The Illusions of E.J.Dionne, Jr.—A Leftist Masquerading as a Moderate Centrist
Next, Dionne goes on to exaggerate and distort the message presented regularly by responsible conservatives I have often cited, like those who write for publications such as The Claremont Review of Books and The National Interest, and which include writers in particular like Yuval Levin, William Voegeli, Jim Manzi, Vince Cannato and scores of others. The conservatives I know who write for these publications on issues such as the budget, health care, the housing crisis and other serious problems do not want to get rid of Social Security, attack the entire New Deal welfare state edifice, and abolish the income tax. Instead of discussing the kind of serious thinking they and others engage in, Dionne attacks a group of straw men who supposedly favor extreme positions that even Ronald Reagan didn’t take.
That too is the old trick: Having bitterly attacked Reagan as an extremist and fascist when he was President (I have heard that from podiums from liberals more than a few times) they suddenly invoke his name as a responsible conservative so different from those who are active today. As for ObamaCare, Dionne does the same thing. Rather than address himself to the kind of criticisms that serious conservatives have made, he simply says it is a “middle-of-the road Republican” program from 15 years ago which is now somehow condemned “as radical.” Really? Please produce that health care program, E.J.
What Dionne really favors is a center-left and pro-Democratic agenda. He, like other liberals, progressives or whatever name these social-democrats prefer to use to describe themselves come up with, does not seem to realize that the United States is a center-right nation, and not a center-left one. That is why he prefers to call conservatives part of an “extreme right” and wants to “broker an alliance between the center and the left.” He even writes this after our country’s voters have seen fit to give the Republican Party a major victory in the midterm election. As Wehner notes, “Americans, by a greater than 2-to-1 margin, self-identify as conservative rather than liberal.”
By ignoring that fact especially, what E.J. Dionne has done is to show that he lives in an illusory world, in which he thinks that he and other social-democrats and socialists (let us use the more appropriate name for them rather than Dionne’s preferred “progressive” label) represent the real voice of the American people, rather than the one that has just spoken out so clearly. And as Wehner adds, Dionne actually supports Nancy Pelosi, a woman so extreme that she gets an 8 percent favorability rating among independents, and a 61 percent unfavorable one! Can Dionne really seriously maintain that Pelosi is a centrist moderate?
As for the recent No Labels event, Dionne acknowledges that “the few Republicans present were admirable people driven from their party by the right wing.” Sure, why else would Dionne call any Republican admirable? So he concludes that moderation only exists “on the center-left and among Democrats.” Since we have seen, and the country believes, that the left and the Democrats are anything but moderate, Dionne reveals that No Labels is a bogus movement — a confab of liberals pretending to be anything but what they are, in order to convince some gullible types to give them a hearing.
And I’m tired of everyone and his brother citing David Frum — a man I respect and consider a friend, although I differ with him on some questions and agree with him on others — as the only conservative every liberal and radical cites regularly as proof that every other conservative is an extremist. Dionne writes that Frum “was too quick to raise questions about Sarah Palin’s qualifications and dares to think that Republicans need to get serious about problems such as health care.”
Yes they do. And at the recent Restoration Weekend panel on conservatism, which you can watch or read here, I strongly came out against Sarah Palin’s candidacy, arguing that rather than gaining a chance to present conservative positions on the issues, she herself would become the issue. I argued that she could not win, and that it would be a disaster for her to become the Republican Party’s candidate. No one booed. I was treated respectfully, and aside from one member of the audience who came up to scold me and yell at me when the panel was over, I received many comments from those attending indicating support for my position. Indeed, one prominent conservative told me that he would not and could not vote for her if she became the nominee, even if it meant Obama might win. And this event was held at what many people consider a gathering sponsored by a hard-line “extremist” conservative group. So, E.J., David Frum is not the only one making that argument, and it is, actually, not so controversial.
So, the truth is that few will follow E.J.Dionne, Jr. in his call for a new group that will attack only conservatives — as he puts it, by reminding “us of how extreme the right has come” — and that will now seek to “help broker an alliance between the center and the left.” Who should we align with — the likes of the MSNBC crew Lawrence O’Donnell, who says that he is a socialist, (unlike Dionne) Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann? Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid? Is that what he seriously believes?
