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

[lugsoul]

You've been duped by a false quote. That one originated in a book by James Barton. No contemporaneous source for it has ever been found.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

To analyze my own #863:

Democratic presidential candidates are getting worse.

• Kennedy ran to the right of Nixon (and Eisenhower), but delivered the Bay of Pigs fiasco which actually made me feel sick to my stomach at the time.
• Johnson sent hundreds of thousands of troops to Vietnam, and mismanaged them so badly that his Vietnam policy was defeated politically by the left in the United States by the time he in effect resigned in 1968. Johnson also set in motion the fabulously expensive boondoggle (as it can be shown in retrospect to be) known as the "Great Society" program.
• Carter inherited a bad foreign policy and domestic situation. By 1981 Iran was not an important ally but a serious enemy, and the economy of the time makes a mockery of claims of "the worst economy in 50 years" applied to any other administration.
• Clinton inherited an apparently problem-free situation, and in the context of history delivered an essentially frivolous administration. It turns out that history was not over, after all.
• John Kerry's political career began when he threw those symbols of valor over the White House fence, and Kerry was a leader in making the Democratic Party the "dove" party whose biggest foreign policy idea was opposition to anticommunism, and he is known for little other than being a reliable anti-military/anti-intel vote in the Senate. And he favors tax hikes even now. IOW, he is the antiReagan. Considering that Reagan cleaned up the Augean Stables inherited and aggravated by Carter:
  • inflation
  • stagnation
  • the energy crisis
  • the Cold War
  that is a pretty difficult record to run on - and Kerry does not in fact run on it. Instead he puts up a smoke and mirrors act which essentially boils down to the conceit that he is America's only war hero.

  That is an astonishing political platform for someone who:

  • supported the election and reelection of Bill Clinton running against noted WWII combat veterans.
  • nominates military naif John Edwards to be VP in his administration.
  • boasts only 4 months in theater and did not voluntarily return to it, boasts no more than 5 medals, and boasts only the rank of Lieutenant.
  What is most astonishing of all about it is the personal horn-blowing Senator Kerry's campaign entails. Traditionally war heroes, having seen comrades take risks and get killed for their trouble - and/or never be awarded medals for their valorous actions - are diffident about boasting of their own heroism. Yet having gotten an early out not only from Vietnam but from the Navy itself, Kerry criticizes Bush for having joined the ANG and for having opted out of the ANG when structural changes in the ANG obsoleted his training shortly before his commitment expired. And Kerry has never praised the valor of any other American warrior apart from his own immediate comrades who were praising him.

  Kerry has essentially created a big, black, sticky, ugly mess - and staked his entire campaign on having that function as a tar baby because it has to be attacked. If Republican politicians make their classic mistake of defending themselves, this might work. But if Bush generalizes it as the attack on all Guardsmen that it implicitly is, it is just a stink pile lying there.

  There hasn't been a good Democratic Secretary of Defense in most people's lifetime. Best Clinton could do was to name a Republican after Les Aspin self-destructed; Carter's SecDef has nothing to boast of but a pile of trashed aircraft in the Iranian desert - and the only other post-Truman SecDef was Robert (Vietnam) McNamara. If Kerry runs as a warrior yet nominates Edwards as his VP candidate, what manner of SecDef are we to expect of any Kerry administration?!?

[Byron_the_Aussie]

...Democratic presidential candidates are getting worse. Kennedy ran to the right of Nixon (and Eisenhower), but delivered the Bay of Pigs fiasco...

Excellent point, CiC. Yet here's a tactic that inspired Perlstein, from the pre-Clinton Clinton:

Republicans understand the political juice that can be squeezed from white Americans’ deep desire not to see themselves as racist. John F. Kennedy took brilliant advantage of an analogous dynamic by slyly prodding Nixon leaners into questioning whether anti-Catholic prejudice influenced their preference.

I think your tagline nails the Perlsteins and Kennedys of this world, quite well.

[Mudboy Slim]

"Who on FR is aware that the mass graves are over ten years old, by the way?"

