tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post674886380783585236..comments2024-03-28T17:53:43.541-04:00Comments on DarwinCatholic: On the Transformative Power of HateDarwinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08572976822786862149noreply@blogger.comBlogger20125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-78573609848963873642011-01-14T13:24:19.232-05:002011-01-14T13:24:19.232-05:00Tom, I just love your logic: people who use vile r...<i>Tom, I just love your logic: people who use vile rhetoric are immune from criticism, since anyone who calls them on it is automatically a hypocrite.</i><br /><br />That isn’t my logic, and you should know better.<br /><br />My logic is that calling 35 percent of the American electorate ‘sick and evil’ is itself a fine example of vile rhetoric, and you have no right to criticize other people’s vile rhetoric if you are going to indulge in it yourself. First remove the beam from thine own eye.Tom Simonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16067031472666752839noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-11837719710959400662011-01-14T08:19:07.491-05:002011-01-14T08:19:07.491-05:00I would never ask you to imagine mainstream Democr...I would never ask you to imagine mainstream Democrats are fascists -- since they're clearly not and calling them so is hyperbolic. (So, of course, is calling them socialists, which is what one normally hears.) It is also deeply silly to claim that "second amendment solutions" are needed to out political problems today. <br /><br />I'm not defending saying these things, I'm just saying that they are not (and factually in this case were not) incitements to murder. Nor do I think that painting people who say such patently silly things as being the mainstream of the GOP in order to insist that they are all insane and wicked is either helpful to discourse or wise. If everyone who said silly things was guilty of inciting murder, we could lock up all the politicians now.<br /><br />As for putting gunsights on a map -- that complaint is just silly. Both parties us martial imagery all the time in campaign planning, and the sort of "Palin's marks look like rifle sights while the DNC's look like dart board targets" analysis going on is so silly one is simply ashamed for those doing it.Darwinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08572976822786862149noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-10626328451202636632011-01-14T02:11:36.448-05:002011-01-14T02:11:36.448-05:00I am unable to imagine that mainstream Democrats a...I am unable to imagine that mainstream Democrats are fascists, or that they deserve to be targeted in anyone's gunsights, or that second amendments solutions are required for any of the political problems facing the US today.<br /><br />JoelAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-28705713207179765992011-01-13T21:27:06.329-05:002011-01-13T21:27:06.329-05:00Certainly, people who use vile rhetoric are not ab...Certainly, people who use vile rhetoric are not above criticism, but it is true that when someone labels his opponents as a whole as being sick and evil, this is often because he's unable to imagine that anyone who differs from him is well motivated and honorable, rather than because he is singularly cursed with vile opponents.Darwinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08572976822786862149noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-47653305656631769782011-01-13T20:17:03.891-05:002011-01-13T20:17:03.891-05:00Well, and if I'm confessing reading habits, I ...Well, and if I'm confessing reading habits, I also can't help tracking the Catholic left over at vox-nova.com -- it's a guilty pleasure of sorts that I engage in most days.Darwinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08572976822786862149noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-15906552116704353622011-01-13T19:55:03.816-05:002011-01-13T19:55:03.816-05:00Joel —
In the very same breath you complain about...Joel —<br /><br />In the very same breath you complain about the ‘coarse, hateful rhetoric’ of your political opponents, and then say that the entire party which is opposed to yours is ‘sick and evil’. I don’t know whether this is deliberate hypocrisy or just an epic lack of self-awareness.<br /><br />It would be laughable if it weren’t sickening.Tom Simonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16067031472666752839noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-45868646074472512022011-01-13T19:47:11.260-05:002011-01-13T19:47:11.260-05:00Meh. I can't stand reading Sullivan regularly...Meh. I can't stand reading Sullivan regularly, especially since the 2008 election. Though practically every time I've clicked on his column from the Atlantic sidebar it's been somewhere between unhinged and moronic. Perhaps, though, he has hidden depths I haven't seen.