A man bearing a sidearm appears outside President Obama’s Aug. 11 town hall meeting in Portsmouth, N.H., under a sign proclaiming, “It is time to water the tree of liberty.”
That phrase of course references a famous statement of Thomas Jefferson’s, from a 1787 letter: “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants.”
Earlier that same day, another man is arrested inside the school building in which the president will speak. Police found a loaded handgun in his parked car.
At an event held by Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in Arizona last week, police were called after one attendee dropped a gun.
Nobody has been hurt so far. We can all hope that nobody will be. But firearms and politics never mix well. They mix especially badly with a third ingredient: the increasingly angry tone of incitement being heard from right-of-center broadcasters.
The Nazi comparisons from Rush Limbaugh; broadcaster Mark Levin asserting that President Obama is “literally at war with the American people”; former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin claiming that the president was planning “death panels” to extirpate the aged and disabled; the charges that the president is a fascist, a socialist, a Marxist, an illegitimate Kenyan fraud, that he “harbors a deep resentment of America,” that he feels a “deep-seated hatred of white people,” that his government is preparing concentration camps, that it is operating snitch lines, that it is planning to wipe away American liberties”: All this hysterical and provocative talk invites, incites, and prepares a prefabricated justification for violence.
And indeed some conservative broadcasters are lovingly anticipating just such an outcome.
Here’s Fox News’ Glenn Beck clucking sympathetically that white males are being driven into murderous rage by “political correctness.”
Here again is Beck chuckling as he play-acts the poisoning of Nancy Pelosi.
Just yesterday, the radio host Sean Hannity openly contemplated violence—and primly tut-tutted that if it occurs, the president will have only himself to blame.
Hyperbolic accusation and fantasy murder may well serve a talk-radio industry facing a collapse in advertising revenues—down 30–40 percent over the past two years, reports FrumForum.com’s Tim Mak.
As revenues dwindle, hosts feel compelled to intensify the talk-radio experience, hoping to win larger audience share with more extreme talk. It’s like the early days of the pornography industry: At first a naked woman is thrilling enough, but soon a jaded audience is demanding more and more, wilder and wilder.
For the radio hosts, it’s all mostly a cynical marketing exercise. But the audience? Not all of them know better.
In April, the Department of Homeland Security released a report warning of the danger of right-wing political violence in the United States, and mainstream conservatives erupted in offense.
National Review’s Jonah Goldberg wrote: My real objection to this report is that its source material amounts to “everybody knows.” Everybody knows the right is full of whack-jobs, hatemongers, and killers, and if we don’t remain vigilant, bad things will happen.
Michelle Malkin asked in her syndicated column: What and who exactly are President Obama’s Homeland Security officials afraid of these days? If you are a member of an active conservative group that opposes abortion, favors strict immigration enforcement, lobbies to protect Second Amendment rights, protests big government, advocates federalism or represents veterans who believe in any of the above, the answer is: You.
Newt Gingrich tweeted: “The person who drafted the outrageous homeland security memo smearing veterans and conservatives should be fired.”
I don’t think the former speaker could tweet such a thing today in good conscience. The person who drafted that homeland security memo has gained very good reason to be worried. The guns are coming out. The risks are real.
It’s not enough for conservatives to repudiate violence, as some are belatedly beginning to do. We have to tone down the militant and accusatory rhetoric. If Barack Obama really were a fascist, really were a Nazi, really did plan death panels to kill the old and infirm, really did contemplate overthrowing the American constitutional republic—if he were those things, somebody should shoot him.
But he is not. He is an ambitious, liberal president who is spending too much money and emitting too much debt. His health-care ideas are too over-reaching and his climate plans are too interventionist. The president can be met and bested on the field of reason—but only by people who are themselves reasonable.
Originally published in The Week.
Read David Frum’s follow-up post here.
88 responses so far
1 txanne // Aug 13, 2009 at 2:19 pm
“It’s not enough for conservatives to repudiate violence, as some are belatedly beginning to do. We have to tone down the militant and accusatory rhetoric. If Barack Obama really were a fascist, really were a Nazi, really did plan death panels to kill the old and infirm, really did contemplate overthrowing the American constitutional republic—if he were those things, somebody should shoot him.”
I was with you until that line. Just because you know he is not these things, there are many who believe he is; so have you just given your permission?
2 Geoff C // Aug 13, 2009 at 2:25 pm
I couldn’t agree with you more David.
However, I’m compelled to make a comparison (that has been done dozens of times) to the ‘Impeach Bush/War Criminal Bush’ crew that did their thing for damn near 6 years. Now the idea of impeaching Bush or him being tried in some international court was ridiculous. But it dogged him for almost his entire presidency. I can’t help but be concerned that this kind of treatment is going to go on for years and years as well, making conservatives look like foolish, nut jobs.
3 balconesfault // Aug 13, 2009 at 2:29 pm
Newt Gingrich tweeted: “The person who drafted the outrageous homeland security memo smearing veterans and conservatives should be fired.”
I don’t think the former speaker could tweet such a thing today in good conscience.
Yet I have no doubt that he would tweet it again in a second … for I don’t think he was tweeting in good conscience to begin with.
4 txanne // Aug 13, 2009 at 2:44 pm
What the hell happened to Alex K’s post on the townhalls? It went poof.
5 franco 2 // Aug 13, 2009 at 3:31 pm
This is just absurd. Hundreds of town hall meetings with tens of thousands of people including moles like the communist la Rouche crazies. A couple of people had guns, woop de do! Still no violence -except for SEIU thugs for the Democrats. I clicked on the Beck link, he made a PASSING reference to “poison” and immediately let us know he was joking. This is the best you got?
Hey Frum have you EVER watched Kieth Obermann? Ever???? ( and I say this not that Obermann should be censored, but that there is a double standard here)
There is something psychologically wrong with David Frum. He is a smart man, yet he insists on loading up his posts with every remote instance that can possibly count towards his point. Never mind that each complaint is more of a stretch than the next, damning his own point by providing feeble examples. This reveals more about Frum’s desperation and intellectual dishonesty on this topic.
Obama and Pelosi and Reid are responsible for the strong and thus far non-violent reactions. They have incited the anger – not Beck not Limbaugh. Beck and Limbaugh are just reporting on the bill and what members of Congress are saying.
And it was Nancy Pelosi who opened up the “nazi” debate by charging the town hall attendees were carrying “swastikas”, and then calling them UnAmerican.
There is a monumental double-standard in the media and the media suck-ups like Frum when it comes to protests and strong political language. What did Frum and his media friends have to say about the real violence that occurs in leftist demonstrations and anti-war rallies on a regular basis? The signs and pictures there? Anything? Nope.
6 balconesfault // Aug 13, 2009 at 3:49 pm
Franco: And it was Nancy Pelosi who opened up the “nazi” debate by charging the town hall attendees were carrying “swastikas”, and then calling them UnAmerican.
So it wasn’t people like this loony who started the debate, eh Franco?
http://worsethanhitler.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/slide_1398_20069_large.jpg
or this one?
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_XimOh2AYlL8/SlKip7mmRVI/AAAAAAAAEAQ/rvfmT2jCshI/s320/HeilBarry.gif
But instead, it’s Nancy for pointing out that these kind of attacks on our President are un-American?
Oh, for the days when congressmen would simply call people un-American for saying “we’re ashamed that the President of the United States is from Texas”, eh Franco?
7 ottovbvs // Aug 13, 2009 at 3:58 pm
franco-2 // Aug 13, 2009 at 3:31 pm
” And it was Nancy Pelosi who opened up the “nazi” debate by charging the town hall attendees were carrying “swastikas”, and then calling them UnAmerican.”
…….So what were those pictures we all saw showing people carrying Swastika signs and Obama with the Hitler moustache……..mirages?…….And all Pelosi said was it was un American to disrupt meetings as indeed it is…….I don’t seem to remember your same concern when Palin said real Americans didn’t live in urban areas…..are you a real American btw using this definition.
“A couple of people had guns, woop de do!”