The fact is that, as Wehner correctly concludes, the only extremist is Dionne himself, a left-winger trying to pass himself off as a moderate man of the center. That is why the No Labels movement does not only look dead, despite Frum’s claim to the contrary, it is dead upon arrival. And for good reason!






Seems to me that discussing liberals rationally is a bit like rationally discussing the costs and benefits of the wee dictator of North Korea.
It only gives them credibility they don’t deserve.
And they wouldn’t ever consider reciprocating for even a moment.
I agree with proreason’s plea for a rational politics. What most commentators miss is the crazy-making nature of our politics, especially when we claim to be “moderates.” I specified the double binds, traps, and prisons here: http://clarespark.com/2009/08/09/what-is-a-corporatist-liberal-and-why-should-they-frighten-us/. This is a short but very clear blog. More, the word “moderate” is so vague that anyone can project her own view of harmony on the supposed outcome of compromise. In our society, harmony is coerced by the state and its mediators, which is what makes it protofascist.
The reason rational discussions between Conservatives and the handful of people on the Left who aren’t merely thieves is impossible is that their bassic assumptions about the world differ radically.
Each side almost immediately begins calling the other side irrational, which really isnt’t an irrational perspective, given the assumptions of the “caller” side.
For example, conservatives believe the Constituion is the foundation of our politics and can only be challenged through the established amendment process. Everybody on the Left, even the more thoughful ones, think that is nonsense. Of course, they will never say it, because they could never win office if they did. So, there really insn’t much of a basis of discussion of ObamaCare, since we believe it is outside the agreed upon system, and they couln’t care less about that.
Staying on the subject of ObamaCare, our belief system is that free markets are the only reasonable economic system. They completely reject that. So what is there to discuss about ObamaCare. I could cite many other bedrock principle differences.
It’s as if we try to discuss football, assuming American football is the discussion topic. But they, without ever saying it, don’t even agree that American football is a legitimate sport, and everything they say is about soccer.
That’s why we can’t really talk to them.
We have to destroy them before they destroy us.
E.J.Dionne, Jr.is convinced that he is not a radical because of his nonviolent mindset. This is a man who may not even had a fist fight in high school. The sight of blood upsets him. Such individuals are convinced of their political moderation simply because they refuse to point a gun at anyone. Dionne is like Obama. He is in his heart of hearts, a soft totalitarian. Dionne only want you to be “nudged.”
E.J.Dionne, Jr.is convinced that he is not a radical because of his nonviolent mindset. This is a man who may not even had a fist fight in high school.
Yet also appears to have grown to embody a philosophy of ‘no enemies on the left’.
Such lofty intellectuals in historical perspective carry some serious baggage. When their ‘progressive’ brethren finally do attain power, and they are elevated to Politburo status for their devoted intellectual services to the cause, it’s a frequent phenomenon to find them dropping the nonviolent mindset like a hot potato.
Because, of course, due to their noble good intentions toward humanity, they reason, when confronted with opposition from the governed, that it’s necessarily anti-humanitarian opposition, and instruct their security services to muzzle or suppress it by any means necessary.
“Yet also appears to have grown to embody a philosophy of ‘no enemies on the left’.”
E.J.Dionne, Jr.has virtually no nonviolent enemies to the left who dress well and normally avoid vulgar language. He also feels a kinship with them if they attended an Ivy league university. Dionne’s allies must also be experts in employing misleading and ambiguous language.
EJ Dionne suffers the same delusion most of the left of center have, as long as Pol Pot is to their left they believe they are in the center.
Several reliable reports state that Pol Pot was also a very mild-mannered individual. That has never stopped anyone on the far Left from advocating slavery or destruction.
This reminds me of discussions of “moderate” Islamists/Muslims. Most of them won’t lift a hand to kill you even though the Qu’ran suggests they do so. However, the 10 percent or so that are Salafists are quite sufficient to do the job for the rest.
Dionne and his ilk are merely trying to pull the curtain back over the “Wizard” and mask the intent.
So your against Palin and that makes you reasonable? Enough with the Palin bashing, it’s beyond old. And it makes you look like a Jackanape. And any “conservative” who would vote for Obama over Palin isn’t a conservative at all, he’s a wishy washy “center-leftist”. Personally, your arguments become muddled when you have to get on the liberal bandwagon to show us your superior intellect. Bashing Palin is a small-minded person trying to appear hip.