<br /><br />I will concede that I've seen him make vague motions towards Burkean conservatism, but usually only in the self-serving manner of, "Now that my side has won, we should be very hesitant to change anything less that have adverse effects."<br /><br />My usual reading diet is Douthat and Brooks on the right, McArdle off in Libertarian field, and Ta Nehisi Coates and Paul Krugman on the left. I also follow James Fallows to an extent, and follow the Wall Street Journal and NY Times opinion columnists generally. Occasionally I also dip into Chait or the other folks at New Republic.Darwinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08572976822786862149noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-8575074464559965052011-01-13T18:06:55.829-05:002011-01-13T18:06:55.829-05:00Your comments about Sully tell me more about you t...Your comments about Sully tell me more about you than about him. He believes in limited government, strong defense, and free trade, and those who call him liberal are abusing the language.<br /><br />Now, I agree that his obsession with Sarah Palin is over the top, but it is worth noting that his previous obsession with Hillary Clinton was just as bad. He supported Bush Jr. early on, including the invasion of Iraq at the time. I believe his criticism of the corruption among the leadership of the Catholic Church is spot-on, though obviously I don't expect you to agree with that. But you should also note that he criticizes the gay rights group The Human Rights Campaign for similar reasons.<br /><br />I read liberal commentators too: Mark Kleiman, Kevin Drum, and Matthew Yglesias are on my daily list. Sully does not fit in among them. He fits in with Ross Douthat or Steven Bainbridge or Eugene Volokh.<br /><br />JoelAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-29879092080369740132011-01-13T16:02:29.353-05:002011-01-13T16:02:29.353-05:00On the bright side, he seems to have found himself...On the bright side, he seems to have found himself in the left, where he blends right in.Darwinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08572976822786862149noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-23673515125316122222011-01-13T16:00:58.003-05:002011-01-13T16:00:58.003-05:00Now if you want to talk about a commentator who is...Now if you want to talk about a commentator who is so completely unhinged as not to be worth taking the time to read, Andrew Sullivan is definitely way up there.Darwinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08572976822786862149noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-52485665878971583962011-01-13T15:47:21.358-05:002011-01-13T15:47:21.358-05:00Like I said, I read Sully regularly:
http://andre...Like I said, I read Sully regularly:<br /><br />http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2011/01/quote-5.html<br /><br />JoelAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-4017352338644989212011-01-13T13:33:49.121-05:002011-01-13T13:33:49.121-05:00I read Ross Douthat and Andrew Sullivan regularly,...I read Ross Douthat and Andrew Sullivan regularly, others that you name only occasionaly. But I have no illusion that any of these people really speak for Republican leadership. Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin are the two leaders of the Republican Party, as evidenced by their radio and TV ratings, their six-figure public speaking fees at Republican and Tea Party gatherings, and most importantly by the fact that the few Republican politicians who have ever dared to criticize either one of them have quickly issued grovelling apologies for it. They know where the power centers are.<br /><br />So I stand by what I said above: you can Will and Brooks me all you want, the fact is that the Republican Party is insane.<br /><br />(I note out of historical interest that this is the opposite of the situation that the US had in the 1970's: back then the Republicans were building a robust and principled conservative movement, while the Democratic Party was full of crazy people. Funny how the pendulum swings.)<br /><br />JoelAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-41432469766618795872011-01-13T12:48:32.634-05:002011-01-13T12:48:32.634-05:00(Incidentally, have you read the Will and Douthat ...(Incidentally, have you read the Will and Douthat and Brooks columns on the shooting? I ask only because you seem to keep suggesting I'm pointing at them as an example of the right being reasonable, when the reason I'm in fact pointing to them is because the folks you consider sane and reasonable conservatives are agreeing with my interpretation of the events in Tuscon, not yours.)Darwinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08572976822786862149noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-18480598925760526492011-01-13T12:46:28.993-05:002011-01-13T12:46:28.993-05:00So you do honestly think that the shooter was insp...So you do honestly think that the shooter was inspired by Palin's rhetoric to shoot Giffords? Despite the fact that he had been confronting her since 2007 and had issued death threats against various other figures in the community, some of them totally non political such as his community college administration?<br /><br />Or is this just a case of thinking it's a good opportunity to demand that Palin and talk radio tone it down on the <i>pretext</i> that their rhetoric had something to do with the attack -- while at the same realizing this pretext has no basis in reality.<br /><br />If the former, I think that's just a bit foolish. If the latter, it strikes me that falsely accusing a whole bunch of people of inciting murder is rather worse than the original offense.<br /><br />It's also a very hard view to get agreement on, since all people naturally find the loud voices they disagree with more offenses they agree with. Those on the right will naturally find characters like Al Franken, Michael Moore, and even at time Obama more offensive in their modes of expression than Palin and Limbaugh.<br /><br />And similarly, those on the left will find Palin and Limbaugh offensive pretty much no matter how they say it because they find their views so offensive. It's a good sign you can recognize that folks like Brooks and Douthat actually speak reasonably, but frankly, many can't seem to see that. I've heard liberal voices at The Atlantic accuse the mild mannered Douthat of being a homosexual hating fascist who shouldn't be listened to in polite society, not to mention a misogynist who wants to oppress women and turn them into baby making machines. If you can be as mild mannered and hesitant in your approach as Douthat and still be vilified as a half-human knuckle dragger, where exactly is the motivation to fit one's expression to the tone the left would prefer?Darwinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08572976822786862149noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-42319568292768119552011-01-13T11:10:47.319-05:002011-01-13T11:10:47.319-05:00darwin, no, I don't think Palin really wanted ...darwin, no, I don't think Palin really wanted someone to shoot Giffords. Rather, Palin is just a selfish attention whore who uses crude and vicious language because she has decided that this is the best way to keep her name in headlines. Not just Palin: most of the R leadership is following her in this, because they have seen how well it works. The completely predictable fact that a few unbalanced and dangerous individuals take such language seriously does not concern people like her.<br /><br />You can Will and Brooks me all you want - the fact remains that the Republican Party is sick and evil and must change. The party is far more represented by bigots like Rush Limbaugh - with 20M daily radio listeners - and Glenn Beck - with his own show on Fox - then by the comparatively sane conservatives who grace our nation's dying newspapers. But I really do have hope that John Boehner, for all his faults, might actually be able to lead the party out of this insanity. We'll see.<br /><br />JoelAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-14358426846783707592011-01-12T23:41:01.043-05:002011-01-12T23:41:01.043-05:00Joel,
So, let's get a straight answer here:
...Joel,<br /><br />So, let's get a straight answer here: <br /><br />Do you think that when Palin's PAC "targeted" Giffords, she was advocating that someone shoot or otherwise physically attack Giffords?<br /><br />Or do you think this is a case in which Palin didn't actually mean for someone to shoot Giffords, but where Loughner heard her words and interpreted them literally, thinking that this meant it was a good idea to go shoot Giffords?<br /><br />Or is this simply an extended game of "gotcha" akin to having someone say, "I hope you have a lousy day," to you right before you get t-boned at an intersection by a drunk driver. <br /> <br />It seems to me pretty clear that it's this third option, especially given that we know now that Loughner has had it in for Giffords since 2007 when he confronted her at an event and demanded to know, "How can there be a government when words have no meeting?" Plus he is on record with the local police for having made death threats against members of his community college administration and various local media and blogging personalities.<br /><br />Did he keep mistaking who it was that Palin wanted to go after?<br /><br />Again, it's conservatives like Will and Brooks and progressives like Chait who have the story right here.Darwinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08572976822786862149noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-52025145089395685052011-01-12T18:19:20.874-05:002011-01-12T18:19:20.874-05:00darwin, You're absolutely right: Sarah Palin ...darwin, You're absolutely right: Sarah Palin did not say that conservatives should "reload and take aim" at Griffiths. Palin's mini-me, Sharron Angle in NV, did not say that citizens would need to resort to "Second Amendment solutions" to deal with liberals. Rush Limbaugh does not routinely describe mainstream liberals as "fascists" or say that they are "destroying America." Glenn Beck does not -<br /><br />I could go on, but why bother. The Republican Party is sick, has enveloped itself in coarse, hateful rhetoric for the past several years, and we have now seen the fruit of this violent bigotry against their opponents.