……Frum of course is quite right…..it’s only a matter of time before one of these right wing nuts opens fire at one of these events(there’s some incident going on in West LA as we speak)…..after all there have been three right wing political shootings so far this year(two involving several homicides) ….this doesn’t concern Franco because basically unlike David who he never stops ranting against (why bother coming here Franco?) he has no sense of proportion or responsibility
8 franco 2 // Aug 13, 2009 at 4:10 pm
I just watched Frum interviewed on CNN with Begala and CeCe Connoly from the Wash Past I mean Post. Three Democrats and the agreeable Republican. What a debate! And guess what? They were talking about Limbaugh bemoaning the fact that Limbaugh is the center of attention. These talking heads are lamenting that “we” should be talking about the bill itself BUT THEY NEVER DO!!! They could in theory but that won’t happen because it isn’t in any of their interests. They want to talk about Hitler references ad infinitum.
CNN and the Washington Past want an over-simplified debate about Rush Limbaugh and nazi references. That is exactly what they want, and they call up Frum to help them. Frum wants it to be about Limbaugh because he has his own axe to grind and apparently he can’t get on TV unless he will attack talk radio or other conservatives. Begala welcomes this angle because he doesn’t have to defend the Democratic plan. Everyone’s happy see? And yet they PRETEND that they are saddened by the debate. It is hilarious!
And Frum cites declining ad revenues for radio as though this is happening to radio exclusively, on a network that consistently comes in way behind Fox and barely ahead of State-run MSNBC! Ad rates on the medium Frum is seen on is declining too, no mention of that. And by the way what are the ad revenues here at NM? Anything at all?
9 Spartacus // Aug 13, 2009 at 4:17 pm
Thank you, Frum. The heated rhetoric is going way too far.
10 ottovbvs // Aug 13, 2009 at 4:31 pm
franco-2 // Aug 13, 2009 at 4:10 pm
“And by the way what are the ad revenues here at NM? Anything at all?”
……..Why bother coming here Franco since you clearly loath Frum and all he stands for? Just interested.
11 Cforchange // Aug 13, 2009 at 4:37 pm
Even if you don’t like the possibility of healthcare reform, how couldn’t you view the barage of ranting seniors displayed on every media front and not be concerned about the party image. It is just cementing the demographic of the party to be old, white, angry and unwilling to confront the problems of our country. Wasn’t that why Bush was dismissed by the public years before the end of his term?
The political entertainers have been and continue to be reckless and negligent. I suppose they have insurance to protect them financially from their actions. But I would imagine there are lawsuits on the horizon.
We really do live in a shameless world and it will take the GOP a very long time to shake the imcompetance, the hypocrisy and mean spiritedness. If radio revenues have droppped so significantly one can only hope that the lights will dim and the mic’s will be powered down because this is not an flattering situation.
12 franco 2 // Aug 13, 2009 at 4:58 pm
I disagree with Frum on many issues and I also disagree with otto on many (other) issues. Interesting that otto pretends to be a lapsed Republican dissatisfied with the party, and yet has never once presented a Republican argument for anything even though his comments are abundant all over NM.
And also interesting that otto feels the need to comment on every other comment here. He is particularly interested in promoting generally leftist memes – the ones we are all too familiar with.
13 DFL // Aug 13, 2009 at 5:28 pm
Conservatives should discourage violence and channel the anger of the conservative yeomanry in contructive ways. A majority of Americans may turn against Obama and his program but certainly a majority will not support buffoons yelling and screaming at senators and congressmen. Question the policies of Obama and the Democratic Party, explain what is wrong with them, and then explain your own alternatives. Unfortunately, the Republican Party seems barren of leadership or ideas but a collapsed presidency like George W. Bush’s will do that to a party.
As for otto, I would guess that he is not an ex-Republican but is E.J. Dionne, Chris Matthews or Paul Begala infiltrating enemy lines.
14 sinz54 // Aug 13, 2009 at 5:30 pm
Cforchange: Both the Gallup and Rasmussen polls fail to find any evidence that angry protesters are turning off the American public. Quite the contrary, more Americans sympathize with the protesters than not.
As I’ve said before: Hyperbole, even extremist rhetoric, has been part of the American Republic since its inception. It’s nothing to worry about. Comparing politicians to Hitler–has been going on since the 1930s. See for yourself:
http://tinyurl.com/om8bv3
Here’s a fashion designer, complaining that “Women’s Wear Daily” is “worse than Hitler”:
http://tinyurl.com/oy6zc6
The real ultra-right-wing extremists don’t bother to listen to Rush Limbaugh anyway. They have their own media outlets, particularly shortwave radio and the Internet. Would you also suggest that all websites must “tone down their rhetoric”? Good luck with that.
15 ottovbvs // Aug 13, 2009 at 5:48 pm
franco-2 // Aug 13, 2009 at 4:58 pm
“Interesting that otto pretends to be a lapsed Republican dissatisfied with the party, and yet has never once presented a Republican argument for anything ”
…….No pretense I’m a lapsed…..and I have presented numerous arguments for conservatism from applauding the capitalist system in it’s entirety and pointing out that nation building has nothing to do with conservatism…..in fact reforming the healthcare system is fundamental to preserving the health of much of American industry…..if it isn’t moved out of its present trajectory it’s going to collapse under it’s own weight and the “conservatives” here are not going to like what comes after believe me.
16 ottovbvs // Aug 13, 2009 at 5:56 pm
sinz54 // Aug 13, 2009 at 5:30 pm
” Quite the contrary, more Americans sympathize with the protesters than not.”
……..Actually it was 34% in the Gallup poll and this would be just about the size of the Republican base…..any connection I wonder……the rest are either turned off or it has no effect one way or the other……but as I’ve said before you guys go knock yourselves out……scream and rant away…..I don’t remember Dale Carnegie saying this was the way to win friends and influence people but you may be right….so go man go
17 ottovbvs // Aug 13, 2009 at 5:59 pm
12 franco-2 // Aug 13, 2009 at 4:58 pm
“And also interesting that otto feels the need to comment on every other comment here.’
……People like you and Baarking are my entertainment Franco…….and some of the other folks even when I don’t agree with them have interesting things to say
18 Chekote // Aug 13, 2009 at 6:06 pm
Apparently, polls indicate that the American public does not share Frum’s and others’ view of the TH protesters. There is real frustration out there about all the spending and the direction the Dems are taking the country. I think Frum is making too much of the disruptions. His time would be better spent denouncing Pelosi’s rhetoric or pushing for conservative reforms.
19 Chekote // Aug 13, 2009 at 6:07 pm
and some of the other folks even when I don’t agree with them have interesting things to say
You like me! You really like me!
20 ottovbvs // Aug 13, 2009 at 6:19 pm
Chekote // Aug 13, 2009 at 6:07 pm
“You like me! You really like me!”
……I find you an interesting study……you’re clearly bright and from the nationalist wing of the GOP presumably because of Zionist sympathies……you’re very clear eyed about the malign influence of the christian fundamentalists and Palinites but curiously blind to the equally pernicious influence of neocon beliefs when you could argue (the Iraq/Afghanistan debacles) that they have actually done even more damage than say Schiavo…..interesting dichotomy
21 Chekote // Aug 13, 2009 at 6:37 pm
curiously blind to the equally pernicious influence of neocon beliefs when you could argue (the Iraq/Afghanistan debacles)
I am not blind to the fact that Iraq hurt the GOP more than any one issue in the last two election cycles. Afghanistan is a completely different matter. We were attacked from there (in a way) and even Obama has made it a priority to defeat the Taliban there. I am also well aware of the fact that the vast majority of Americans don’t share my view of foreign policy. However, I truly believe that spreading freedom and connecting countries to the global economy is the best policy for ensuring long term stability. Failed states create problems and pose dangers to the rest of the world. So do states controlled by crazy strong men. Of course, some pose more dangers than others and have to be dealt with. We just can’t retreat to our shores.