@denroy, please remove your blinders and re-read the story. There is no bashing of Ms Palin other than the statement that the writer, among others, does not think she is electable. Personally, I agree; she would become the controversy in an election. Mama Grizzly is MUCH more effective as a king/queen maker than she was as a pol herself.
Wow – Talk about serendipity. I just finished reading Dionne’s column in my local paper where he describes the recent confab of the “No Labels” schmoozers. Dionne noted that the only Republicans there were guys like Mike Castle and Charlie Crist who had just lost primaries or state-wide elections and lauded them for their “moderation.” He then went on to characterize the ENTIRE Republican Party (i.e. the part that didn’t show up) as “extremists.” He then said something to the effect that the No Labels group could achieve constructive action by bringing moderates and liberals together so that they could, in effect, quarantine the Right.
You must Dionne credit for one thing – This is a fellow totally devoid of any sense of irony. One the one hand he supports a group that is (supposedly) devoted to suppressing incivility and name-calling in politics and then off-handedly describes the entire GOP as dangerous extremists. (He didn’t say “dangerous” but the implicaiton was right there.) So much for “No Labels.”
This is nothing new for Dionne as well as that gang of terribly nice insiders who gathered in Manhattan and who described themselves (again without irony) as “a gathering of citizen leaders.” They are adept at the lofty above-the-fray rhetoric of disinterested civility (Bill Galston is a master of this) while simaltaneously putting the shiv in the back of conservatives. I guarantee the next time that a Maxine Walters or Alan Grayson describes Republicans as all “hateful,ignorant, racist bigots” the “No Labels crowd will be out ordering another soy latte.
Chambers, I too read Dionne’s column today. He quoted his own book: “The Great American middle…saw in liberalism a creed that demeaned its values; in conservatism it saw a doctrine that shortchanged its interests.” To liberals like Dionne, it is intuitively obvious that higher taxes, bigger government, and redistribution of income are in the interest of the middle class. And if that middle class disagrees, that merely shows how effectively the conservatives have brainwashed them.
Dionne never fooled me. I got tired of reading him and the rest of the Washington Post 10 years ago and terminated my subscription that dated back to the early 1960s.
Palin is definitely a polarizer, especially with the lame-stream media continuously bashing her, but none of the other current Republican front-runners is going to be acceptable. Gingrich is a closet statist and environmentalist, Huckabee wasn’t a fiscal conservative in Arkansas, and Romney’s problem, for me, isn’t his faith, it is that he was so easily outsmarted by McCain in the primary fight of 2008.
Dionne is a goal post mover. He knows he’s a leftist, he just want every to think he’s a centrist. Worked pretty well for Obama… in the short term.
Dionne is like all progressives, so long as someone else does their dirty work for them, thay can remain clean. Normally, a good natural disaster would thin the herd of idiots like him.
All you have to do to understand that E.J. Dionne is a left-wing lunatic is to read one of his columns.
What’s up with this Palin business? McCain was the Republican nominee, and I think Palin compares quite favorably to Biden. Palin ran a state government, Biden ran for office.
I don’t need a label to know what Dionne is. Stalin told us.
Dionne blows the way of his paycheck.
I’m going to defend Ron on this one, because he is only stating the facts. There’s been too many Palin bashing slams here at PJM. This one isn’t one of them.
If you want to get rid of the dismal failure Obama, Sarah Palin should not be your candidate of choice. She’s an asset to the cause, I like her, her philosophy and message are correct, but she may not be electable as President. We risk losing a very winnable election with Palin as candidate. Let Palin carry the message, because she is an incredibly effective marketer. But there are at least ten candidates comparable in opinion that are far more electable.
Let’s not get so hung up with our defense of the outrageous charges and criticisms of Palin, that we can’t admit there are candidates with far better chances of winning.
However Ron, you’re a little too soft in your criticism of Dionne. Let’s call Dionne what he really is – a phony insider and hypocrite, a shallow, leftist hack and easily swayed in his political correctness. Dionne believes himself a whole lot smarter than the rest of us, when he is nothing but a progressive rube with a pen.
Tex Taylor, you are salivating yourself over your own defeatism.
After having blababled about your alleged love for Sarah Palin, you reject the very fundamental right of her as an US citizen; the right to get ellected as an US President.
So you acknowledge her enormous contribution to the Conservative course and yet deny her the fruits of her own work?