<br /><br />Having said all that, I will note as you do that there are a few sane conservatives out there who see the problem: Pat Buchanan, for example, who acknowledged a couple days ago that if he had said the things Palin had said then he would now feel the need to apologize. Or even John Boehner, who always speaks in mature and measured tones and rejects the spittle-flecked mania of his Tea Party colleagues. The R Party desperately needs to do some serious soul-searching, and Boehner might actually be the right guy to lead them in this. Maybe.<br /><br />JoelAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-34755718999267831202011-01-12T17:35:45.946-05:002011-01-12T17:35:45.946-05:00JMB,
No, I was two in 1981, and thus not much awa...JMB,<br /><br />No, I was two in 1981, and thus not much aware of the news coverage. <br /><br />Joel,<br /><br />You know, I'm really not sure how to respond seriously to the claim that Loughner was motivated by a campaign map which "targetted" vulnerable House seats with crosshairs. I mean, seriously?<br /><br />Yes, there has been a rather cynical ploy on the Left since 2008 to find either racism or threats of violence (preferably both) in basically everything that comes out of the Right. The idea, I suppose, is that if the right can be painted with these characteristics, then people won't want to vote for them. The last election doesn't exactly seem to have shown this to be a successful ploy, but it fits well with people's personal prejudices, so I guess the habit just stuck.<br /><br />Still you don't have to take my word for it. You could ask comparatively reasonable adults in the room such as: <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/10/AR2011011003685.html" rel="nofollow">George Will</a>, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/10/opinion/10douthat.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss" rel="nofollow">Ross Douthat</a>, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/11/opinion/11brooks.html?ref=opinion" rel="nofollow">David Brooks</a> or <a href="http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-chait/81168/the-arizona-shooting-not-product-right-wing-rage" rel="nofollow">Jonathan Chait</a>.<br /><br />I did read Palin's released statement today, though frankly, I found it one of the more well written and appropriate statements to come out of a major politician -- rather scarry as she's pretty clearly proven herself over the last couple years to be a lightweight. But at least she has the sense to emplooy good writers.<br /><br />I can't really think of a better phrase than "blood libel" for the way the Left has behaved during this tragedy. If I didn't use the word myself, it was not for thinking it inappropriate. <br /><br />Though at least in tragedy we can still find humor. There's the Democratic ex-Representative who during the election said that Florida's governor should be "put up against a wall and shot" who penned an editorial demanding that Republican's cease using violent rhetoric, then explained that "only fruitcakes" would have taken his imagery seriously:<br /><br />http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2011/01/kanjorski-only-fruitcakes-would-take-my-call-shoot-governor-liter?sms_ss=facebook&at_xt=4d2e1a913efeabf4%2C0Darwinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08572976822786862149noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-20817924606538064772011-01-12T16:36:04.286-05:002011-01-12T16:36:04.286-05:00darwin wrote: " . . . those on the left are ...darwin wrote: " . . . those on the left are more eager to cash in on this atrocity by telling everyone, "See, my opponents are so wicked they cause political violence!" than they are to draw the country together in the unity they claim to be so eager for."<br /><br />You need to address this:<br /><br />http://www.samefacts.com/2011/01/watching-conservatives/palin-target-murdered/<br /><br /><br />Joel<br /><br />P.S. I note that Palin is today accusing Democrats of "blood libel". She is truly shameless.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-51915831524216239642011-01-12T14:44:02.636-05:002011-01-12T14:44:02.636-05:00I don't know if you are old enough to remember...I don't know if you are old enough to remember when Ronald Reagan was shot but nobody blamed the left for John Hinkley Jr's action. He was clearly seen as a dangerous and disturbed individual.JMBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02542004362101344466noreply@blogger.com