Many of them are, I'm sure, but the indiscriminate torture and murder committed by Saddam, his sons, and his regime continued up to the day the Coalition Forces proceeded into Baghdad. At a recent counter-demonstration in which we were supporting Rumsfeld against the anti-War Leftists, I had the honor of meeting some survivors from Saddam's Abu Graib prison. Upstanding men, but each had had their hands severed off at the wrist...thanks to Saddam and his thugs.

"Not to excuse Saddam. I despise the thug. But look: the death toll from the ENFORCED starvation in North Korea is greater than Saddam could even spit at. When comes that invasion?"

Hey, I'm one who believes in the Liberation of Syria, Korea, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Cuba, but I do not believe America will need to stage Iraqi-style Liberations fer each and every evil Totalitarian State. I'm sure you realize that the despotic Iranian Regime is already destabilized to the point that they could be overthrown any day, any month, any year from now. N. Korea's a tougher nut to crack, as Kim Sung Il has more of a death-grip on Power, but with China and Japan and Russia working as our allies, I'm hopeful that Regime Change--or at least Regime neutralization--will be possible in Dubyuh's second term.

"I don't trust Bush with the Iraqi people's freedom and security. His man in Iraq, Chalabi, was revealed to be a spy for their sworn enemy Iran, remember."

Fair enuff...I certainly did not trust Clinton with the Massacre of innocent Serbs and ethnic Albanians in Kosovo. Still, Dubyuh's not gonna be selecting the permanent leaders fer Iraq, Iraqis will make that selection this winter. Didn't the meeting of the 30 June deadline to turn over power to the Iraqis undercut a little of your doubt regarding Dubyuh's motives? Or is yer LOATHING fer Bush so deepset that evidence that disproves yer biases is discarded indiscriminantly?

FReegards...MUD

[dead]

It's hard to take this guy seriously when he has typos and gframmar errors in his writing

That post is priceless!

I didn’t rewrite anything. Perlstein’s typos were his own.

[combat_boots]

"the mass graves are over ten years old"

True. During the Iran-Iraq war, in particular, 1.5 mm soldiers died (both sides) not counting POWs and those wounded or those suffering from having been gassed. At one point, Uday Hussein ordered the beheading of 36 people--in one day.

Regarding N. Korea--while I was visiting S. Korea a in 2001 (summer) on business, there was a report that the N. Koreans were suffering so from starvation that they were both eating grass, and, sometimes female babies. Of course, this was just a report, but it was commonly known and accepted in the South.

[1Old Pro]

This'll be off the record. Won't use it for any article.

Yep, didn't Kerry say he wouldn't use his self made films of himself in Vietman for political purposes? oops, then shizam, there they were during the convention. Kerry's a louse, ust like Hitlery.

[1Old Pro]

that crtiicism of Bush from the left has MORE to do with policy than criticism of Clinton from the right, other things equal

Yea right, liberals are actually able to think and reason and that's why they oppose policies. Hogwash liberal elitism.....Conservatives opposed Klintoon on all fronts. From his socialistic, statist, big government policies to his corruptness, proven corruptness. Lying under oath, cheating on his wife, all things that allow us to properly conclude that he was not fit to serve in the WH.

[Mudboy Slim]

"...while I was visiting S. Korea a in 2001 (summer) on business, there was a report that the N. Koreans were suffering so from starvation that they were both eating grass, and, sometimes female babies."

Communism is EVIL, so I wouldn't be all that surprised...MUD

[68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub]

I don't need to cater to a supporter of Hanoi Kerry.

Neither should you!

Hanoi Kerry is a known traitor.

ASK anyone who was in Vietnam with him.

ASK me.

[68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub]

"Tonk, did Rick answer any of your posts? Bet he is squirming in his pants after seeing all the truths here. Snicker, snicker!!"

He sent me a FReep mail attacking Bush, and not answeing MY question.

He's a loser, just like Hanoi Kerry.

[Taliesan]

Then stay off those threads. Let people who want to debate do so. Extend to everyone the freedom you fought to preserve.

[Arrowhead1952]

He sent me a FReep mail attacking Bush, and not answering MY question.

He's a loser, just like Hanoi Kerry.