It doesn’t show that you are in a posession of some kind of an independent mind. It shows that you have been thoroughly brainwashed by the LFTOID propaganda.
This is the very essence and a strategic target of the American Communo-Fascists; to sow the seeds of doubts in Palin’s leadership quality in the minds of the voulnerable ignoramusses like yourself.
What about taking the opposite stand?
What about making a strategic decision to fight for her tooth and nail and help her win over the “KENIAN” in the case she wins the GOP’s nomination, she certainly deserves.
Looks like it took a very short time for you to mellow and start doubting in Palin’s ability.
It took almost best fourty years of my life under the boot and whip of COMMUNISM before I could call myself a free man.
Yet, I’ve NEVER doubtet in the rationale of my dreams or strategic targets that derived from those dreams.
Bogdan,
I think I made it pretty clear I like Sarah Palin. She’s great. She’s just not electable. Being pragmatic is part of being an independent mind.
Dionne is using the usual liberal tactic of defining the playing field so only his people could possibly compete. I am hoping that conservatives with the help of the internet will not let the left define the issues. That is the one and only reason they had both houses of congress and the presidency.
As for Sarah Palin I don’t let you define the argument either. She is still the best candidate for the job in the country. Whether that will be the case in two years I don’t know but to let the media control the idea of who is acceptable is juvenile after what we have seen in the last 10 years.
Isn’t it puzzling that leftist, activist judges so FREQUENTLY have to OVERRULE the will of the citizens of our “center-left” nation!!!
The great American philosopher Rush Limbaugh argues convincingly that Democrats often have to hide their left-wing inclinations to get elected. They have to do everything possible to appear moderate and centrist. George Lakoff and the late Saul Alinsky emphasize the importance of “framing the debate” in the favor of the leftist. E.J.Dionne, Jr. plays this card to the hilt. The man is also always dressed in a suit and tie. You will never see him attired like a hippie from the the 1960s.
Exactly right, David Thomson. A few years ago, linguist George Lakoff argued that the key to Democratic political victory was through improved doubletalk, like calling plaintiffs’ lawyers “public protection attorneys.” Aside from the basic dishonesty of calling things what they aren’t, it’s politically futile. When a liberal politician calls himself “progressive”, only liberals accept that description. Everyone else knows that a progressive is simply a liberal who is afraid to call himself a liberal. Calling a racial quota a “goal” or a “timetable” (what is this, a railroad?) doesn’t change the fact that it’s a racial quota. Trying to start a political movement and calling it “No Labels”, when it consists almost entirely of Democrats, merely teaches the public that “No Labels” means Democrats who are afraid to call themselves Democrats.
No one writing for the wingnut PJM would know where the center is.
Please examine the results of the voting on Nov 2, 2010.
Great comment Joseph. Could you please explain which of the conservative values do you consider to be of “wingnut” caliber?
…and therein lies the problem. Each successive generation of “conservatives” accepts the expansion of the state of the previous generation of “liberals”. The end result is that they both sell us down the river, only at a different rate.
Conservatives need to really start championing the private sector and free market alternatives to the agenda of the left, otherwise we’re just as screwed as if the left were in charge.
Didn’t the election of 2010 teach you anything, Ron?
Isn’t anyone bothered by how Newt Gingrich talks about his awesomeness because he managed to grow government at a smaller rate than his democratic contemporaries? Sorry, Newt, this is nothing to be proud of for a so-called conservative. If you want to impress me, then start actually shrinking government.
We can handle liberal expansion of government when it is checked by conservative shrinking of government. When the choices are between “grow some” and “grow a lot”, they aren’t really choices at all, they both take us to the same poor house.
What Richard said.
“…and therein lies the problem. Each successive generation of “conservatives” accepts the expansion of the state of the previous generation of “liberals”. The end result is that they both sell us down the river, only at a different rate.”
Exactly, Richard. And every time the libs get back in power they become drunk with it and more and more extreme and unamerican. When the Repubs are voted in they seem to forget how far the libruls have moved the country leftward. The Repubs then take the status quo as an unchangeable reality. This time it must be different.
