Friday, June 20, 2014

FRIDAY AROUND-THE-HORN.

• Back when George Will signed up with Fox News, I wondered why; though he and they were both technically conservative, Will seemed too pointy-headed for people who think Fred Barnes is a sage and Steve Doocy a wit. But Will's recent column in which he suggested ladies get raped for the street cred shows that he had a strategy. The column has raised an outrage and even gotten him unsyndicated by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch (who knew, women read newspapers too!) but it has also made Will a hot ticket among the yahoos who think Will has been punished for "blasphemy" ("this is America -- not China, not Cuba... despite the left’s attempts to silence," argh blargh etc.) and use the term "feminazi" seriously. Years of bullshit and bad-faith arguments have sufficiently infantilized these guys that a weedy professor type like Will would just make them mad with his fancy lingo -- unless he used it to validate their more thuggish sentiments. So goodbye ruminative considerations of U.S. policy, hello war on women, only with a bow-tie, and the brethren may consider their cause uplifted by the endorsement of a genuine intellectual. (Camille Paglia must be kicking herself.)

• Visiting Clickhole does not make me as happy as not visiting it but knowing it exists. Is this the future of the web? Paging Prof. Jeff H. Jarvis...


• Terry Teachout has an interesting list of American artworks he would require high school students to study. The choices are intelligent and worth debating, but he prefaces the thing by telling how the UK's Tory education minister got rigorous about teaching literature and this resulted in a "predictable convulsion of high-minded outrage" in which the minister was accused of being "antiprogressive."  I'd love to know how your average conservative parental units in, say, Minot, North Dakota would react to the news that their young'uns would be forced to absorb Martha Graham and Langston Hughes. Oh, one other thing, Terry -- I recommend we add Otto Preminger's Skidoo to the film curriculum. It will teach the kids something about the 60s, and scare them off drugs.

114 comments:

  1. Jay B.3:15 PM

    You know, it's hard to sustain a cult when everyone in it is a martyr.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Matt Jones3:28 PM

    There's no finer example of doublethink than the modern conservative: an asshole who believes that any criticism of his positions is "silencing", but then demands that *his* criticism of others be permitted because "religious freedom", all without the slightest hint of concern at the collision...

    ReplyDelete
  3. sharculese3:33 PM

    With Clickhole, I dont' think the Onion got how much a parody of Buzzfeed would just look like Buzzfeed. Some of the shit is funny, (the "How Many of These Friends Episodes Have You Seen" quiz had me cracking up) but I can't see myself visiting it regularly.

    ReplyDelete
  4. That lace hat fits any "intellectual" conservative you care to name.

    ReplyDelete
  5. So goodbye ruminative considerations of U.S. policy, hello war on women, only with a bow-tie, and the brethren may consider their cause uplifted by the endorsement of a genuine intellectual.

    Well, I have it on the good authority of an all-male Faux News panel that there is no Republican War on Women. However, I don't see why Will has to give up one gig for the other. There are just as many bow-tie clad violent, sexist creeps as any other sort. His ruminations over whether the ladies are just making shit up because bitches lie, can assure the rapist at Princeton and the white-collar wife beater that assaulting women doesn't make them one of the hoi polloi.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Martin Pollard3:46 PM

    Explains Dennis Miller's "humor," anyway (at least after he dropped his writers, who actually knew humor, and embraced his inner wingnut full-time).

    ReplyDelete
  7. coozledad4:09 PM

    He is a pig in a lace hat.

    He's got lace on his head alright, but it's a pair of panties wrapped around his goddamn face. He'll be sniffing them on live TV before too long.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Had a back and forth on Twitter with Oliver Willis and some wingnut goober. The goober called us "progressive brownshirts" because neither of us thought George Will being dropped by one paper was an example of the erosion of Free Speech! in modern America. I'm sort of proud of that.

    ReplyDelete
  9. mgmonklewis4:25 PM

    They tend to have a prim, schoolmarmish quality, don't they? Like Miss Havisham without the winning personality.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Don't forget all the bible-thumping Ayn Rand fans.