Just SOP for the left. Attack and bash Bush. I have yet to hear on F'ing kerry supporter tell me one reason why they are for voting FOR kerry.

The only answer I have ever heard (including the libs calling Rush, Hannity and Laura) is, they don't like Bush. The RATs have become the party of hate.

[68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub]

Hey Perlstein

Answer MY question.

Why do you support a traitor like Hanoi Kerry?

And DON'T spread lies about Bush like you did in my FReep mail.

From Perlstein | 08/04/2004 6:55:42 AM PDT replied

Friend, Bush's application to the Guard is a matter of public record. He checked the box stating that he desired NOT to be sent to Vietnam.

Check your facts Perlstein

Aerospaceweb.org was started in 2000 to provide information regarding a wide range
of aerospace-related fields, including aircraft design, spacecraft design, aerodynamics,
and aerospace history.

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/history/q0185.shtml

...Nevertheless, we have established that the F-102 was serving in combat in Vietnam at the time Bush
enlisted to become an F-102 pilot. In fact, pilots from the 147th FIG of the Texas ANG were
routinely rotated to Vietnam for combat duty under a program called "Palace Alert" from 1968 to 1970.
Palace Alert was an Air Force program that sent qualified F-102 pilots from the ANG to bases in Europe
or southeast Asia for periods of three to six months for frontline duty.
Fred Bradley, a friend of Bush's who was also serving in the Texas ANG, reported that he and Bush
inquired about participating in the Palace Alert program. However, the two were told by a superior,
MAJ Maurice Udell, that they were not yet qualified since they were still in training
and did not have the 500 hours of flight experience required. Furthermore, ANG veteran
COL William Campenni, who was a fellow pilot in the 111th FIS at the time,
told the Washington Times that Palace Alert was winding down and not accepting new applicants....
...
The point of this discussion is that the military record of George W. Bush deserves a fair treatment.
Bush has been criticized for avoiding service in Vietnam, though the evidence proves that
the Texas Air National Guard and its F-102 pilots where serving in Vietnam while Bush was in training.
Bush has been criticized for using his family influence to obtain his assignment,
but the evidence shows that he successfully completed every aspect of the more than
two years of training required of him.
Bush has been criticized for pursuing a safe and plush position as a fighter pilot,
but the evidence indicates the F-102 was a demanding aircraft whose pilots regularly risked their lives.
Bush has also been criticized for deserting the Guard before his enlistment was complete,
but the evidence shows he was honorably discharged eight months early because his position
was being phased out...
...
While it is not our goal to compare and contrast the records of the candidates on this subject,
the fact that the questioner cites John Kerry's military service makes us feel it necessary to comment.
It is interesting to note that there are just as many, if not more,
irregularities in Kerry's military record as there are in Bush's.
Kerry can certainly be praised for some of the actions he performed while in the line of duty,
but his record does contain some troubling portions as well.
Not the least of these is his involvement in the controversial group
Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW) while he was still an active-duty member of the US Navy.
Kerry's testimony before Congress as VVAW spokesman in 1971,
during which he accused soldiers serving in Vietnam of being war criminals,
was found to be based on largely falsifed information as documented by Wikipedia.
The Boston Globe has also reported on troubling accusations regarding the circumstances
surrounding Kerry's medals, particularly his first two purple hearts awarded for
minor injuries that may even have been self-inflicted.

[68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub]

Don't you dare tell me where or where not to post.

EVERYTIME I see someone supporting Hanoi Kerry I'll be right there.

I'm not debating any Hanoi Kerry supporter.

Not now, not later.

[4CJ]

Kerry can certainly be praised for some of the actions he performed while in the line of duty, but his record does contain some troubling portions as well. Not the least of these is his involvement in the controversial group Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW) while he was still an active-duty member of the US Navy.

Giving aid and comfort to the enemy. T-R-E-A-S-O-N.

[Defender2]

Thanks for a good post and PING, Tonk!!!!:-)

D2

[Old Sarge]

Tonkin, Tonkin, Tonkin...

You should realize by now that, same as with Mojo's magnificent work, there will be no reply.

This Socialist wasn't looking to debate; he was trolling for sound bites for his next hate crime.