I am awaiting a decisive attack on and destruction of all the crazy, unconstitutional works of the Reid/Pelosi Congress, the Obama power grabs, and the government’s obvious disdain for the people of the U.S. This broad and energetic offensive must begin in January. Get the bills passed and let Obama veto and defend his vetoes. He and his gaggle of Libs must be kept busy, very busy, so the damage they could do until 2012 can be minimized.
Don’t hold your breath.
Mr. Radosh:
Dionne has not been a centrist for as long as I’ve know of him, which if 15+ years.
I think he just seemed centrist to you back in the day because you were farther to the left back then.
I wasn’t.
C’mon
Which of these three persons does not belong
a) R. Brooks
b) D. Frum
c) EJ Dionne
Answer: none, they all belong. Anyone regularly reading political opinion would get this, much less an author.
The difference between the “quasi moderate” Dionne and rabid leftoids like, for example, Olberman is like between the “gentleman burglar” Arsen Lupin and the burglar who is using an extreme violence to break into your house. terrorise its inhabitants and steal your property.
Of course, there is a difference in their methods.
However, they both are burglars, criminals and both deserve a prison.
Whether it is Dionne or Olbermann, they both are ideologues and apologist of the same system; a “PARASITOCRACY” where the PARASITE can outvote a HUMAN OF A SMART AND HONEST WORK and using its, usually obtained with lies and tricks, majority, to steal the wealth created by the latter.
Whether the THIEF steals a hundred dollars or one dollar from you, it is still a theft.
Dionne is just that; a sligtly more refined aplogist and an ideologue of THEFT.
Couldn’t be simpler.
Slightly O/T.
I’d like to draw the attention of my American friends to the strange metamorphosis the once great Pajamas’ own Jenifer Rubin went through since she had begun working for that quasi “centrist” WashPo.
In the past, Rubin was one of the most articulate and compassionate defenders of Sarah Palin and, obviously, she has always benn a delight to read.
Since having been bought by WashPo, she morphed into one of her fierces critics and joined the inglorious club of other quasi conservative women collumnists like Noonan, Parker and a few other less known female Palin bashers.
What a terrible waste of a genuine talent!
What a terrible case of a moral corruption!
“No Labels”.
Sounds like that organization is going to take off big time (like the “Coffee Party”)!
Between the Progressive Left and Progressive Right there is the Progressive Center.
None of them are ‘moderates’.
EJ Dionne finds himself yearning for the Progressive Center-Left while Americans move away from Progressivism. He thinks he seeks where Americans are and is lost trying to understand why there aren’t more people there to agree with him.
Exactamundo! Being a ‘little bit progressive’ is like being a little bit pregnant.
Abort! Abort! Abort! (ideas not people) ahem…
So many great comments. The commenters make this site so good. Many of the articles? Not so much. Radosh has never yet written an article I have found stimulating and worthwhile.
Here’s the problem with those who claim to have been Leftists, but since have moved to the Right. “There are none so zealous as the recently converted.” If you have moved to the Right in all honesty, you do not become a “moderate” or “reasonable”. You become a fierce zealot.
Barring some life-changing event, Leftists who become such in their early years can never shake their patterns of thinking. There is a certain embracing of certain ideas and values, things which are completely antithetical to the Right. They become less radical, but still they support the Leftist agenda in general, no matter how the evidence stacks up against this discredited ideology.
You are either on the Left or the Right. A left-of-center person is a left-of-center person. The road is the same. The destination is the same. The only difference is the self-imposed speed limit.
The worst part is, most folks hold these values in the first place, because they were the popular views amongst their circle of acquaintances. They accepted them without thought. Go along to get along. Herd mentality. The desire to be popular is greater than the desire to do what’s right.
Btw, if you think there is no Far-Left anymore, then YOU are Far-Left, because you see nothing to the Left of you anymore.
I beg to differ darlin’…
Many articles on PJM bring out the best and the worst of us. We are all spankin’ human at the end of the day. Me and my cuss words and a bit of frothin’ at the mouth go I when I’m on a role. Difference is, I can own up to my britches being a bit too deep in the much. The problem with Lefties is that they can be up to their eyeballs in the muck and the mire and dribble out a lie to their dyin’ breath. Iffin’ that ain’t crazy, laddy, I sure as shootin’ do not what else could be as comparative a wild eyed story!;)
You are either on the Left or the Right. A left-of-center person is a left-of-center person. The road is the same. The destination is the same.
Yeah, yeah, if you’re not part of the solution you’re part of the problem. Cast in concrete.
