Comments on: 2006: A World Awash in Fear and Fascism — The Year in Review http://pjmedia.com/blog/2006_a_world_awash_in_fear_and/ Wed, 15 Feb 2012 18:19:32 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Bill Bradley http://pjmedia.com/blog/2006_a_world_awash_in_fear_and/#comment-3727 Bill Bradley Mon, 01 Jan 2007 20:55:03 +0000 http://dev.pajamasmedia.com/blog/2006-a-world-awash-in-fear-and-fascism-the-year-in-review/#comment-3727 Nonsense. Just don't try to sell Bush as a centrist. >What is happening here is that Bill is trying to treat "Conservative" with the same plastic disregard for its meaning as "Liberal" has been treated. And, surprise, surprise, he is doing it for political gain (another modern liberal trait). Nonsense. Just don’t try to sell Bush as a centrist.

>What is happening here is that Bill is trying to treat “Conservative” with the same plastic disregard for its meaning as “Liberal” has been treated. And, surprise, surprise, he is doing it for political gain (another modern liberal trait).

]]> By: Wildmonk http://pjmedia.com/blog/2006_a_world_awash_in_fear_and/#comment-3726 Wildmonk Mon, 01 Jan 2007 15:14:33 +0000 http://dev.pajamasmedia.com/blog/2006-a-world-awash-in-fear-and-fascism-the-year-in-review/#comment-3726 If the words "Conservative" or "Liberal" are to have any meaning at all, there are criteria by which you must judge a person's political disposition. "Liberal" has undergone a huge transformation over the last century as various interest groups have twisted it to their advantage. However, support for greater government control of the economy and a more expansive view of the government's capacity for social engineering are the primary hallmarks of Liberalism since 1968. Conservatism has been marked by pretty consistent standards since Edmund Burke: rejection of utopianism, respect for organically-evolved political solutions. By these measures, I am pretty Conservative despite the fact that I don't buy in to stem-cell bans or prayer in the schools or a bunch of other issues of the day. So, for example, I find myself in agreement more with Milton Friedman and Ronald Reagan than John Maynard Keynes and Jimmy Carter. I do not find myself in agreement with George Bush on many issues. What is happening here is that Bill is trying to treat "Conservative" with the same plastic disregard for its meaning as "Liberal" has been treated. And, surprise, surprise, he is doing it for political gain (another modern liberal trait). If you would like to see a true Conservative - one of the fathers of modern Conservatism - take Bush to the woodshed - then I would encourage you to start here: <a href="http://www.supremefiction.com/theidea/2006/12/how_the_right_w.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.supremefiction.com/theidea/2006/12/how_the_right_w.html</a> As I say, it is a start. The fact is that Bush has violated both of the central tenents of Conservatism in his execution of the war in Iraq: he has acted in broadly utopian terms pursuing change in the Middle East and he has shown little respect for organically-evolved political solutions. Combine this with an almost impenetrable wall of yes-men that make it almost impossible for him to see the real political needs on the ground in this war and you have a prescription for a failed war and a failed presidency (it pains me to say that as I originally supported the war). For more on that topic see here (a more balanced article than I expected given the source): <a href="http://www.newyorker.com/printables/fact/061218fa_fact2" rel="nofollow">http://www.newyorker.com/printables/fact/061218fa_fact2</a> The fact is that Bush has been a disappointment to anyone who can reasonably be called a "Conservative" by relevant philosophical definitions. *That* is why I won't "take him at his word" and call him a "Conservative" as Bill suggests. If the words “Conservative” or “Liberal” are to have any meaning at all, there are criteria by which you must judge a person’s political disposition.

“Liberal” has undergone a huge transformation over the last century as various interest groups have twisted it to their advantage. However, support for greater government control of the economy and a more expansive view of the government’s capacity for social engineering are the primary hallmarks of Liberalism since 1968.

Conservatism has been marked by pretty consistent standards since Edmund Burke: rejection of utopianism, respect for organically-evolved political solutions. By these measures, I am pretty Conservative despite the fact that I don’t buy in to stem-cell bans or prayer in the schools or a bunch of other issues of the day.

So, for example, I find myself in agreement more with Milton Friedman and Ronald Reagan than John Maynard Keynes and Jimmy Carter. I do not find myself in agreement with George Bush on many issues.

What is happening here is that Bill is trying to treat “Conservative” with the same plastic disregard for its meaning as “Liberal” has been treated. And, surprise, surprise, he is doing it for political gain (another modern liberal trait).

If you would like to see a true Conservative – one of the fathers of modern Conservatism – take Bush to the woodshed – then I would encourage you to start here:

http://www.supremefiction.com/theidea/2006/12/how_the_right_w.html

As I say, it is a start. The fact is that Bush has violated both of the central tenents of Conservatism in his execution of the war in Iraq: he has acted in broadly utopian terms pursuing change in the Middle East and he has shown little respect for organically-evolved political solutions. Combine this with an almost impenetrable wall of yes-men that make it almost impossible for him to see the real political needs on the ground in this war and you have a prescription for a failed war and a failed presidency (it pains me to say that as I originally supported the war). For more on that topic see here (a more balanced article than I expected given the source):

http://www.newyorker.com/printables/fact/061218fa_fact2

The fact is that Bush has been a disappointment to anyone who can reasonably be called a “Conservative” by relevant philosophical definitions.

*That* is why I won’t “take him at his word” and call him a “Conservative” as Bill suggests.

]]> By: Flying Rodent http://pjmedia.com/blog/2006_a_world_awash_in_fear_and/#comment-3725 Flying Rodent Mon, 01 Jan 2007 06:01:47 +0000 http://dev.pajamasmedia.com/blog/2006-a-world-awash-in-fear-and-fascism-the-year-in-review/#comment-3725 Allow me to chuck in a couple you missed - May - Right-wing blogosphere wins European Champions' League. June - National volleyball league discontinues in admiration of achievements of right-wing bloggers. June - Right-wing bloggers win soccer World Cup, Italians horrified at last-minute victory. August - Right-wing bloggers prove Israel isn't bombing Lebanon. Lebanese renounce anti-sematism, recognise Israel, fellate Rumsfeld. November - Americans elect non-Republicans to office, announce allegiance to terrorists. Comical wankers commence distraction campaign. December - Saddam executed. World celebrates new year, doesn't notice - right-wing bloggers melt-down in onanistic circle-jerking mutual masturbatory wank-fest. January - More of the same, with more masturbation. Happy New Year from Scotland! Allow me to chuck in a couple you missed -

May – Right-wing blogosphere wins European Champions’ League.

June – National volleyball league discontinues in admiration of achievements of right-wing bloggers.

June – Right-wing bloggers win soccer World Cup, Italians horrified at last-minute victory.

August – Right-wing bloggers prove Israel isn’t bombing Lebanon. Lebanese renounce anti-sematism, recognise Israel, fellate Rumsfeld.

November – Americans elect non-Republicans to office, announce allegiance to terrorists. Comical wankers commence distraction campaign.

December – Saddam executed. World celebrates new year, doesn’t notice – right-wing bloggers melt-down in onanistic circle-jerking mutual masturbatory wank-fest.

January – More of the same, with more masturbation.

Happy New Year from Scotland!

]]> By: Bill Bradley http://pjmedia.com/blog/2006_a_world_awash_in_fear_and/#comment-3724 Bill Bradley Mon, 01 Jan 2007 03:51:49 +0000 http://dev.pajamasmedia.com/blog/2006-a-world-awash-in-fear-and-fascism-the-year-in-review/#comment-3724 GW Bush says himself that he is a conservative Republican. Take him at his own word, whydoncha? :) This comes from a non-liberal, by all non-right wing definitions. Chill. GW Bush says himself that he is a conservative Republican.

Take him at his own word, whydoncha? :)

This comes from a non-liberal, by all non-right wing definitions.

Chill.

]]> By: Don Meaker http://pjmedia.com/blog/2006_a_world_awash_in_fear_and/#comment-3723 Don Meaker Mon, 01 Jan 2007 03:00:28 +0000 http://dev.pajamasmedia.com/blog/2006-a-world-awash-in-fear-and-fascism-the-year-in-review/#comment-3723 Important to note that NIXON won more popular votes than Kennedy-Johnson in 1960, in an election marred by fraud in West Texas and Cook County Illinois. When it comes to stolen elections, and political sainthood, "Nixon's the One". Important to note that NIXON won more popular votes than Kennedy-Johnson in 1960, in an election marred by fraud in West Texas and Cook County Illinois.

When it comes to stolen elections, and political sainthood, “Nixon’s the One”.

]]> By: Canof http://pjmedia.com/blog/2006_a_world_awash_in_fear_and/#comment-3722 Canof Mon, 01 Jan 2007 00:06:55 +0000 http://dev.pajamasmedia.com/blog/2006-a-world-awash-in-fear-and-fascism-the-year-in-review/#comment-3722 WHY do libs insist on calling W a "CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN?" Because 1) They want to believe he is in order to prove to themselves that they are in the majority and that the approval rating of the President reflects this. 2) They want to build off of his unpopularity to attack Republicans in general. The fact is that their insistance ignores the key fact that HALF of the people disapproving of Bush disapprove for reasons entirely opposite of what the Left criticizes him for. Poll after poll after poll proves this. The reason the Dems took Congress this year was because many of their new candidates ran RIGHT of the Democratic center. The country is not as far Left as you think, liberals. WHY do libs insist on calling W a “CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN?” Because 1) They want to believe he is in order to prove to themselves that they are in the majority and that the approval rating of the President reflects this. 2) They want to build off of his unpopularity to attack Republicans in general. The fact is that their insistance ignores the key fact that HALF of the people disapproving of Bush disapprove for reasons entirely opposite of what the Left criticizes him for. Poll after poll after poll proves this. The reason the Dems took Congress this year was because many of their new candidates ran RIGHT of the Democratic center. The country is not as far Left as you think, liberals.

]]> By: Mark http://pjmedia.com/blog/2006_a_world_awash_in_fear_and/#comment-3721 Mark Sun, 31 Dec 2006 18:19:51 +0000 http://dev.pajamasmedia.com/blog/2006-a-world-awash-in-fear-and-fascism-the-year-in-review/#comment-3721 C'mon guys, accept it: George W. Bush has always been, is, and always will be a CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN. Not to mention the worst President in U.S. history. C’mon guys, accept it: George W. Bush has always been, is, and always will be a CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN.

Not to mention the worst President in U.S. history.

]]> By: Bill Bradley http://pjmedia.com/blog/2006_a_world_awash_in_fear_and/#comment-3720 Bill Bradley Sun, 31 Dec 2006 06:14:50 +0000 http://dev.pajamasmedia.com/blog/2006-a-world-awash-in-fear-and-fascism-the-year-in-review/#comment-3720 I see that my earlier comment about Bush releasing the Iranians captured last week in Baghdad has not yet shown up here, but this other comment has. Bush is not a centrist. Period. I see that my earlier comment about Bush releasing the Iranians captured last week in Baghdad has not yet shown up here, but this other comment has.

Bush is not a centrist. Period.

]]> By: Bill Bradley http://pjmedia.com/blog/2006_a_world_awash_in_fear_and/#comment-3719 Bill Bradley Sun, 31 Dec 2006 04:47:23 +0000 http://dev.pajamasmedia.com/blog/2006-a-world-awash-in-fear-and-fascism-the-year-in-review/#comment-3719 More than a day after the event, I see that I am still the only PJ Media person who has reported that the "Colossus of Crawford" actually RELEASED the Iranian "diplomats" captured last week in Baghdad. Recognizing that fact, and understanding what it means, is key to grasping the situation there. More than a day after the event, I see that I am still the only PJ Media person who has reported that the “Colossus of Crawford” actually RELEASED the Iranian “diplomats” captured last week in Baghdad.

Recognizing that fact, and understanding what it means, is key to grasping the situation there.

]]> By: A. N. Pierson http://pjmedia.com/blog/2006_a_world_awash_in_fear_and/#comment-3718 A. N. Pierson Sat, 30 Dec 2006 21:34:29 +0000 http://dev.pajamasmedia.com/blog/2006-a-world-awash-in-fear-and-fascism-the-year-in-review/#comment-3718 I would like to address the comment of Bill Bradley above - that Bush is not a Freeranger. Freeranger appears to be a neologism invented by readers of this site, so it is hard to say what it means. But I take it to mean someone who draws his views from various parts of the political spectrum. In that sense, Bush is indeed a Freeranger, as is, ironically, Clinton. Both men are, more or less, centrists with views that roughly correspond. (Clinton was a strong supporter of the war in Iraq when it was expedient.) Ironic that they are both hated by the opposite sides when they are both so similar. I would like to address the comment of Bill Bradley above – that Bush is not a Freeranger. Freeranger appears to be a neologism invented by readers of this site, so it is hard to say what it means. But I take it to mean someone who draws his views from various parts of the political spectrum. In that sense, Bush is indeed a Freeranger, as is, ironically, Clinton. Both men are, more or less, centrists with views that roughly correspond. (Clinton was a strong supporter of the war in Iraq when it was expedient.) Ironic that they are both hated by the opposite sides when they are both so similar.

]]>