Skip to comments.
Words have failed the Democrats
National Post ^
| September 09 2003
| Robert Fulford
Posted on 09/09/2003 12:49:01 PM PDT by knighthawk
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-26 next last
To: MizSterious; rebdov; Nix 2; green lantern; BeOSUser; Brad's Gramma; dreadme; Turk2; Squantos; ...
Ping
2
posted on
09/09/2003 12:49:56 PM PDT
by
knighthawk
(Full of power I'm spreading my wings, facing the storm that is gathering near)
To: knighthawk
I don't think that The New Yorker has moved to the right. It has the same center-left stance journalistically that it has always had, and a contempt-for-Bush editorial stance that is only less conspicuous than that of the New York Times because the house style doesn't allow for as much out-and-out editorializing.
To: knighthawk
Very good read - thanks for the post.
4
posted on
09/09/2003 1:07:22 PM PDT
by
TexasNative2000
(You may disagree with me, but I will fight for your right to be in error.)
To: knighthawk
Interesting insight, to be sure... and quite correct. There is simply no one on the left side of the spectrum that can match prose with the likes of Victor Davis Hanson. Mona Charen or Thomas Sowell and a plethora of others. No commentator can touch Limbaugh and now Hewitt. But, when will we witness a correspondent shift in mainstream journalism or televised broadcasting. There are few major urban newspaper worth the paper their printed on, and even the History and Discovery Channels are mediums for leftists broadcast propoganda. Granted, the American public chooses ideas and thruth on the open market, much like they do any other commodity. But, I would like to think that at some point, even the mainstream media outlets must be concened with the smell of the tripe they are trying to shovel, produced by the ideoligal and intellectual morons that they employ with tremendous zeale.
5
posted on
09/09/2003 1:08:04 PM PDT
by
Mr.Atos
To: knighthawk
Ah but the Democrats DO in fact have plans for education, health care, and so on. But they are uncharacteristically silent on these issues because they know socialism is a LOSER!
6
posted on
09/09/2003 1:09:56 PM PDT
by
thoughtomator
(Israel is the canary in the coal mine of Islamofascism)
To: Mr.Atos
No commentator can touch Limbaugh and now Hewitt. Well, the left does have Camille Paglia. At least I think the left has her... it's hard to tell sometimes. She's all over the map, I suppose.
But, she's certainly not a rock-solid conservative by any stretch, and yet I enjoy her work because she is a brilliant writer.
I doubt you'd hear a liberal voice admiration for William Buckley on the basis of brilliant prose. And his prose is brilliant.
To: Allan
Fulford ping.
8
posted on
09/09/2003 1:32:55 PM PDT
by
keri
To: knighthawk
Socializing health care IS too "liberal". Moving to the right of it means fighting agaisnt it and I haven't seen any Dems doing that.
9
posted on
09/09/2003 1:33:05 PM PDT
by
cake_crumb
(UN Resolutions = Very Expensive, Very SCRATCHY Toilet Paper)
To: knighthawk
Today conservatism is largely if not mainly, a product of the much savaged "neo" school. Its made conservatism a creed capable of commanding an electoral majority in American political life. Europe and Canada have nothing like it. If you wonder why American conservatives seem reasonable and cheerful in outlook, its precisely that they aren't their grandfather's "stuffed shirt" conservatism. In the old days, the paleos would have competed to say "NO" no matter what. Today conservatives are more likely to say "YES" and then ask how it can advance the conservative agenda. All of which enrages liberals to no end. There was once a dominant liberal intellectual tradition in this country. A sign of how much the times have changed can be seen in that the Democrats' front-runner, Nikita Dean, isn't running to offer a coherent liberal alternative to President Bush; he's running on pure anger. Yes, Virgina one side has lots of things to say and said them in a way that attracts the American imagination. "Right wing crazies" can to use an Arnoldism, be bold and colorful.
10
posted on
09/09/2003 1:43:59 PM PDT
by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
To: goldstategop
" 'Right wing crazies' can to use an Arnoldism, be bold and colorful."LOL..yep. Though the left in the US and the rest of the world still consider us "the stupid party".