I’d rather listen to folks who think, and weigh opposing concepts, with brains instead of concrete.
I do weigh them, and they are always found wanting. There is no Leftist policy which ever leads to good, because the road to Hell is paved with good intentions. When I weigh a concept, I simply look ahead to whither the road goes. With Leftism, I always see Hell at the end of the road.
Argumentum ad absurdum – Take the other fellow’s argument and follow it to its extreme, logical, absurd conclusion to demonstrate the fallacy of his argument.
One need only do the same with policies to sort good from bad.
I am not a knee-jerk wingnut. I will always consider an argument, because I could be wrong, and there may be something to it, at least in pointing out my own illogic or some flaw I should correct. Even if his conclusions are wrong, some of the other fellow’s facts may be right.
Well, here is a related observation. It is almost never difficult to interpret what a conservative really means, but it is almost always nearly impossible to figure out what a leftist really means.
Leftists are trained in obfuscation. If they couldn’t disguise the truth, they would be a 10% party, because Americans don’t belive that crap. So they can be writing about the most extreme position conceivable, but they will throw in a few observations that only make sense from the other side of the fence. They can’t help it. They assume you are stupid and that if they say one thing you agree with then you will agree with every word, no matter how ridiculous it is. Obama, for example, is continually claiming to be pro-business. What’s with that! Of course he isn’t pro-business, he is as virulently anti-business as it is possible to be….but by saying it, in his overwhelming narcissism, he assumes the rubes will be totally convinced.
So Radosh finds it difficult to write in a forthright manner. His heart is in the right place, but everything thing else is still in the land of obfuscation. He can’t resist fuzzing an issue because he almost genetically wants to be able to agree with everybody at the same time.
“No one writing for the wingnut PJM would know where the center is.”
I know where it is. It’s where you are when a “liberal” Democrat wants to enslave you 100%, and you stupidly compromise to 50%.
Grab a tootsie pop and lick until you get to the chocolate chewy center, if you are patient that can take a while and you will lick and suck until the candy shell gives way to your teeth and tongue, but, if you’re impatient, you bite the hard candy shell and eat the chewy chocolate center too soon and then you just want another candy and you end up a big fatso with tooth decay..
Liberals believe that the perfect ‘utopia’ is ‘equality’ like when Jim Jones enslaved his Jesus believin’ socialists and convinced ‘em to drink the frickin’ koolaid.
When does it end? When do we wake up out of our stupor? When do we stop engaging folks who have no right to even speak to us at all? When do WE own the dialogue?
WHEN?
Re #21 Bogdan from Australia –
Well…yes and no. I’ve been an avid reader of Jennifer Rubin for the past 2 1/2 years at
Commentary’s website (i.e., long before their disallowing comments; even sneaked in a few snarks myself at JEN for
her occasional snarks at Sarah in 2008-9) and her views on Gov. Palin haven’t changed at
the WashPo. But JEN is just NOT Palin-averse as Noonan and Parker are !(BTW, nomenclature-wise, Noonan and Parker are
columnists, whereas JEN is a blogger extraordinaire, not a ‘columnist.’ IMHO)
So, you’re exactly right, except for your last three sentences — Ms. Rubin’s integrity is intact.
Jennifer will keep Sarah honest, and we’ll keep Jennifer honest, deal?
“Nomenclature-wise” — been a fan of Arthur Freed musicals lately. “It’s Always Fair Weather” — love it, movie-wise!
‘Dionne is upset that Barack Obama “is attacked simultaneously as an ‘extreme liberal liar’ and a ‘Nazi,”’
Well, if the Democrats hadn’t done things like use the KKK the way the Nazis used the SA to terrorize and murder people, members of the Democrat Party wouldn’t have to worry about being compared to the Nazis.
If your organization acts like Nazis, then you’re probably going to get compared to Nazis.
So, here’s a little tip for you liberals, when you hold power don’t do stuff like round up thousands of innocent American citizens and toss them into concentration camps, ’cause if you do we’re going to compare you to Nazis…and we’ll be right to do so.
Of course, it’s too late now, you’ve been behaving like fascists for the last 150 years (party of slavery and all that), and we’re pretty much never going to let you forget it.
Oh no, the Republicans are the party of slavery. Just ask the Democrats, they’ll tell you .