22 SFTor1 // Aug 13, 2009 at 6:39 pm
Franco says: “Obama and Pelosi and Reid are responsible for the strong and thus far non-violent reactions. They have incited the anger – not Beck not Limbaugh. Beck and Limbaugh are just reporting on the bill and what members of Congress are saying.”
This is probably the most irresponsible political comment I have ever seen. It defies imagination that a thinking adult can read David Frum’s article and express this contrarian drivel. “Thus far non-violent”—I suppose Franco expects violence, and will know exactly where to place the blame. How tragic.
People are showing up to raucous events where violence breaks out on a regular basis with guns. Not a problem? ARE YOU KIDDING ME?
They’re guns for crying out loud. One shot and someone is dead for showing up at a public event to make their voice heard. Not a problem? Please, tell me that people here are not that cavalier about the lives of fellow Americans, nor about their rights.
What kind of effect does this have on the debate? If you were a liberal or a moderate in favor of health care reform, would you go to such an event and speak up about it, in the knowledge that some of the more rabid opponents may be armed? This is not democracy. This is ochlocracy. This is mob rule.
Another thing that is going to make me throw up is the contention that this equates to MoveOn’ers calling for the impeachment of George W. Bush. They had their reasons (which you may disagree with), and demanded a Constitutional remedy. That is fair.
To bring out lethal weapons is an affront to civil debate. Let’s ride that tiger just a little longer, and we may all be very sorry.
23 Godwin’s Law Comes to the Town Halls - The Opinionator Blog - NYTimes.com // Aug 13, 2009 at 6:49 pm
[...] “The reckless right courts violence,” David Frum wrote today, invoking the protesters who have up armed at town halls. “We have to tone down the militant and accusatory rhetoric.” The Nazi comparisons from Rush Limbaugh; broadcaster Mark Levin asserting that President Obama is “literally at war with the American people”; former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin claiming that the president was planning “death panels” to extirpate the aged and disabled; the charges that the president is a fascist, a socialist, a Marxist, an illegitimate Kenyan fraud, that he “harbors a deep resentment of America,” that he feels a “deep-seated hatred of white people,” that his government is preparing concentration camps, that it is operating snitch lines, that it is planning to wipe away American liberties”: All this hysterical and provocative talk invites, incites, and prepares a prefabricated justification for violence. [...]
24 Godwin’s Law Comes to the Town Halls - The Opinionator Blog - NYTimes.com // Aug 13, 2009 at 6:49 pm
[...] “The reckless right courts violence,” David Frum wrote today, invoking the protesters who have up armed at town halls. “We have to tone down the militant and accusatory rhetoric.” The Nazi comparisons from Rush Limbaugh; broadcaster Mark Levin asserting that President Obama is “literally at war with the American people”; former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin claiming that the president was planning “death panels” to extirpate the aged and disabled; the charges that the president is a fascist, a socialist, a Marxist, an illegitimate Kenyan fraud, that he “harbors a deep resentment of America,” that he feels a “deep-seated hatred of white people,” that his government is preparing concentration camps, that it is operating snitch lines, that it is planning to wipe away American liberties”: All this hysterical and provocative talk invites, incites, and prepares a prefabricated justification for violence. [...]
25 Chekote // Aug 13, 2009 at 6:49 pm
sftor1
Calm down! Did it ever occur to you that the media is overplaying the screaming aspect to the THs? Also, why are some many here surprised by the fact that you have a few crazies. You must not be involved in grassroots politics very much. The nutty element is always there. For a while, it was the North American Union conspirancy. Then the 9/11 was an inside job conspiracy. You can always count of someone trying to abolish the Fed to show up at political meetings.
Where is the outrage regarding people on the Left attributing to racism any criticism of Obama’s policies? We all know how explosive the issue of race is in our country. What they are doing is very dangerous. More dangerous of grandpa yelling at congressmen.
Finally, Frum needs to drop his obsession with talk radio. If he doesn’t like it. Don’t listen to it. I stopped watching Beck after he started crying on command. I would encourage Mr. Frum to do the same.
26 balconesfault // Aug 13, 2009 at 6:53 pm
If you want polling – from the Gallup poll:
“Generally speaking, do you consider each of the following actions at town hall meetings to be an example of democracy in action or an example of abuse of democracy? How about [see below]?” Options rotated
“Individuals making angry attacks against a health care bill and what it might do”
Democracy In Action 51
Abuse of Democracy 41
Unsure 8
“Booing when members of Congress make statements that the opponents disagree with”
Democracy In Action 44
Abuse of Democracy 47
Unsure 9
“Shouting down supporters when they speak in favor of a health care bill”
Democracy In Action 33
Abuse of Democracy 59
Unsure 8
——————————————————————————-
In other words – the American public slightly supports angry attacks (which seems kind of silly – there should be overwhealming support for people to get angry).
There is a slight objection to booing congressmen (again, as long as it doesn’t continue too long for the congressman to be able to speak – like the chanting on the infamous Lloyd Dogget video – that’s rude, but not abusive, imo)
We’re back to the 33% number when it comes down to shouting down healthcare supporters, while the vast majority of Americans consider this an abuse of democracy.
************
What the Gallup poll seems to indicate is that there are about 1/3 of the American public who are dead set against any healthcare reform at the moment, and will support any tactic to fight it. On the other hand, it looks like about 41% of Americans are locked in on wanting some significant reform … to the extent that they (stupidly, imo) would say that just voicing an angry opinion against it is undemocratic.
That leaves about 26% floating around in the middle – and from all appearances, most of those 26% are seriously turned off by any anti-reform demonstration that silences supporters.
27 franco 2 // Aug 13, 2009 at 7:05 pm
sftor1
Too funny, ‘”the most irresponsible political statement ever seen”? Ha HAHAHA…
28 ottovbvs // Aug 13, 2009 at 7:06 pm
Chekote // Aug 13, 2009 at 6:37 pm
“not blind to the fact that Iraq hurt the GOP more than any one issue in the last two election cycles. Afghanistan is a completely different matter”
……Not really….I completely endorsed the invasion of Afghanistan to remove the Taliban…..the problem was that whatever small window we had to turn this around by the injection of manpower and bucks was squandered because of the desperate effort in Iraq…..If we’d sent 210,000 troops (Afghan+Iraq max)and spent roughly 800 billion in Afghanistan from the get go do you think we’d be in a relatively better position than we are today?….Of course we would……it’s called Strategery….and Bush and Cheney weren’t very good at it…….basic military principle…..concentration of force at the decisive point….that was always Afghanistan and never Iraq…..now we’re faced with the need to make an investment of time (the new Brit CODS says 40 years), men (probably 250,000+) and money ($3 trillion+) to pacify a piece of mountainous geography …….the American public are never going to sign off on this……Reality Chek my son
29 ottovbvs // Aug 13, 2009 at 7:08 pm
“What the Gallup poll seems to indicate is that there are about 1/3 of the American public who are dead set against any healthcare reform at the moment,”
……aka the Republican base
30 Fras // Aug 13, 2009 at 7:16 pm
Mr. Frum, I began reading your posts and website specifically because it had different viewpoints on conservatism. I believe the Republican party should welcome all with differing and even opposing views. However, the underlying current of the majority of your posts seem to be a personal feud with the more conservative wing of our party. Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin and Sarah Palin have strong views and beliefs and they have a base that identifies with those views and beliefs. The party needs that base along with moderates like yourself and independents. Stop antagonizing these people. Instead of fighting them, why not try to find ways to unite with them. I’m sure you have beliefs that are closer to their views that those of the progressives. Our party needs to unite now more than ever. Your constant berating of these guys does not help. Restoring the GOP to its rightful place will not be achieved with infighting. Let’s face it you can’t chase them from the party no more than they can chase you out (I hope). Don’t let the left use as a pawn in discrediting the GOP. I believe you are a smart man and you can use this forum to help bring the party together. I hope to see future posts detailing how we can work together. The GOP cannot be a party of all moderates. It will take a coalition of moderates, independents and yes, red blooded conservatives to formulate our party’s resurgence.
31 SFTor1 // Aug 13, 2009 at 7:19 pm
Franco, until you agree that firearms and public debate do not mix, we have nothing to say to each other.
32 SFTor1 // Aug 13, 2009 at 7:22 pm
One last thing, Franco:
Please give me a brief summary of the incident that set in motion World War 1.
33 franco 2 // Aug 13, 2009 at 7:38 pm
sftor1
“Franco, until you agree that firearms and public debate do not mix, we have nothing to say to each other.”
You remind me of my first wife. After misinterpreting my statement, you give meaningless ultimatums and make silly demands.
34 Self Correction // Aug 13, 2009 at 7:40 pm
[...] who blogs under the pseudonym “Eugene Victor Debs” emailed me this afternoon about my piece on the reckless talk on the right. Your penultimate paragraph set the wrong tone to create any sort [...]
35 anniemargret // Aug 13, 2009 at 7:42 pm
chekote: “There is real frustration out there about all the spending and the direction the Dems are taking the country”
Ahem…Millions of people voted Obama in and Bush/Cheney out because of the all the spending and direction the Republicans were taking the country. The deficits were in well in place before Obama took office. The direction was appalling – the cost in lives and treasure in Iraq, in addition to the widespread disrespect throughout the world hurt us.
The essence of this healthcare debate is that liberals believe there IS a problem with rising healthcare costs, insurance companies run amuck, and a humane streak (bleeding hearts of course) for seeking parity for those without any insurance; while Republicans love the status quo…’what, me worry? I’m fine”.
And I don’t think true conservatism is about ’spreading freedom’ without invitation, unless you subscribe to illegal and immoral invasions and nation-building. Not very ‘conservative’ that.. This pre-eminent beneficient hegemony just creates fear and resentment. There are plenty of tyrants in the world. We picked Iraq because of its geo-political ramifications, not because Saddam was any imminent threat…heck, even GWB finally admitted that one!
sftor1: “To bring out lethal weapons is an affront to civil debate. Let’s ride that tiger just a little longer, and we may all be very sorry.” Bingo.
Of course violence will ensue. Guns and a lethal political atmosphere don’t mix. We have some right wing family members blasting the rest of us with email screeds, in CAPITAL LETTERS, of course to enforce their out of control rage against ‘government interference’ – (the usual Nazi/Marxist/Socialist/Klingon screed against Obama) but at the same time, these same family members are collecting social security and running to the doctor for every minor ailment and using Medicare to do it. And if they get Alzheimers, or dementia, they will most probably dip into Medicaid to buy down to obtain nursing home assistance.
Republicans feed on fear. They don’t appeal to the better nature of human beings but the lowest.
But Republicans will reap what they sow. It is called karmic justice. What you put out, you eventually will get back.
36 Chekote // Aug 13, 2009 at 7:44 pm
Please give me a brief summary of the incident that set in motion World War 1.
Now the townhall protesters will lead to WWIII. Too funny! As far as carrying guns, I live in Texas where we have a concealed weapons law. Lots of people carry guns. And guess what? We don’t seem to have any gun sprees going on here.
37 anniemargret // Aug 13, 2009 at 7:50 pm
It only takes One Lone Nut with a gun to go on a ’spree.’ You’ve probably been lucky so far. Rational people with registered guns is one thing….wild-eyed ranting enraged people with loaded guns in a crowd is quite another.
38 franco 2 // Aug 13, 2009 at 7:59 pm
“If we’d sent 210,000 troops (Afghan+Iraq max)and spent roughly 800 billion in Afghanistan from the get go do you think we’d be in a relatively better position than we are today?….Of course we would……it’s called Strategery….and Bush and Cheney weren’t very good at it…….basic military principle…..”
Um, NOT. This was the Soviet strategy that failed. More troops – more support people – longer supply lines and more targets for terrorists. Afghanistan has many regions that are uncontrollable because of the terrain. No amount of troop strength could subdue them, and really what for? Afghanistan is NOT a strategic country has no oil or wealth/infrastructure. Further that number and presence of US forces would CREATE more problems Afghans are even more insular and conservative than Iraqis.
AND let’s not forget, without invading Iraq and getting rid of Sadaam Hussein’s regime and invading Afghanistan instead, we would still have to leave troops in place to defend the Gulf States, and no doubt Sadaam would be funding/supplying insurgents in Afghanistan all the while. Nope, not too bright of you Otto.
39 franco 2 // Aug 13, 2009 at 8:06 pm
anniemargret “Ahem…Millions of people voted Obama in and Bush/Cheney out because of the all the spending and direction the Republicans were taking the country. The deficits were in well in place before Obama took office. The direction was appalling -”
Interesting though Obama kept the SAME direction and went warp speed, quadrupling spending making the “well in place deficits” look like chump change.
We are still in Iraq and going deeper into Afghanistan and Gitmo still exists. Instead of disliking us countries now laugh and mock us under Obama. They think he is a pushover – and he is! And they STILL hate us, and they probably always will. Grow up.
40 Chekote // Aug 13, 2009 at 8:12 pm
The deficits were in well in place before Obama took office.
True. And that is why so many Republicans voted for Obama or stayed home. However, since taking office Obama has increased deficit at a faster rate than Bush.
The direction was appalling – the cost in lives and treasure in Iraq,
May I respectfully remind you that many Democrats supported the Iraq War initially based on the intelligence supplied by George “Slam Dunk” Tenet who was also a Democrat? I realize that people forget as time passes on. But the invasion was supported by a majority of the American people at the time.
in addition to the widespread disrespect throughout the world hurt us.
How? And frankly I don’t see that Obama is getting any more cooperation from the world than Bush. Countries are just like people. The do what they believe to be in their best self-interest. You might get a mother Teresa here and there. But that is the exception. Not the rule. Who is in the White House is immaterial.
The essence of this healthcare debate is that liberals believe there IS a problem with rising healthcare costs, insurance companies run amuck, and a humane streak (bleeding hearts of course) for seeking parity for those without any insurance; while Republicans love the status quo…’what, me worry? I’m fine”.
I believe there is a problem and so do the majority of Republicans. Cost is a HUGE problem. But the Obama plan does not address costs. It set up all kinds of new bureaucracies that will be inefficient as all bureaucracies are. So where will the savings come from? He mentioned digitizing medical records. That’s fine. But that will not be enough to lower costs. So again. How will the Obama plan lower costs?
As far as the uninsured. About 38% can afford it but do not buy insurance. 23% million qualify for programs like Medicaid and SChip but don’t take advantage of the program. 4% million are in prison and are cared for. The rest are illegals. Again, how does the Obama plan address the problem of the uninsured?
Also Annie, liberals have not cornered the market on compassion any more than conservatives have cornered the market on virtue.
41 Chekote // Aug 13, 2009 at 8:20 pm
Maybe David Frum and the editors of New Majority should be focused on actually helping the Republican party and not providing amunition for every liberal.
I agree. If Frum wants to increase his influence he needs to promote ideas. It is okay to state that you disagree with a particular tactic or idea. But Frum seems fixated with the talk show hosts.
42 mickster99 // Aug 13, 2009 at 8:25 pm
John Dean’s book “Conservatives without Conscience” explains it all. If you want authoritarians you just need to look to the right. What is happening is right out of the authoritarian leader/follower mindset. Frum is correct and the economic analysis is so obvious. This was abundantly clear with the Tea Baggers. And before that really with Palin and Obama paling around with terrorists. Why be surprised?
43 anniemargret // Aug 13, 2009 at 8:38 pm
franco: “And they STILL hate us, and they probably always will. Grow up.” I am grown up. Grown up long enough to know the world never disrespected us as they do now.
Chekote: I think Tenet is and was a stooge. He wanted affirmation and he got it, but incurred the disrespect of millions. And yes, it is true many Americans initially supported the Iraq war. But be honest now…they supported the war because they were emotionally and mentally horrified by the events of 9/11, in a fighting mood (understandable) and because Bush and Cheney made the false case of linking Iraq to 9/11. They were sold a bill of goods about Iraq, or at least the real reasons why we went into Iraq, and made a 360 degree turnaround in the last election.
You mean you don’t think who is in the White House is material to world events? Of course who is in the White House is vitally important. As a conservative and Republican (I assume) surely you don’t believe Reagan was ineffectual on the world stage? He had presence and courage and intelligence. So does Obama. I’m sure Obama is listening to the generals on the ground about Afghanistan; correcting the initial mistake of not putting enough troops/presence there.
I have people in my family that are uninsured. You don’t really think if they can ‘afford’ to buy insurace and protect their families, they wouldn’t? We are talking about people making marginally, or below, what is considered a decent wage to support themselves and their families. The uninsured are working people…who are struggling to pay their bills, keep their homes, but getting laid off from jobs, and then finding it extremely difficult to find another job. I find this broad bush attack against the uninsured in this country appalling by the Republicans. It IS a compassion and ethical question. Do we as a nation do our utmost to make sure every American has adequate healthcare without going into bankruptcy, or having the insurance decide what they will pay or not pay, or don’t we?
I have to ask, and not just you, but all these bloggers here are dissing these unfortunate people….have you met any of them face to face, or they are statistics, unknown and lumped together and haughtily dismissed? I have met many, many of them and trust me…they are decent, hard-working Americans, through no fault of their own have come into terrible circumstances.
Read some of the horror stories of personal anecdotes that Andrew Sullivan’s blog are listing lately. These are real people with real problems. Sorry, call me a bleeding heart liberal, but I prefer to stay that way. Costs are a problem, of course, I am not being dismissive of it, but the ideology here exhibited is too dismissive for my taste.
And no, Chekote, I don’t think Every Conservative is not compassionate. I have met many wealthy corporatists in my lifetime who have given very humanely of their time and energy and monies to help their fellow Americans. But the overall emphasis of today’s Republican party smacks of arrogance and a too casual dismissal of what is going on in our country. Life, Liberty and The Pursuit of Happiness. You cannot obtain them if your life is casually dismissed as problematic because of money.
I believe good people can find the way…on both sides if they want to. But do they want to? Or making br0wnie points for partisans are more important? (I am not directing this to you personally, as you seem to be a rational person with character). I believe there is an answer, and I hope to God we find one.
44 NH // Aug 13, 2009 at 9:04 pm
Aw come on Dave, don’t be a liberal WUSS. This man was NO different than many others who normally carry up here in NH, and women too! He likely wasn’t the only one with a gun.
He is part of the responsible society that has the right to defend themselves. I mean when you got so many thugs nearby, who could blame him?
Dave, do you think because so many people are hurt in car crashes we should take away your right to drive?
It is a mountain out of a molehill and the most overly cliched subject on earth.
Please, spare us the whining about this, it’s very old. And it doesn’t cut it with us NHerites.
45 NH // Aug 13, 2009 at 9:07 pm
Oh by the way, speaking of Nazis, have you ever read the racist, bigoted, scary supremacist rantings of the three who advise Obama now?
Holdren, Emanuel (E not R) and Sunstein?
Make your hair stand on end and these are people who should KNOW BETTER because they likely had ancestors KILLED by Nazis.
Reams of writing that have people scared for what they have planned for us.
Yes I will use the word NAZI because that is what they did, the same things being proposed by these three utopian elitist thugs.
46 dmalone1 // Aug 13, 2009 at 9:11 pm
I for one, having grown up in the Boston area, a short bus ride away from Harvard Square, have never taken seriously the constant refrain from the left, which I’ve heard all my life—from teachers, neighbors, and friends, that the political right in this country is violent, dangerous, and conspiratorial—a la Oliver Stone’s “JFK’. When I was growing up, “scary” was the adjective most often used to describe conservative politicians such as Ronald Reagan and Jesse Helms or Christian television personalities such as Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell. While I personally had little in common with any of the above, I always took such critiques to be a gross exaggeration, pure cliche, an example of left wing paranoia, not to mention condescention and snobbery towards my neighbors in the southern states. Such atittudes often made me laugh actually, because I knew they were so untrue. And in my mind, liberals, in making these assertions, were guilty of the same egregious stereotyping of “the other”that they’d so often claimed to deplore.
Well now, I think like Mr. Frum, I’m starting to feel a little differently. The angry, and extremist rhetoric from talk radio and cable news personalities, the domestic terrorism wing of the anti-abortion movement, and now the antics at these health care town meetings are bringing the crude stereotype of the American conservative that I described above to fruition before my very eyes. I’m now seeing, for the very first time, the lifelong critique by the left of my party in all it’s ugliness: “the angry white male”, the anti-intellectualism, the mindless jingoism, and the potential for violence in fervent Christianity.
Of course, I’m aware that the best and the worst tend to define a particular group of people, even members of a political party, and that perception can be quite unfair. But then I’m also aware of the popular saying that “in politics, perception is reality”.
47 SFTor1 // Aug 13, 2009 at 9:11 pm
Chekote says: “Now the townhall protesters will lead to WWIII.”
Just a reminder that a gun and a couple of bullets are not trivial items. But, please, do continue the highest murder rates in the civilized world.
ireign, did you see any of those MoveOn’ers with guns at public meetings during those eight years under Bush?
ireign, when guns are brought into combustible situations it will only be a matter of time before someone fires one. I know it’s no big deal, so it won’t be too much to ask for you to get the victim all better on your private health care plan.
48 SFTor1 // Aug 13, 2009 at 9:32 pm
Is it just me, or is there a complete confusion here about the idea of self-protection?
Several posters seem to think that bringing a gun to a public event can be justified for purposes of self-defense. I must assume the scenario would be that somebody behaves in a threatening manner, out comes the gun, and you send a few slugs his way to change his mind. Or are you considering some sort of situation where someone else has a gun, you draw yours, and you have a little shoot-out?
Is anyone here seriously suggesting that it would be OK for someone who feels or is threatened to start firing a gun in a crowded public venue? Wouldn’t any sane gun owner leave his weapon at home when going into a place like that, considering the potential consequences, all of them bad?
Is this Waziristan or the United States?
49 Chekote // Aug 13, 2009 at 9:34 pm
You’ve probably been lucky so far.
No luck. You never know who has a gun so it tends to calm everybody down.
50 SFTor1 // Aug 13, 2009 at 9:54 pm
ireign: no, my comment does not take the cake for stupidity. Your inability to recognize a bad situation about to get worse, and your attempts to trivialize it is stupider, and I mean stupider, by far. Your failure to understand the danger of firearms simply means you have never been around them. If my two years in the military taught me anything it is that nothing good happens around firearms.
David Frum is not involved in scaremongering. He is registering his concerns with a very worrisome development. You have a confluence of elements at work here: the likes of Sarah Palin talking about death panels, socialism, turning the U.S. into a dictatorship and other highly inflammatory rhetoric, and people bringing firearms to public meetings where these things are used as invective against politicians who are there to face their constituents. Sounds like a good idea to you? Great. Stupider is as stupider says.
And remember, ireign, if and when somebody gets hurt we all pay for it. You too, even if it is not over your private health care, at least not at first glance.
51 anniemargret // Aug 13, 2009 at 9:56 pm
The discussion that the town hall hate-fests have now degenerated into who is concealing or exhibiting guns or whether or not someone is inciting violence, or could incite violence, is a sign that it is going down a potentially dangerous path.
52 SFTor1 // Aug 13, 2009 at 10:03 pm
ireign: who the hell is Ed Schultz? You mean he is mentioned in the same breath as Beck and Limbaugh? Please.
And let me be very clear: I understand that it is legal to own and in some cases bear firearms.
It doesn’t change the fact that any responsible gun owner would have the good sense to leave it at home under lock and key when going to a volatile event. How do you know what’s going to happen? Who says you will be the one using it? You may lose it. It may go off accidentally. You may get very angry and do something you will regret. You may misread a situation and do something you will regret. Any of these sound like they have positive outcomes to you? These are unlikely scenarios you say? The hell they are.
53 COMMON FOOTSOLDIERS IN THE AMERICAN LEGIONS OF THE STUPID « SMELLY TONGUES // Aug 13, 2009 at 10:04 pm
[...] Etheridge cites David Frum from New Majority … [...]
54 SFTor1 // Aug 13, 2009 at 10:04 pm
One more thing, ireign, don’t forget to thank me for my service.
55 SFTor1 // Aug 13, 2009 at 10:12 pm
Here is how this breaks down:
If you have a larger than pea-sized brain, own a gun and wish to go to a town hall meeting, you leave the gun at home.
If you are sufficiently worried that the town hall meeting could become a hazardous place, and this compels you to stay home, you need to sit down and ponder the state of public discourse, and how to fix it.
If you think bringing a gun could have anything but bad outcomes you should not own a gun in the first place.
If you go to the meeting and bring your gun with the intention of possibly defending your rights with it you should not be walking the streets with the rest of us.
56 Chekote // Aug 13, 2009 at 10:29 pm
Mr. Frum,
How about denouncing the Left for stoking racial tensions?!
Clyburn: Town Hall Protests Like Horrid Anti-Civil Rights Demonstrations
So now Obamacare=Civil Rights Movement. I said it before the election. Obama will be a David Dinkins at the national level. His supporters are working overtime to stoke racial tensions.
57 Chekote // Aug 13, 2009 at 10:34 pm
Actually advocate for ideas that you believe in and try and help Republicans that you like get elected.
Bravo!
58 franco 2 // Aug 13, 2009 at 10:50 pm
ireign,
Check out the Frum/Begala segment on CNN posted here by Frum. It has Frum et al lamenting the level of debate on health care. But they would RATHER talk about Limbaugh and nazi references than talk about the plan themselves, thus revealing that they too want to discuss simpler and baser aspects.
No one is interested in what Frum thinks about the bill, they are interested in hearing him bash Limbaugh. And by the way we are getting far more substantive info from talk radio about the bill than from the politicians and the mainstream media. Limbaugh pushed back at Pelosi for the swastika reference claiming they are more like nazis than the right – and he is perfectly correct. They are socialists and won’t even admit to it.
It is a bit like a TV news show during ratings week airing segments on how teens are exposed to soft porn and showing clips as they comment how depraved it all is…
59 balconesfault // Aug 13, 2009 at 11:05 pm
What he (Schultz) said is far worse than what any of the main right wing talk shows hosts have said.
That’s your opinion. Mine is that one could listen to many of the right wing hosts on a regular basis and conclude that yes, indeed they would like to see Obama shot. He certainly has much basis for his opinion – and he clearly states it as such – as right wing hosts have for making the argument that Democrats want to lock people away in re-education camps, euthanize old people, or see millions of Americans killed in additional terrorist attacks.
And the funny thing is … Limbaugh and Savage and Hannity et al don’t even couch these opinions by saying “I think”, the way Ed Schultz did. They just speak them as absolute truths that they know for sure, and that their listeners are expected to uncritically accept.
60 SFTor1 // Aug 13, 2009 at 11:10 pm
Chekote, you can’t just make things up. I will agree that Clyburn is mislabeling the nature of the protests. That is not the same as “stoking racial tensions.” To call Barack Obama a David Dinkins at the national level is a slur and should be beneath you.
ireign, thank you for belittling my military service. What would we do without patriots like you?
So carrying guns in crowds are the same as freeway driving now? Really?
You don’t think people carrying guns puts anyone in “grave danger?” There is only one kind of danger around guns, ireign, and that’s the grave kind. Please try to reflect on this for a moment.
ireign, scaremongering is to say that Saddam Hussein has WMDs when he really doesn’t. David Frum is rightly saying that somebody could get hurt, during what should be a peaceful assembly, shouting notwithstanding, because there have been instances of PEOPLE CARRYING GUNS TO THE MEETINGS. Guns frighten people. Maybe we can at least agree on that.
Another quote: “but you appear to want to silence dissent in this case because of the relatively minute possibility that something bad could happen.” No ireign, I want all Americans to be able to go to these meetings and speak their minds freely and without fear. An immeasurable help towards this goal would be the absence of firearms, or even the suggestion of their presence. Agree?
One last thing: the conservatives are there on their own free will to speak their minds, but the “union members” are “brought in?” Are you saying that the main problem we have here are union members “drowning out protesters?” I don’t think you can be serious about that.
61 SFTor1 // Aug 13, 2009 at 11:13 pm
Franco-2: “They are socialists and won’t even admit to it.”
Franco, you need to take a basic class in political theory. You have no idea what a socialist is.
As you like to use the term, you might want to know what it actually means.
62 balconesfault // Aug 13, 2009 at 11:18 pm
franco: Check out the Frum/Begala segment on CNN posted here by Frum. It has Frum et al lamenting the level of debate on health care. But they would RATHER talk about Limbaugh and nazi references than talk about the plan themselves, thus revealing that they too want to discuss simpler and baser aspects.
Yes – check it out. Blitzer clearly introduces the segment by saying he’s inviting Frum to talk about the tone of the healthcare town hall meetings … and not about the content. Don’t blame him for CNN latching on to controversy, instead of issues. The networks love that game – cover the fight, not the substance – if you haven’t noticed that, you haven’t paid attention to our last half dozen election cycles.
And Frum is intelligent to know that when you come on those shows, you talk about what the host wants to talk about … or you don’t end up being invited on those shows anymore.
. Limbaugh pushed back at Pelosi for the swastika reference claiming they are more like nazis than the right
Limbaugh is still grossly mischaracterizing what Pelosi said about the swastikas – I heard him doing so again today. He keeps talking as if Pelosi was accusing Republicans of promoting themselves with swastikas, when Pelosi was calling out the banners at many Town Hall meetings including Obama’s image and the swastika. Which has most certainly been done.
Which, incidentally, fits right in line with Limbaugh’s dropping the Hitler reference on Obama. If Limbaugh wanted to elevate the debate, he’d call on conservatives to cut that crap out, and pledge not to do so himself. I’m not expecting that anytime soon, just as I’m not expecting to quit hearing Republicans lying that Pelosi was claiming they are embracing the swastika as their own signal.
63 SFTor1 // Aug 14, 2009 at 12:27 am
ireign, you are inventing new ways of missing the point.
You think the White House or Democrats should “stop doing townhalls” if there are safety concerns. That is giving in to mob rule, ireign. There must be something inside you that can grasp the concept that this would be a complete capitulation for a free country. I will not believe that you are so ignorant and so completely lack democratic instincts that you cannot see this.
Are we to understand that union members should be excluded from the ticket lotteries? What are you talking about exactly? Union members, like anyone else, put their names in. Some get a ticket, some don’t. You get a contingent of conservatives, and a contingent of people who support health care reform, union or otherwise. Is there a problem with this? Is there something wrong with belonging to a union?
Lastly I feel that I must remind you that the reason for the efforts to reform health care is because we have a massive problem. Health care costs are becoming an increasing burden on business, industry, commerce, and the public sector. People with health care coverage go bankrupt from uncovered bills. The workforce is losing its mobility for a lack of transportable health care. Far too many people are without. This is a screamingly expensive way to run a country. It weakens communities and society as a whole. That’s why we are working to fix this. That’s why we have town hall meetings.
What do we get from the right? Allegations of “death panels.” Noise. Lies. Men with guns carrying signs.
Lead, follow, or get out of the way.
64 rbottoms // Aug 14, 2009 at 4:08 am
Threatening rant? How about truthful analysis that a big chunk of the people who used to shop at Whole Foods, like myself, don’t appreciate calling Obama a socialist.
Let’s see if the CEO of Whole Foods can make do with right wingers and Ann Rynd followers to keep his stores humming.
He exercised his right to air his opinion, we’re exercising our right to take our money elsewhere and encouraging others to do so as well.
65 ottovbvs // Aug 14, 2009 at 8:00 am
franco-2 // Aug 13, 2009 at 7:59 pm
“Um, NOT. This was the Soviet strategy that failed. More troops – more support people – longer supply lines and more targets for terrorists. ”
……..So we need “less troops” in Afghanistan……so why are we now up to over 60,000?
“AND let’s not forget, without invading Iraq and getting rid of Sadaam Hussein’s regime and invading Afghanistan instead, we would still have to leave troops in place to defend the Gulf States,”
……..We invaded Iraq to defend the Gulf states?……we were easily containing Iraq before the invasion at an annual cost of around $3 billion and no casualties
” No amount of troop strength could subdue them, and really what for? Afghanistan is NOT a strategic country has no oil or wealth/infrastructure. Further that number and presence of US forces would CREATE more problems Afghans are even more insular and conservative than Iraqis.”
………..So there was no point in invading and we should leave? I agree
66 ottovbvs // Aug 14, 2009 at 8:11 am
ireign // Aug 13, 2009 at 11:43 pm
“Plenty of people carry guns in parts of the country. Most of the time this doesn’t result in grave danger to anyone.ZZZZ”
……….the rest of the time it causes about 9,000 shooting deaths……..another bulletin from the non- movement conservative who has a porky problem
67 ottovbvs // Aug 14, 2009 at 8:23 am
ireign // Aug 13, 2009 at 11:43 pm
“I am not going to relitigate the Iraq War but many Democrats voted for the War based on similar intelligence to what the White House was receiving. ALMOST EVERYONE IN CONGRESS believed that Saddam Hussein had WMD’s”
…….Who conveyed the intelligence to the congress?……the administration!…..it has now been revealed they were lying/distorting/obfuscating….whatever is the most self deluding and responsibility avoiding word you’re most comfortable with
……Even then a lot of Dems didn’t believe it….in the house the vast majority of Democrats voted against war authorisation while in the senate I think the split was basically 50/50……try to keep your porky fests under control
68 ottovbvs // Aug 14, 2009 at 10:47 am
ireign // Aug 14, 2009 at 10:35 am
“Charming. Funny, no one at the dailykos had a problem with the Whole Foods CEO’s position ”
……What was the problem?…..separation of church and onions?
69 balconesfault // Aug 14, 2009 at 11:09 am
This pro-health care consumer is actually appalled by the boycott. If individual consumers want to choose not to give Whole Foods their business because of an editorial, so be it. But an organized boycott is wrong, imo.
This is another example of when people swim in like-minded schools too much, they start acting as if those outside their school aren’t simply people with a different opinion … but enemies. Now, despite being able to walk down my hall and look out the window and see the Whole Foods World Headquarters at Lamar and 6th, I rarely shop there – but certainly it’s not about political reasons.
If a firm is acting badly with respect to global abuse of the environment, or of indigenous peoples rights, or is working in concert with tyrants who suppress freedom … if they abuse their own workers here or abroad … or even if they work in a concerted fashion to harm businesses which I support, I can understand a boycott. For their CEO expressing an opinion that I disagree with? No.
70 ottovbvs // Aug 14, 2009 at 1:08 pm
78 ireign // Aug 14, 2009 at 12:58 pm
……your bile/pomposity count is pretty low today……spent some extra time in front of the mirror did you?….or are actually seeing someone about the Adler problem at last?
71 barker13 // Aug 14, 2009 at 1:20 pm
Re: Franco-2 // Posts #5 and #8 –
Just as a general statement… in my not so humble opinion Franco consistently demonstrates both superior intellect and intellectual consistency AS WELL AS obviously a far greater degree of integrity as compared to David Frum.
Re: Sinz54 // Aug 13, 2009 at 5:30 pm (#14) –
Always a pleasure to be exposed to both common sense and polling data that backs it up. (*WINK*)
Re: Chekote // Aug 13, 2009 at 6:06 pm (#18) –
“[Frum's] time would be better spent denouncing Pelosi’s rhetoric or pushing for conservative reforms.”
(*SHRUG*) One would think.
But then again… Frum is about “pushing Frum” – “Frum The Brand” – if and when he ever sees it in his own interest to become a registered Democrat he will (*SHRUG*)
(And I’m talking for personal gain… financial gain, ultimately… not to “send a message.”)
BTW, Chekote… (*HUGE FRIGG’N GRIN*)… first the health care thread… now this thread… very impressive!
Re: Franco-2 // Aug 13, 2009 at 7:38 pm (#33) –
(*ROFLMAO*)
Re: Anniemargret // Aug 13, 2009 at 7:42 pm (#35) –
“Ahem…Millions of people voted Obama in and Bush/Cheney out…”
Voted Bush/Cheney OUT…???
Hmm… someone refresh my memory… were Bush/Cheney voted out of office in ‘04?
Were they running for re-election in ‘08…???
(*CHUCKLE*)
Re: Chekote // Aug 13, 2009 at 7:44 pm (#36) –
(*SMILE*)
Chekote… you’re really growing on me! (*GRIN*)
Mea culpa for those times you perceive I’ve crossed the line when debating you.
(*PROFFERED HANDSHAKE*)
Re: Ireign // Aug 13, 2009 at 8:10 pm (#40) –
“Maybe David Frum and the editors of New Majority should be focused on actually helping the Republican party and not providing amunition for every liberal.”
(*SNORT*)
Yeah. Chances… slim to none.
Again – and note, for all my sharp elbows I don’t “go here” all that often – Frum is one of those Washington/NY/LA types who will smile in your face and the moment your back is turned….
(*SHRUG*)
Hey. Yeah. I know. Stereotype. Well… so be it. If Frum was a “businessman” he’d be working for a Gordon Gekko type. Frum strikes me as the sort of guy who would be involved in the crooked late, unlamented “Oil For Food” scam. I mean can’t you just see Frum as an upper-mid level UN functionary…???
(*SMIRK*)
Re: Chekote // Aug 13, 2009 at 8:12 pm (#41) –
(*THUMBS UP*)
Re: Chekote // Aug 13, 2009 at 9:34 pm (#51) –
“You never know who has a gun so it tends to calm everybody down.”
(*WINK*) More Guns, Less Crime!
http://www.amazon.com/More-Guns-Less-Crime-Understanding/dp/0226493636
(Oh… and btw… are these Lefties NUTS or what in inferring they believe most of these senior citizens are Republicans as opposed to lifelong Democrats who probably love BOTH FDR and Ronald Reagan…?!?!)
Re: Chekote // Aug 13, 2009 at 10:29 pm (#61) –
“I said it before the election. Obama will be a David Dinkins at the national level. His supporters are working overtime to stoke racial tensions.”
(*SIGH*) (*HANGING MY HEAD IN DEEP DEPRESSION*)
Yep. It certainly is starting to look that way.
Re: Ireign // Aug 14, 2009 at 10:35 am (#75) –
“If Republicans followed suit — Ben & Jerry’s would be out of business.”
(*CHUCKLE*)
Actually, Ireign, Ben & Jerry’s went corporate long ago. They’re owned by Unilever if memory serves.
(*SMILE*) (*SHRUG*)
I got your point though! (*GRIN*)
BILL
72 ottovbvs // Aug 14, 2009 at 1:28 pm
ireign // Aug 14, 2009 at 1:19 pm
“PLEASE READ SOME BOOKS ON INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS/POLITICS!”
………..Well I only have about 3,500 books in library(ask my wife when we move house)……of course some of them are novels, or about art, music, architecture, theater, movies, gardening, but I’m SURE there must some books about history, economics, politics, philosophy and international affairs SOMEWHERE…..I’ll take your advice and look
………btw the Adler problem is not a depressive mental condition
73 ottovbvs // Aug 14, 2009 at 3:29 pm
ireign // Aug 14, 2009 at 1:30 pm
““PLEASE READ SOME BOOKS ON INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS/POLITICS!”
…….I took your advice irreign……..Kennan, Mackinder, Keegan, Kennedy, Daalder, Manchester, Keynes, Jenkins, Judt, Kershaw, Fukuyama, Chernow, Issacson……who are these people?……some sound furrin…….Ludwig von Mises, Max Weber, Schumpeter…..French commies by the sound of it….you think?……didn’t see any with your name……maybe you write under a pseudonym…..Mickey Mouse?….Michael Moore?……..I saw one in the bookstore the other day that might be by you because I know your always teaching and encouraging people to learn……..”Let me teach you Onanism”…..that one of yours?
