from the Federal Leviathan and returning Power to the States, Localities, and Individuals. Then, if certain Northeastern states wanna create a socialist Utopia, they can refrain from bothering the rest of us with their big-spending hair-brained schemes.

FReegards...MUD
55 posted on 08/03/2004 12:27:37 PM PDT by Mudboy Slim (RE-IMPEACH Osama bil Clinton!!)

----

But Clinton, tho' certainly not my hero, slowed the growth of the federal government. Bush did not. So as to how much federal spending is wasteful, the question is more appropriately directed at Mr. Bush.

[lugsoul]

Can you post a source for the first quote? It seems that this one is a quote I've seen challenged.