    Of course they're the same people.
    ~

    ReplyDelete
  11. TribalistMeathead4:47 PM

    I really enjoyed the Which Orange Is The New Black/Mad Men Character Are You? quizzes, as well as 7 Toys That Haven't Been As Much Fun Since 9/11.

    ReplyDelete
  12. It has always seemed to me that people like Will and Coulter and even Cheney for that matter, don't actually believe anything they say about the "social" issues of conservatism. They do believe that their class - or the class they speak for - deserves all the money, all the time. And they will say anything to keep the base riled up and the money flowing. They pick and choose their moments - as Will just did - for maximum effect in that regard. Without consideration for the truth - even the truth that they themselves might hold.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Bethany Spencer4:54 PM

    Listen, there's still hope for Camille. She can still buy a bowtie.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Well imagine if you were having a private conversation with adults about the nasty habits of pseudo-humans and a bunch of pseudo-humans butted in and told you not to say those things.

    You'd have a pretty good idea of how the neoCon feels about the fact we won't sit silent while they stand athwart history yelling about n-words and bitches.

    ReplyDelete
  15. The last one is hanging by one hand because there was no one left to drive the other nail in.

    ReplyDelete
  16. montag25:26 PM

    Traditionally, the authoritarians didn't have to resort to such tricks, but, in an age when free speech is accentuated, and violence is generally frowned upon, they don't have much choice.

    Not that they haven't been trying to reassert their single unchallenged point of view. Fuckstick Ari Fleischer's "people should watch what they say." Bill O'Reilly's "just shut up, shutupshutupshutup!" Ashcroft's warnings of terrorists in our midst and that everything suspicious, no matter how small, should be reported. Etc.

    They can keep trying all they want, but I don't think they're going to succeed in silencing criticism, not as long as they're sounding as stupid as they have been lately.

    ReplyDelete
  17. TribalistMeathead5:30 PM

    Sure it is. It's much easier for me to sneer at people who legitimately enjoy reading Buzzfeed listicles when I'm reading satire of Buzzfeed listicles.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Spaghetti Lee5:33 PM

    It surprises me how often establishment conservative big-shots abandon their claims to respectability these days just to earn the unwavering defense of the rabid base. Not just in terms of how any of them think they're going to maintain a political party with the support of only the craziest 25% of the country, but that they genuinely think that Ace of Spades, Godlstein et. al. are more pleasurable company than establishment hobnobbers. Sure, those high society parties can get boring, but at least they don't define "gourment dinner" as "ranch and BBQ potato chips."

    Will is a lot of things, but I don't think he's a complete idiot. The reason conservative intellectualism is dead is not because there's no such thing as a smart conservative but because smart conservatives are being hunted down and either forcibly reprogrammed or exiled by the dumb ones.

    ReplyDelete
  19. J Neo Marvin5:46 PM

    I volunteer!

    ReplyDelete
  20. montag26:14 PM

    Oh, there are smart conservatives. However, they spend all their time and effort trying to make bad ideas sound like good ideas. The sine qua non of that principle, of course, was William F. Buckley, who could empty out the entire dictionary onto just one shitty idea, in an attempt to make the idea itself invisible under the cover of multisyllabic nouns and adverbs. The tactic was to make the unpalatable unnoticed. As importantly, William Buckley wasn't trying to attract the conservative unwashed--he was most visible on PBS' "Firing Line," where he hoped to BS liberals.

    That's not a talent that the conservatives have cultivated over the years (and, admittedly, Buckley was sui generis). After all, who's pretty much the top dog at National Review today? Jonah Goldberg, whose greatest intellectual excursion has been to expand the Monty Python argument/contradiction sketch to book form.

    Given that intellectualism is a preoccupation with and analysis of ideas, if you're starting off with some pretty crappy ideas, as conservatives are, you're in a conundrum. You become intellectually dishonest and defend the indefensible, by whatever rhetorical razz-ma-tazz you can muster, or admit that the ideas themselves are deficient.