74 ottovbvs // Aug 14, 2009 at 6:33 pm
ireign // Aug 14, 2009 at 5:31 pm
“Wow!!! You read all those books in two hours…”
……..a bit longer……about 50 years actually……Judt is probably one of the best European historians (he’s a Brit but at NYU)…..His Postwar is probably the best history of Europe (1945-2006) out there but I understand your abhorrence of excellence….I’m sure Coulter or Buchanan could give you a much better intepretation…..yep Coulter and Buchanan just about your intellectual level
75 ottovbvs // Aug 14, 2009 at 6:40 pm
85 ireign // Aug 14, 2009 at 5:31 pm
” you happen to copy and paste the NY Times bestseller list ”
……..And who is Issacson?…..I’ll let you google
76 ottovbvs // Aug 14, 2009 at 7:20 pm
85 ireign // Aug 14, 2009 at 5:31 pm
“” you happen to copy and paste the NY Times bestseller list ”
…….And when did Max Weber, Ivo Daalder or Roy Jenkins last appear on the NYT best seller list I wonder…..you can spend the evening researching it….wouldn’t want your brain to atrophy from insufficient use
77 joedee1969 // Aug 15, 2009 at 9:45 am
If you know of other calm conservative sights out there. Please let me know. I want to find more conservatives to fight Rush and Sean from destroying conservatism and turning it into a cartoon. The writer C. Rich is the best but I need to know if there are more voices out there:
http://americaspeaksink.com/?s=government
78 ottovbvs // Aug 15, 2009 at 10:18 am
joedee1969 // Aug 15, 2009 at 9:45 am
…….try Bartlett the conservative economist who writes at Forbes……he’s actually got an article link up on this blog at the moment where he details how most conservatives don’t have a clue what they are talking about when it comes to Keynesianism …….he’s conservative but just doesn’t buy into the usual right wing boilerplate fantasies…..I think he’s just about to publish a book that is full of apostasy on Reaganomics although he actually worked in the Reagan white house…..it will be nuanced of course not the bumper sticker diet on which most right wingers exist ……another alternative is Judge Richard Posner who is an appeals judge on the 7th I think in Chicago…….He’s something of a polymath writing on subjects as diverse as music and economics……he’s published a book called a failure of capitalism which is probably the best layman’s guide to the financial crash and subsequent recession I’ve come across (although I believe a financial journalist at the WSJ has just published a very good one)…..it’s in layman’s language, nuanced of course and very good although I don’t agree with all Posner’s conclusions some of which seem skewed to propping up his long held Chicago school theories…..that should keep you busy for awhile
79 ottovbvs // Aug 15, 2009 at 10:26 am
joedee1969 // Aug 15, 2009 at 9:45 am
……..I just followed your link to Rich and must confess to being somewhat underwhelmed…..he has a piece whining because “the poor” have been cut out of the cash for clunkers program…..how the hell would he know……does he have any data……no just a theory……cash for clunkers is a cheap and cheerful program to inject some demand into the economy and has an environmental/reduced oil dependancy side benefit…….give me a break…..he’ll be complaining the poor are squeezed out of buying at Tiffany’s next
80 barker13 // Aug 15, 2009 at 10:56 am
Re: Ireign // Aug 15, 2009 at 10:44 am (#92) –
” Bartlett isn’t much of a conservative. He has posted on this blog…”
Yeah. Bartlett was/is a HUGE disappointment to me. I used to love reading his stuff in the Journal, but now…
(*SIGH*)
He’s also thin skinned and frankly nasty. I tried to engage him in serious debate and just couldn’t get the man to engage.
(*SHRUG*)
Ireign. Let me ask you… do you (like me) question to an extent whether Frum and his merry band are “quite right” in the head?
I’m being serious here.
They actually try to portray themselves as “journalists,” as “reporters.” They keep on trying to pass on this illusion that NewMajority.com is a “press” site, a “news media” site.
I mean, sure… it could be just arrogance and wishful thinking… but a few of these folks are starting to worry me!
(*GRIN*) (*CHUCKLE*)
BILL
81 ottovbvs // Aug 15, 2009 at 11:37 am
ireign // Aug 15, 2009 at 10:44 am
…….Still NOT a jingoist, fundamentalist, movement conservative, but DEFINITELY an all too obvious liar, alas
“Posner- Since his underlying assumption is that markets are efficient (which isn’t accurate) much of his conclusions are incorrect. ”
………So you reject one of the central tenets of the Chicago school……that’s fine, so do I(or at least assumptions of their absolute efficiency), hence my comment:
” and very good although I don’t agree with all Posner’s conclusions some of which seem skewed to propping up his long held Chicago school theories”
…….for someone who gives lectures on comprehension you seem remarkably shaky in your grasp of it
“I just had a problem with the Internet so my much lengthier post was lost. ”
…….we must be thankful for small mercies I suppose
“And yes, Bartlett in addition to being a hack–came as somewhat thin-skinned in his comments on this blog.”
……..this one made me titter…..from the thinnest skin I’ve ever seen
82 barker13 // Aug 15, 2009 at 3:41 pm
Re: Ireign // Aug 15, 2009 at 11:15 am (#94) –
“I think David Frum is perfectly rational.”
OK. Me too, when it comes right down to it. (*GRUDGINGLY SMILING*)
But how’bout these kids and that Elise (???) woman and a few other of his “contributors” who seriously seem to believe they’re “reporting” and that NM is some sort of authentic journalistic enterprise…???
I mean I can understand how “nicer” folks than I would yearn to give these people the benefit of the doubt, but, jeez… resume inflation is one thing… these folks actually seem to believe they’re “reporters” and “editors” in a journalistic sense.
(*SHRUG*)
Wouldn’t you love to be a fly on the wall when (if) these people get together in person?! (*CHUCKLE*)
BILL
83 ottovbvs // Aug 15, 2009 at 5:16 pm
barker13 // Aug 15, 2009 at 3:41 pm
“and that NM is some sort of authentic journalistic enterprise…???”
………..If you feel NM has no merit one wonders why you spend so much time here boring us all to death with your kudzu like prose (complete with stage directions)…….Why don’t you go and bore for your country elsewhere?
84 rrpjr // Aug 15, 2009 at 9:13 pm
What an old maid.
Why even bother asking where Frum was over the past eight years and the fever swamps of Leftist rage and hate. No matter. This extraordinary movement that vexes Frum is overwhelmingly civil and informed and emerging as one of the most astonishing irruptions of legitimate outrage in our history. Frum doesn’t get it, and moreover resents it. It is indecorous and threatens the world he knows and inhabits as a well-schooled and dutiful elite. He resents those who do get it, such as Palin, who, channeling Orwell and Reagan, can nail the innate duplicity and lethality of the Left in a few well-chosen lines and drive Obama into a corner.
Tough. Anyway, we’ve long since reckoned with the uselessness of those such as Frum. We’ll do just fine without them
85 rrpjr // Aug 15, 2009 at 9:15 pm
Oh, and by the way, there was no violence until Obama, employing classic Stalinist tactics, fomented the thuggery in St. Louis. He’s the one courting the violence. He’s the one who wants it.
86 Harford for Obama // Aug 15, 2009 at 9:39 pm
[...] By harfobama NewMajority [...]
87 SFTor1 // Aug 16, 2009 at 1:26 am
rrpjr: “Oh, and by the way, there was no violence until Obama, employing classic Stalinist tactics, fomented the thuggery in St. Louis. He’s the one courting the violence. He’s the one who wants it.”
Hello rr—can I call you rr? I have news for you: you just disqualified yourself from being taken seriously.
88 ShortsandPants - Taser of Wisdom: “Learning Frum Experience” Edition // Aug 18, 2009 at 10:24 pm
[...] Frum’s pushback against the lunatics hasn’t earned him any friends on the radical right, but could divide the [...]
You must log in to post a comment.