Posted on 08/03/2004 12:09:31 PM PDT by 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
This passage is pure garbage Perlstein, and you know it is. Bush gave the rich a 100% tax cut, and now those rich contribute absolutely nothing to the treasury? The rich pay more than HALF of all income taxes, and that is true even after the tax cut. Your claim now that the rich pay NO taxes is utter trash, the kind of crap usually reserved for DU. Care to produce IRS numbers that actually prove this non-point, or does your hatred of anyone with more money than you completely justify your refusal to portray them honestly in your writings? Just wondering...JFK
I read a first-hand account of a soldier charged with protection of a fuel convoy through Falluja (posted here on FR I recall), and he told of 12-year-old boys firing AK-47s on the convoy from overpasses, and of one young boy he was forced to kill, as I recall - the boy had come up next to his disabled truck, knocked him down with a round in his vest, and didn't retreat from his warning shots.
The word "Children" doesn't mean the same thing in Iraq as it does in tony Manhattan neighborhoods, and if there are children in Abu Ghraib, it is undoubtedly because they were, among other things, trying to kill US and coalition troops with machine guns or RPGs.
With respect to Bush's youthful exploits - my cousins and I once tried to load up live frogs with firecrackers when we were about 10, until my uncle and my dad intervened and whipped our butts.
Boys, it would seem, are innately barbaric no matter what their social stratum, especially in packs. It is the task of responsible parents to civilize them so that they grow into respectable men, as both I and George Bush have managed to do.
I think we are respecting freeper DEAD by doing such : ) Fine by me : )
Some very significant facts I think the left ignores, almost deliberately, include the corruption, incompetence, and ineffectiveness of the UN, as well as the cynical corruption of the old European powers in their dealings with, for example, Iraq and the Middle East, as well as the world at large. The old manner of maintaining stalemate between and among powers, such as the USSR and the US, no longer offers the US any benefit; stasis no longer assures survival. Other facts that the left denies, I believe dishonestly, include the competence and experience of the Bush team, especially in defense and foreign affairs. The left also dishonestly denigrates Bush's intelligence, competence, and honesty. I do not worship the man as some larger than life hero. Rather, I am simply glad that we are fortunate enough to have a President with an MBA and executive experience who can perform competently in this new world where our safety and survival is at stake.
The left has lost its way in this new world. Their determined efforts to remain lost and out of touch amaze me. The left's denial of reality is starkly evidenced by support for a Democratic candidate with nothing to recommend him and unable to stir any enthusiasm not traceable to reaction to Bush and the new reality.
I would be interested in your thoughts.
Wasn't much of an exoneration. His behavior was odious, irresponsible and unprofessional. They couldn't prove a viable motive, that's all.
Exactly. Remember the Jack Thompson threads, Weegee?
From here:
National Archives spokeswoman Susan Cooper said the issue isn't over.
"This is still under investigation, and the National Archives is not commenting on the case," she said.
But Cooper said the concern all along has been about the copying and removal of documents.
"And that's where the investigation stands now from our perspective," she said.
The Justice Department does not talk about ongoing investigations.
It is illegal to remove classified documents, originals or copies, from the National Archives.
"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. "
Boo frickin' Hoo. ... as Cher said in Moonstruck "Snap out of It"
You think Conservatives control everything? We dont control what is taught in schools, shown on TV, written in papers, propagandized in films, indoctrinated in colleges and journalism schools. We dont control the judges or the courts. And conservatives -real conservatives - dont control a Congress that is a pander-bear organization nor even the Executive branch, run by a moderate-conservative head of an administration stuffed with liberal bureaucrats and status-quo paper-shufflers.
Or are you a loony Leftist who thinks of moderate Colin Powell as some right-winger? LOL.
So what do CONSERVATIVES really control ... Your state of mind?!?!
While your mindset is a clue as to why the Democrats are so loony these days, it is not healthy for ya. As I said, snap out of it. Reality awaits your return!
"Why do you people behave as if all liberals read from some sheet of talking points."
LOL! It couldn't be because the only other rational assumption would be that the DNC has planted a reciever into every liberal's ear, would it?
Can you deny that all liberal spokesmen and women, sound like alpinesque echos of every other liberal?
Are you people
I've read this comment from you now .... 8 times ? You have an account here . Tell me why the posting of this thread had to be arrainged ?
You wrote "Of course, two years after Bush made his pledge, only 2 percent of the AIDS money has been distributed (in any event, it will mainly go to drug companies). And appearing earnest in the presence of African Americans has been a documented Bush strategy for wooing moderate voters since the beginning."
-------
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2004-02-03-insidethebudget_x.htm
I confess, I've wondered that off and on myself.
''We were terrible to animals,'' recalled Mr. Throckmorton, laughing. A dip behind the Bush home turned into a small lake after a good rain, and thousands of frogs would come out.
''Everybody would get BB guns and shoot them,'' Mr. Throckmorton said. ''Or we'd put firecrackers in the frogs and throw them and blow them up.''
bookmark for later
Phanton Lord, I'll trust the VFW on the matter of the VA budet.
Totally unaware of that one. Any link to that story?
I think your premise that Goldwater turned off blacks is wrong. Few blacks would even recall that. I think the highly publicized Nixon Southern Strategy, Pat Moynihan's recommendation to practice "benign neglect" toward blacks, the Southern Democrats conversion to the GOP and the FBI murder of Black Panthers Fred Hampton and Mark Clark during Nixon's first year in office were the key factors. That and the Democratic Party's embrace of blacks (Kennedy's support of MLK, Johnson's war on poverty, the presidential candidacies of Barbara Jordan and Shirley Chisholm, etc. The older generation loved Mr. Roosevelt and Mr. Truman integrated the military.)
It's true that Republicans put the Civil Rights Act of 1964 over the top but from that point on it was hard to tell that the GOP had anything but disdain for blacks during the Nixon years. By the time of his resignation, the birds had flown the coop and no amount of telling blacks that they've never done better than under Reagan seems to convince them.
Perlstein's no 'guest', bozo. He invited himself. PS where'd you get your tagline: DU?
Read the details, my friend, not just the headlines. He was exonerated from the charge that the withheld information from the 9/11 Commission. He has not been exonerated from charges of mishandling classified information - the National Archives states that this is still under investigation.
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.