    As for Will, he's not an idiot, nor is he particularly gifted at what he does. Nor is he an intellectual--he's what passes for an intellectual in conservative circles. He's a lot more label than substance, as any reading of him proves. Fox bought the label, which is what Roger Ailes does.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Mooser6:32 PM

    Oh, you should see his columns, going back years, on issues of race, and sexual non-conformity. He's a piece of shit, rolling in shit.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Pope Zebbidie XIII6:58 PM

    Jesus remains inconvenient.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Pope Zebbidie XIII7:03 PM

    Do not stare too long at the logical inconsistency, lest the logical inconsistency stare back into you.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Pope Zebbidie XIII7:05 PM

    "progressive brownshirts" : it's like a progressive barn-dance, but with goose-stepping.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Pope Zebbidie XIII7:12 PM

    All the Right has left is a number of stupid people's ideas of what smart people sound like.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Perhaps the establishment conservative big shots are intimidated by the rabid base. After all, the rabid base has all those guns.

    ReplyDelete
  27. i remember a particularly despicable column he wrote *the day after* allen ginsberg died, slamming him for personally giving birth to non-rhymey poetry and beards and for daring to sign a six figure publishing contract (because, you know, who'd want to publish allen ginsberg?)

    ReplyDelete
  28. Spaghetti Lee7:29 PM

    I don't think it's even about the ideas at all anymore. I'm working on the assumption that Will wrote that column knowing it would raise peoples' ire, and that he could jump to Fox and land on both feet as the newest conservative "persecuted" by liberals. A career move, in other words.

    You'd think there would be better ways to do that then pretending you believe that women use being raped to further their social status, but that's just the way things go, I guess. People bitch about Buzzfeed, but Republicans have been writing clickbait since before there were clicks to be baited.

    ReplyDelete
  29. smut clyde7:33 PM

    it's hard to sustain a cult when everyone in it is a martyr.I know, this new 'christianity' thing won't last.

    ReplyDelete
  30. montag27:37 PM

    George Will might well be the anti-Ginsberg, so I understand his animosity. After all, Will was clean-cut, and so white he's pink, so anally-retentive that he's somehow learned to walk with a Louisville Slugger up his ass. That makes him much superior to an aging hippie queer poet who was beloved around the world for not only his poetry, but for his advocacy of peace and justice. Will was just pointing out the obvious, although not in quite the way he intended.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Cato the Censor7:39 PM

    George Will should be stripped, scourged, and nailed to a cross. Once that's done, he may then be legitimately called a martyr, but not beforehand.

    ReplyDelete
  32. montag27:47 PM

    True enough, but, if anything, that's just more proof that Will was never an intellectual in any real sense of the word. Being a climber in ConservativeLand means doing whatever's necessary to take advantage of the wingnut welfare, and Fox is the Byzantium of wingnut welfare.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Jay B.8:13 PM

    The problem is they are the "New Coke" of Christianity. Instead of sanctifying poverty and challenging the ruling class, they are saying the Romans were right all along. And no one has made a Saint out of Pontus.

    ReplyDelete
  34. montag28:13 PM

    Never underestimate the power of NRA wingnut money, of which they have quite a bit to spread around.

    That said, after the Cliven Bundy fiasco, even so-called "moderate" Republicans (who were never moderate, only seemed so in comparison to the current crop of flakes, feebs and fools) were getting heat for backing away from the crazies.

    Guns definitely embolden the gullible.

    ReplyDelete
  35. montag28:21 PM

    Ah, but metaphorical martyrdom is so much more easily and quickly attained.

    And advertised.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Seems the WaPo editors who decided that Will's column was A-O.K. are all guys.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2014/06/20/george-will-sexual-assault-column-editors-were-all-male/

    Go figure!
    ~

    ReplyDelete
  37. Damn geese were always underfoot at them barn dances!!

    ReplyDelete
  38. jcricket10:42 PM

    well that's just creepy. I guess it fits.

    ReplyDelete
  39. the UK's Tory education minister got rigorous about teaching literature


    ... or alternately, a reactionary jumped-up posh boy wannabe decided to drop To Kill a Mockingbird and Of Mice and Men in favor of a more properly "British" curriculum, and received pushback from pretty much everyone who isn't a reactionary with vis head up vis ass. Sweet Jeebus, does Teachout think this was another case of children being forbidden from studying the "classics" in favor of Hothead Paisan comics, or whatever it is that gets US right-wing bookburners temporarily outraged on behalf of literature for a change? Perhaps Teachout could provide a brief follow-up, sketching out why Harper Lee has no place in a school literature class. Because I know why barely-literate American neoconfederates hate TKaM, but I'd be interested to see if Teachout can shine the usual turd in a way that's ...


    [PUTS ON SUNGLASSES]


    ... novel.

    ReplyDelete
  40. redoubtagain12:54 AM

    George Will's "issues of race" start with him growing up in Downstate Illinois in the '50s and '60s. Back then Downstate grew corn, soybeans and bigots, and not necessarily in that order. There were "sundown towns" all over Downstate. Some still are. Also if you were raised anything other than Protestant (like Roger Ebert) you got out of Downstate ASAP.

    ReplyDelete
  41. BadExampleMan1:14 AM

    Yes, but Tucker Carlson is unlikely to cede his turf without a vicious slap-fight, and I'm not sure Our George is up to the exertion.

    ReplyDelete
  42. BigHank531:56 AM

    Yeah, it's a lot harder to sign glossy photos of yourself for your doting fans (only $29.95 each!) when you're nailed up eight feet off the ground. Only the finest of metaphorical martyrdoms for Mr. Will: he won't even have to disturb his peaceful slumber to reap the rewards of persecution.

    ReplyDelete
  43. DocAmazing2:05 AM

    Camille Paglia in a bowtie would be mistaken for a soon-to-retire blackjack dealer in an off-strip casino.

    That would be a step up in terms of the general perception of her reliability.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Hard to be the martyr when you're the one piling the tinder around the stakes.

    Another example of conservative doublethink.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Buckley was a thug with a thesaurus.

    ReplyDelete
  46. And they'll keep on baitin'

    ReplyDelete
  47. nanute7:44 AM

    George Will Buckley?

    ReplyDelete
  48. Derelict8:37 AM

    the UK's Tory education minister got rigorous about teaching literature

    Universally imposed standards for some aspect of education. I wonder how our conservatives feel about such a thing.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Derelict8:52 AM

    Freedom of speech most certainly does not mean a guaranteed right to be published or syndicated. Just ask any struggling writer.

    For a group of people always blithering on about the "magic of the marketplace" and yelping about "entitlement culture," they sure seem to feel entitled to ignore the dictates of the market when it comes to their horrid ideas being rejected.

    ReplyDelete
  50. mgmonklewis9:49 AM

    Regarding that Teachout article, it's a nice idea, but how is he proposing those works all get included in the curriculum? Between preparing for standardized tests and learning other necessities such as writing and grammar, they're supposed to fit in time to watch three movies, a musical, a dance, two plays, and then get around to reading more traditional literary forms in the curriculum: novels, short stories, and poems?

    Not to mention, the list seems slightly stilted and stuffy. Granted, it's hard to pick films that are suitable for a high school audience and wouldn't set parents in an uproar (Chinatown and L.A. Confidential are out), but how about Psycho, Double Indemnity, Some Like It Hot, or a Marx Brothers film? Also, do the director, subject matter, and actors all have to be American, or what are the criteria for making it a uniquely "American" film worth studying in high school? Noble as it may be, I'm not convinced that "WWII film including an actor who himself was an injured WWII veteran" is a solid basis for determining a film's historical-cultural worth (unless your audience consists mainly of Tom Brokaw).

    And really, one group of paintings? Like you couldn't take a week to examine a brief survey if you felt the subject was that important? No Copley, Cassatt, Whistler, Hopper, Pollock, Bierstadt, Audubon, Remington, O'Keeffe, Liechtenstein, or even Grant Wood and Norman Rockwell? How about photographers like Matthew Brady or Ansel Adams?



    Not even a mention of architects like Sullivan or Wright? Not even a blurb in the curriculum about the development of the skyscraper or the ranch house (if you wanted to tie this survey into social history as well)?


    As for literature... wow. The amount of great material not even mentioned in passing is stunning. Not even a "The course should study 5 of the following 25 works." And really, an American Literature survey without anything by Hawthorne is just wrong. You couldn't even fit in "Young Goodman Brown"? It's got supernatural elements that might even make high schoolers interested in reading it.


    Anyway, Teachout's survey ideas are an interesting starting point for a conversation, but man, is his list stunted and constipated. Seriously, I think I've learned more art history and social history from any three episodes of the Antiques Roadshow than I'd learn in Teachout's class.

    ReplyDelete
  51. mgmonklewis9:58 AM

    Squaredancing to Wagner: The latest Progressive craze!

    ReplyDelete
  52. The Tragically Flip10:01 AM

    Pretty sure Thomas Sowell is the wingnut intellectual, no?

    ReplyDelete
  53. mgmonklewis10:02 AM

    My mind just shut down and rebooted at the thought of the Paglia-Will mashup. Aging anti-feminist contrarian, trying too hard to dress young, but also sporting a bowtie and combover, spouting prim, condescending tripe about the Dionysian force of Rand Paul and Madonna.

    ReplyDelete
  54. sharculese10:17 AM

    Look, it's different, because the Brits don't have our ennobling tradition of selective and opportunistic federalism. They're doing the best they can with their debased heritage.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Smurch10:41 AM

    Go, and do likewise.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Derelict11:02 AM

    The quote from the unnamed editors was something like "We tried to warn him but he seemed really sure about what he wanted to say . You could almost feel the sigh of despair on your cheek as you read the words.

    WTF!?!?! Just what function do editors serve if not as gatekeepers for their publication? Sometimes as an editor, you have to tell your brightest stars that their present submission is a piece of shit. Even the greatest and most brilliant writers turn out a turd every now and again. And part of your job as an editor is protecting both your publication and your star writer from those turds.

    ReplyDelete
  57. montag211:03 AM

    Probably because it's quite terrible, just too plain weird for broadcast, even on late-night tv, the snowmobile manufacturer sued for copyright infringement and won, or a combination of all three. I.e., who knows?

    ReplyDelete
  58. DocAmazing11:22 AM

    They're masters of it.

    ReplyDelete
  59. LittlePig11:50 AM

    Ewwww. That's some Rule 34 I could have lived without even conceptualizing. Ack.

    ReplyDelete
  60. mgmonklewis11:53 AM

    ♫ Elleman left and a do-SIEG-HEIL! ♪

    ReplyDelete
  61. LittlePig11:55 AM

    We're talking basically vampires here (non-sparkly ones). Old vampire yetis? Say, that could work.

    ReplyDelete
  62. LittlePig1:20 PM

    Oh, He left that scene a long long time ago. Besides John provided an (unusually) convenient out: Get Into Heaven Free! cards.

    ReplyDelete
  63. LittlePig1:23 PM

    He is a pig in a lace hat

    Harrumph. What the hell did we ever do to Matt?

    ReplyDelete
  64. LittlePig1:27 PM

    Thugosaurus willamsi

    Good thing he is extinct, and hopefully in a place that allows Gore Vidal to punch him in the nose whenever Gore damn well feels like it.

    ReplyDelete
  65. Derelict1:29 PM

    Haven't you heard The Word, brother? It was all a mistake; a simple and slight mistranslation.

    "For when I was sick, did you not withhold care from me? When I was in prison, did you not keep visitors from me? When I was hungry, did you not take the bread from my hand to secure your profits? When I was naked, did you not place a hood upon my head and electrodes upon my genitals?

    "For as you have done to me, so have you done to the least of my brethren. And so have you earned the Kingdom of Heaven!

    "Now go, ye, and pray like a hypocrite upon the street corner, a stone ye the harlot and the homo. Especially the harlot who does not put out for you, or the homo who threatens to open your closet door."

    ReplyDelete
  66. Derelict1:32 PM

    As long-gone (and sorely missed) commenter fourlegsgood might have pointed out, not all pigs are the same.

    ReplyDelete
  67. Derelict1:40 PM

    It's comforting to think that they don't believe the stuff they say. But they do. They really and truly do.

    I have had the sad experience of spending way too much time around these people. Very, very few mouth the words and don't believe it because it's literally impossible to hang around these people for very long and keep that façade up.