11
posted on
09/09/2003 1:47:53 PM PDT
by
cake_crumb
(UN Resolutions = Very Expensive, Very SCRATCHY Toilet Paper)
To: knighthawk
The neoconservatives set out to bring clarity to American politics, and by their example redefined American journalism commentary.Allow journalism to self-define as the pseudo-objective reporters of every inkling of a need for improvement in American social infastructure--the anticonservatives. Not all commentators are conservative, but those who are not are becoming ridiculous.
12
posted on
09/09/2003 2:18:05 PM PDT
by
conservatism_IS_compassion
(The everyday blessings of God are great--they just don't make "good copy.")
To: Thud
ping
To: knighthawk
Hatred of communism is the beginning of political wisdom
bump
14
posted on
09/09/2003 3:49:40 PM PDT
by
tophat9000
(Free Republic ..You have to support, things we don't support, to get our support.... goofy isn’t it?)
To: knighthawk
In a fit of absent-mindedness, Democrats have moved to the right of their traditional position and even to the right of positions that Republicans once held. As Miller put it, "No serious Democratic contender today would endorse Richard Nixon's plans from the early 1970s for universal health coverage and a minimum family income: Nixon's package was far too liberal." It was defeated by a coalition of conservative Republicans and liberal DemocRATS. The Republicans were against socialized medicine, and the DemocRATS thought they could get an even more left wing medical program with a future DemocRAT president.
15
posted on
09/09/2003 5:05:10 PM PDT
by
Paleo Conservative
(Do not remove this tag under penalty of law.)
To: knighthawk
Sounds right to me:
If you believe their rhetoric, the main and perhaps only function of a Democratic politician today is to keep Republicans out of office.
16
posted on
09/09/2003 8:56:24 PM PDT
by
GOPJ
To: Mr.Atos
Don't forget Mark Steyn. If there were a half dozen more like him, this country would always vote Republican.
To: TontoKowalski
I doubt you'd hear a liberal voice admiration for William Buckley on the basis of brilliant prose. And his prose is brilliant.Hmm. I find Buckley's writings (or at least his columns) rather disjointed with poor conclusions as if he had dictated them to someone and never given them a second thought.
His earlier work was much better, IMHO.
To: knighthawk
Before Reagan liberals actually thought that they had won the debate as to which direction the country should move. Since the eighties, many Americans have seen the failure of outright liberalism. Has anyone read defenses of school busing lately by any lib columnist lately? How about bi-lingualism? Are they claiming that reinstituting the death penalty leads to higher crime and murder rates? How about getting tough with commies will make the Soviet Union go ballistic? Cutting taxes will shrink the economy?
Liberalism has been tried and found wanting. Actually it's been found to disastrous. It is revealing that the top Dem candidate is the one that appeals to the angry, leftist wing of the donkey party. All the old hippies and all the freshly-minted leftists out of college support Dean...in short all the old losers and all the liberal university ignoramuses.
Good conservative journalists have certainly helped hold the wolf of liberalism at bay. But liberalism's own inherent destructive illogic and anti-American character have helped also.
19
posted on
09/10/2003 2:47:33 AM PDT
by
driftless
( For life-long happiness, learn how to play the accordion.)
To: only1percent
Their contempt for Bush was epitomized in a cover I saw of The New Yorker last year. I can't remember it exactly, but it's theme was something to do with how-stupid-is-Bush. I'm sure most of the NYer readers are of the upper west-side, elite, liberal stripe who sneer at conservatives and think the world ends at the other side of the Hudson River. The smug, pompous, condescending view that NYer readers have of everyone else is typical of most liberals. Their view was and is : we have all the answers, you pathetic, ignorant, middle-class worms, do what we tell you, and don't ask questions.
20
posted on
09/10/2003 3:03:27 AM PDT
by
driftless
( For life-long happiness, learn how to play the accordion.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-26 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson