I agree that blogs are not only for the like minded, though I stand by the “common interests” part. There is, though, a tendency for any particular blog to attract people who generally agree with one another (or perhaps the consensus develops over time through discussion – probably both), and that leads to the potential for truepeers’ concerted action.

In their rabid hatred of Bush the chattering classes of the left are forced to bring back the real politic of Kissinger and Nixon of “If he’s our dictator, then he is ok to us.” Of course Bush is not going to change the world in a day and of course we will have to deal with some bad actors temporarily but he has announced that the acceptence of permanent repression will not fly and to hear the ABB crowd heap scorn on Bush’s idealism and have them adopt the bitter cup of “well those arabs really don’t want or can’t handle democracy like us white europeans can” is just to ironic to bear. If they had a brain or were not so politically tone deaf they would have applauded Bush’s speech and then sat back and watched him try to implement the herculean effort that his lofty goals are going to require. But instead they are heaping abuse on Bush and indirectly are becoming the marching and shouting society for the Dictators and the Despots of the world. They watched Kerry fail as he tied to win an election on being the anti-bush and know they are treading down the same road by just saying that Bush is a fool to aspire to freedom and democracy for the world. The Democratic party and the cynical Kissinger, what a match!

I have not seen the movie, although I know it is considered a classic. My use of mimes as a comparison wasn’t intended as a slam on the art per se, it was just a comment on the lack of real influence that the protesters have on the body politic, that they have become like a mime on Venice Beach that scrounges for quarters to make a living. If that is a passion for them, more power to them, but if these sidewalk chanters think they will draw a crowd to their political philosophies and if they think they are going to change the world they are in for rude shock in the coming years.

They are also akin to the old Committees of Correspondence, in that they permit political organization outside the controlled and approved “official” channels.

‘These days, all that has been stood on its head: In the wake of September 11, the right claims it wants to free oppressed people – why, democracy is on the march! – while the left is too often caught saying “I told you so” about the mess in Iraq, even as that country speeds toward an election that any decent human being should hope goes well. In 1968, who would have believed it possible that the left would be home to the dreary old “realists” while the right would be full of utopians?’

And they say we’re conservatives.

These days, all that has been stood on its head: In the wake of September 11, the right claims it wants to free oppressed people – why, democracy is on the march! – while the left is too often caught saying “I told you so” about the mess in Iraq, even as that country speeds toward an election that any decent human being should hope goes well. In 1968, who would have believed it possible that the left would be home to the dreary old “realists” while the right would be full of utopians?

Old labels just don’t apply anymore do they? Not for me, that’s for sure.

I think the direction in which we are going is one where the difference between independent thought and the herd is going to be turned over more and more quickly, making it less easy for anyone to dwell at either end. On the one hand, the herd is going to be moving quickly because of the connectivity and information flow we now have; and this is going to demand of any averagely successful herd member an ability to do a lot of the work of integration or synthesis we traditionally ascribe to independent thinkers. In other words, we are going to need to accent ever more the team player, but successful teams will have everyone taking turns as leader and not just in cautious, inoffensive, half-assed ways. With ever more global competition, this will be such a challenge: people will have to put an emphasis on the virtues that make it possible both to perform and to get along with each other taking turns standing out – not just taking turns in a PC rotation, but making proposals or hypotheses on which we all must risk our success and failure. In other words, truepeers(-:-)

I write it off to her social milieu. We all know that the Democrats and their MSM enablers have almost finished building the “we were beaten by the evil religious people, ergo we didn’t lose” narrative. Silly as it is, that narrative is nearly set in stone now so any reference to the Deity must needs be embarrassing for poor Peggy. I’m sure she was hoping Bush would just sweep all that under the carpet so she could tell her friends, “See! He’s ok.”. Alas and alack it was not to be.

Bush can credit God or whoever, I look at the policy, goals, so with that I credit, the envelope please… George Bush. As Roger said… No Bush, no election. The rest, as the grandmothers say, is bubbe meises. No truer words can be said but I’ll add what my own father says, “This guy Bush has Chutzpah. For me if this Chutzpah comes from Dubya’s religion, then so be it and preach on! And Brother Dubya, there a few other people you can preach to that like Roger or myself may also find your rhetoric more appreciable, maybe in… Iran?