[clue-talk] Wow, Card's a little political...

[Sean LeBlanc]

On 11-01 11:48, Collins Richey wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 9:26 AM, Sean LeBlanc <seanleblanc at comcast.net> wrote:
> 
> > I'm just not going to bother prioritize reading Goldberg's book ...
> 
> 'Tis a pity, since , since,
> 
> >
> > If I'm to be frank, if I have to worry about authoritarianism - I'd say it's
> > going to come from the right. Sinclair Lewis said, "When fascism comes to
> > America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross."
> 
> If you bothered to read the book, you would learn that fascism already
> came to town with Woodrow Wilson, and it certainly wasn't from the
> right.

I'm talking about right here and right now. Which wing are we to be more
concerned about? I don't see liberals exhorting people to violence, do you?
I DO see this on the right, though.

And, I'm curious...did Goldberg discuss how much big business folks here
loved fascism in Europe?
 
> > When I look at the McFailin' Nuremberg^H^H^H^H rallies, when I hear this
> > chilling rhetoric about "real Americans" and "the real America",
> 
> Pardon me, but the fanatic Obama rallies aren't Nuremberg rallies?

You see people on the left exhorting people to violence, then? Can you
provide examples? Because I can for McCain campaign rallies. 
 
> < when I see ...
> 
> Ok, you're rambling.

If you say so. I'm just citing examples of what I think is dangerously close
to a tipping point in the Republican Party. They better get their house in
order, or they will (hopefully) spend a long time in the wilderness. 

I saw that at least people rejected Michele Bachmann's outrageous gibberish,
and her numbers were way down in what was expected to be a win. Good. She's
been saying and doing crazy things for years (saying God wouldn't let AGW
happen, since Christ saved the Earth, she's an evolution-denier, and she
even stalked a gay rally), hopefully, now that people have sat up and
noticed what an insane person she is, she will get the boot.

Hopefully the whole party gets rejected for a while, and they do a serious
re-think on the whole pandering to RWAs thing.

I'm hardly the first to say so, of course. People WITHIN the party itself
are saying similar things, and unless you've been under a rock, you've seen
the same commentary I have. From the conservatives, not the "looney left".

Like I said, I've lost count how many people have found they couldn't toe
the party line, and came out and said various things about McCain,
especially about the single most important decision he could have made as a
candidate - choosing Palin. 

Looking back on this campaign, unless the RNC can steal this election for
McCain, they will point to that choice as being the cincher for losing
McCain the vote. Choosing someone as incompetent, anti-intellectual and
ignorant as Palin over all the other choices in a cynical bid to try to get
"values voters" (cough) may have worked to get a few of those voters...but I
think McCain also lost a lot of Republicans of principle in the process.


 
> > when I witness the rampant and pervasive anti-intellectualism coming from
> > the right,
> 
> WTF is that? You can't be an intellectual if you don't believe in
> socialism? People on the right are not really convinced that the
> rampant and pervasive pseudo-intellectual socialists that dominate our
> educational system are the best form of intellectualism. Sign me up.
> Or is the tired old mantra: you can't be a real intellectual if you
> believe in God?

I never said any of the above. Don't put words in my mouth.

I don't think you must be retarded if you are religious. I'm talking about,
for instance, pandering to the evolution-deniers and the AGW-deniers. I hope
you don't think "Dr" Dino Hovind is an intellectual. If you do, then I guess
we are at a complete impasse.

I'm also talking about pandering to the notion that any old hick from a
small town has more wisdom than people that live in the city. I'm talking
about pandering to "hockey moms" and telling us they have more insight into
foreign policy than wonks... 

And what's this obsession with socialists? 

As I keep saying Obama's been "palin' around" with Friedmanite disaster
capitalists. Where are the "socialists" in the Democratic Party?

 
> If you are a true believer that the wise sages of socialism should
> control everything, you will swallow these 14 points hook line and
> sinker; otherwise, there is more than one way to look at these issues.
> Among the more ridiculous: 1. The implied but not stated assumption
> that those with a Support the troops sign or an American flag on their
> cars are crypto-fascists. 6.. Government controlled media. The
> standard media (newspapers, TV, etc.) are firmly in the hands of
> socialists. The fact that Fox chooses to go another way and (horror of
> horrors) frequently supports Bush is proof of nothing. 13. Cronyism.
> Of course the right invented this practice, and those on the left have
> never practiced cronyism. Ha!

You seem to have constructed some sort of semblance of what you think I'm
saying and/or stand for, and are attacking it.

If you want to fling memes from right-wing radio at liberals, have at it.
Just realize I'm not a member of any specfic group, and so, this has no
bearing on what I said or what I stand for. 

Tell me where I said I support socialism, and the above might make some sort
of sense.I do think the hyper-"patriots" are the ones to watch out, for,
though, yes, as they are probably signifying they are RWAs.
 
> I haven't gotten around to reading up on what you call
> authoritarianism. Is this just the juvenile 60's "Appose all
> authorities"?

No. 

But feel free to think so.

I suggest you read the book, though. It's free. It's the guy who was
referenced a LOT in the book _Conservatives Without a Conscience_. 


-- 
Sean LeBlanc:seanleblanc at comcast.net
http://sean-leblanc.blogspot.com
"Cogito ergo I'm right and you're wrong."
		-- Blair Houghton