I love this blog post. I love the points it makes. Yes, I understand that intellectuals can make condescending points that alienate people, and it is important to maintain an popular, populist capacity in your rhetoric.
But the conservative voices I hear speaking sound stupid, churlish in their contempt for science and intellect. There are powerful groundswells of national concern that seem tailored for a conservative thinker to speak to. The radical deconstruction over the past decade of what "family" means. Horrible, rampant government spending. A truly fearsome global security problem.
Why is my time wasted disputing global warming or evolution? Why is the public's time being frittered on who knew about what torture/interrogation techniques when? How are the causes that matter to this country persuasively argued by insulting Liberals?
4 comments:
Posner is one of those people I read from time to time because he's obviously an intelligent person, but he's also deeply mistaken on several issues. He prizes "Constitutional pragmatism" over principle because he's comfortable. This is cowardice.
"Why is my time wasted disputing global warming or evolution?"John, I know you don't believe me when I say this, but global warming is the vehicle that the statists have chosen to push their agenda; that being acquisition and concentration of power. The environmental movement is no more about the environment than the peace movement was about peace. They are both about the exact same thing: socialism and the destruction of America. It is critical to stop these people and expose their lies. I won't go into all the details here, but I provided many links in my earlier response on my blog.
You won't get much of an argument from me about evolution. As a matter of faith, it's pretty much a silly thing to argue about. Conservatives do look rather foolish when they argue about things like flag burning, prayer in schools, evolution etc... and I wish they'd stop and concentrate less on matters of faith and more on matters of governance.
On the other hand, doesn't it bother you that our government run schools have adopted secular humanism and nature worship as their official religions and teach them to the exclusion of all else? But that's an argument against the existence of government run schools more than it is about the details of what they teach... The problem is that too many conservatives don't understand that, and instead allow themselves to get trapped into arguing that the schools should adopt, to some extent, their religious beliefs. It's a fool's game.
"Why is the public's time being frittered on who knew about what torture/interrogation techniques when?Now this is a disappointment and frankly you should be a bit embarrassed for thinking this is trivial. As a lawyer you should understand the importance of lawyers being able to give their honest opinions without fear of prosecution or persecution. Obama and his political hack of an Attorney General have threatened the Bush administration lawyers with prosecution and disbarment for writing opinions that were used to guide which interrogation techniques were used and when.
Just last week the Obama administration used the exact same legal reasoning to justify the extradition of an accused Nazi war criminal to Germany. So he wants to use the legal reasoning to suit his purposes, but prosecute those who came up with it. This is not the rule of law, this is arbitrary and capricious abuse of power, and you think it's irrelevant?
The CIA says that top congressional leaders of both parties were briefed and fully aware of what was being done, and not one of them objected. In fact the only questions posed reflected a concern that they might not be doing enough. Nancy Pelosi was in these briefings according to several witnesses and leaked CIA documents. Yet, Nancy Pelosi is one of those calling for a "truth commission" to go after the Bush administration officials responsible.
Surely you can see why it's important to find out who knew what and when...
For heaven's sake, John, please wake up!
Hey Sergeant Pete
global warming is the vehicle that the statists have chosen to push their agendaI know. But that doesn't make it less real as a scientific reality. All political actors take political advantage of whatever's out there.
Surely you can see why it's important to find out who knew what and whenI do, and hope that it occurs, but think it shouldn't be the thing pundits lead with. If I'm any example, the average citizen has about 4.5 minutes to pay attention to news every day. I think that the point of the linked article is not that conservatives are wrong, but that they are foundering strategically.
When someone seeks to persuade me as act of will rather than reason, unless it is someone I already trust implicitly, I will resist them. Even if they claim to be acting from the same core beliefs.
Global warming is NOT a scientific fact. At least not in the way that the "global warming" crowd wants you to believe. The climate is always changing, it always has and it always will. But I don't want to get wrapped around the axle on that now...
I assume your comment about persuasion by "act of will rather than reason" is directed at me. It's obvious that that phrase has a specific meaning for you, but it has much less (apparently) for me. I don't think I ever said or intimated that you should believe me just because I said so... I have labored to use reason, and specifics to make my points always with an eye toward bedrock principles.
Either you can't, or don't think it's worth your time to do so, but you have yet to really respond to any of my points directly. Frankly, John, you have made a number pronouncements with not a shred of evidence or specific examples to back them up. You have made statements which are merely echoes of the narrative spouted by the media.
I know it was a very brief time and a long time ago that we served together, but I remember you as a thoughtful and highly intelligent person who was also well grounded in gospel principles. If my thoughts and conclusions are in error, please point the errors out to me. If, however, you have-as I suspect-not been paying attention to what is really going on, I wish nothing more than to wake you (and others) up to the monstrous evil being perpetrated upon this nation.
So, I will ask point blank, are you at all interested in having a conversation about these things, or would you rather that I just shut up and go away. I will respect your wishes either way.
My comment about will versus reason was alluding to Posner's blog-post.
...you have made a number pronouncements with not a shred of evidence or specific examples to back them up. You have made statements which are merely echoes of the narrative spouted by the media.I haven't intended to pronounce any assertions of fact, so much as expressed opinion and impression. I identify myself as politically and socially conservative, and do not see politicians or commentators who resonate with my belief in civility, and reason.
So, I will ask point blank, are you at all interested in having a conversation about these things, or would you rather that I just shut up and go away.That's a narrow range of options; if I am avoiding a true conversation/debate, it certainly is NOT because I want you to go away. I simply do not have the time to focus on something so research-intensive. I love reading in my spare moments, love to consider the heart-felt and impassioned words of others, but rarely am I moved to respond in a fully engaged response or retort (with four teenagers in the house, all of my rhetorical muscles get plenty of exercise in discussions with them). I have read what you've written, both here and at your blog.
So please do keep writing, and I will keep reading.
Post a Comment