Of course conservatives wish to dismantle the welfare state but recognize that is the long game and would not even be a morally acceptable choice at the present.
I am an unabashed Palin backer. Have read both of her books. There is nothing extreme about her and she is not an airhead. I am not sure she could win but things aren’t looking that good for Obama either.
What can he run on? His agenda is completely dead. He is going to be forced to some extent to compromise with the Republicans on the budget. The defeat of the omnibus was huge because otherwise the confrontation might have been delayed until next Fall just when the presidential campaign is getting underway. He will look weak and powerless.
Heck all the Republican candidate has to do is to promise what Obama promised but failed to do “a line by line review of the budget and cut what doesn’t work”. Winner.
Palin is a believer in frugal government. Read her books, you will see. I bet Mr. Radosh hasn’t bothered…too busy looking down his nose like most of the elites.
There’s no Trot like an old neo-Trot!
Happy days.
It was tough being a liberal in the ’80′s & ’90′s, You had to pretend you were normal, to restrain the utter rage, the lust to control and hurt real Normal People, through the federal government naturally, the agency of all that is good and is Progress.
2008 changed that, and bitter little rodents like Dionne could come out of the closet,[ in Dionne's case a possible double meaning].
Free at last, drop the masquerade, spit out the venom. Except it all blew up in their ignorant, fanatical faces.
E.J., you may have to assault people yourself rather then have the feds do it for you.
Leftists are outlaws. They refuse to accept, or even acknowledge, the rules that American society has always been defined and maintained by. Of course, the ultimate goal of every Leftist is the destruction of that society. Now, once upon a masculine time not that long ago, a court could designate someone as ‘outlaw’. This was the reason outlaws could be “Wanted — Dead or Alive”. As outlaws, they had no legal rights whatsoever. You could kill them, and, unless you were fined for littering, no problems. So, my bottom line with conservatives’ polemics contra Leftists is always the same: great, now what are you gonna do about it? The response is usually to write another, even snarkier, column. Sorry, that’s not gonna do the job.
Nov. 2, 2010 is what we DID about it. Nov. 2012 is what we are going to continue to do about it.
And in the mean time, in-between time, the solvent states
will use the individual mandate as a test case for refusing
to obey unconstitutional laws.
Dionne is another one who is so in love with Obama that he is unable to be an honest journalist.Every one of his articles are the same,get the Republicians,get the conservatives.Dionnes pet hatred is to destroy Sarah Palin every chance he can.I believe Dionne really works for the Democratic party as one of their talking points man on the Washington Post.Dionne is a disgrace.
Dionne is a centerist. He resides in the center of the left-wing peat bog with the likes of Michael Moore, Olbermann, Ezra Klein and Pete Bienart. His idea of a moderate republican is Meghan McCain. He believes the Daily Kos is balanced reading and that Media Matters should oversee all television and radio licensing. His idea of a good president is Fidel Castro and he has autographed pictures of Hugo Chavez hanging in every room of his home. He wants to enforce a federal cap & trade with Al Gore as the carbon fee czar and points to the current winter in europe as proof of global warming.
Dionne thinks that the stimulus worked great and we should double up on another asap and that everybody is excited to partake in Obamacare.
This being said – to Obama and Soros, Dionne is indeed a centerist.
Having read Dionne’s columns, many times over many years, I have never come to the conclusion that he is anything BUT a leftist.
Yea, E.J. has articles on a Communist, oops, I mean Progressive Socialist website called Truthdig all the time. It smalls bad.
Can someone please tell me the origin of the term “Snark” ? Thank you very much! (Wikipedia too slow on my dial-up)
“Indeed, one prominent conservative told me that he would not and could not vote for her if she became the nominee, even if it meant Obama might win.”
That “prominent conservative” is, in fact, an establishment hack more interested in perpetuating the insider game and comfortable levels of corruption than in advancing liberty.
We deserve to know who he is.
(But, then, there’s a curious absence of NAMES attached to the myriad you describe as opposed to Palin.)
What it all boils down to is the choice between two names: statist and anti-statist. All other claims to “liberal” or “conservative” are misleading.
Labels smables. These Statists seem to love to cut finely nuanced differences between their woosey pursuit of Big Government statism. Call them all what they really are Communists, flat out totalitarians. When the shooting starts make sure that one of them isn’t behind you.