    Much more common, in my experience, was the true belief accompanied by unstinting judgment of all "others" for their foibles and failings. And huge aircraft-carrier size helpings of "doesn't really apply to me" escape clauses. (Like the wife of one mid-level Republican appointee who cornered me at a fundraiser to rail against the immorality of the gays--and expound on how much she liked to do housework in the nude and maybe I should come visit some time while because their house was so private.)

    ReplyDelete
  68. Derelict1:41 PM

    I see what you did there, and I'm hooked.

    ReplyDelete
  69. Derelict1:44 PM

    Noble as it may be, I'm not convinced that "WWII film including an actor who himself was an injured WWII veteran" is a solid basis for determining a film's historical-cultural worth.

    But it does give you an excuse to show Wrath of Khan as James Doohan ("Scotty") was shot six times and lost a finger during the D-Day landings.

    ReplyDelete
  70. LittlePig1:48 PM

    Or Green Acres reruns. Eddie Albert didn't get that Bronze Star climbing the telephone pole to answer a call.

    ReplyDelete
  71. Helmut Monotreme3:06 PM

    I don't think it's possible to underestimate Tucker Carlson's ability to screw up a sure thing. George has a fighting chance.

    ReplyDelete
  72. coozledad3:07 PM

    Dressed in the height of Roman fashion, no less!

    ReplyDelete
  73. smut clyde4:07 PM

    how much she liked to do housework in the nude
    Don't we all? That episode with the vacuum-cleaner, just an accident.

    ReplyDelete
  74. RogerAiles4:25 PM

    Jeff Jarvis is still alive? What about Doc Searles?

    ReplyDelete
  75. Derelict5:29 PM

    You were expecting 9 graphs, uncut?

    ReplyDelete
  76. Ellis_Weiner9:14 PM

    Stop trying to make Yeti porn epics happen.

    ReplyDelete
  77. mgmonklewis12:12 AM

    You have to let them happen.

    ReplyDelete
  78. smut clyde12:34 AM

    He'd probably file a tort.It's that what the kids are calling it now?

    ReplyDelete
  79. AGoodQuestion1:24 AM

    George Will has learned that being a weedy Casper Milquetoast in a bow tie need not keep you from riling up the base with knuckle-dragging sentiments. He should really send Tucker Carlson a bottle of good wine.

    ReplyDelete
  80. AGoodQuestion1:28 AM

    Eastwood may be a wingnut, and he's definitely a bad boyfriend. Still, he's a lot higher than Will on the scale of having genuine talents and marketable skills.

    ReplyDelete
  81. AGoodQuestion1:31 AM

    Fuck, doesn't he know that a bearded homosexual with a taste for non-rhyming poetry wrote Leaves of Grass. Actually given Will's puddle-shallow commitment to the greats of Western culture he might not.

    ReplyDelete
  82. AGoodQuestion1:46 AM

    It does have credits sung by Harry Nilsson. That's worth something.

    ReplyDelete
  83. montag22:59 AM

    Perhaps no more absolute proof that they have no respect for, nor understanding of the First Amendment is the way in which they use it in their defense. First, of course, is that they would like everyone to think that the First Amendment immunizes them from criticism. Second, they would like the public to think that the First Amendment prioritizes their speech over that of others, and third, certainly, that the First Amendment broadly applies to their commercial speech.

    It's not at all difficult to spot the authoritarian impulses in all these postures. In a way, I think this might explain the over-the-top reaction to almost everything said by someone not conservative--the aim is to exclude speech, to enforce the monoculture. When Obama says something bland, say, "kids ought to eat their vegetables," the outrage is immediate and outsized: "Impeach him!" It's not because he said anything untoward. It's because he said something. Then, when someone reacts, "you want to impeach him because of vegetables?--that's nuts," oh, heavens, that's a violation of the conservatives' free speech rights--because, of course, someone else not a conservative said something.

    That tendency will always be with the 27%, and because the government won't enforce it for them, they're going to go on thinking they've got to do it themselves. The only antidote is to keep laughing at them.

    ReplyDelete
  84. montag23:01 AM

    It also has Groucho Marx as God.

    Which also might be one more reason it's not in syndicated circulation. Groucho ain't George Burns....

    ReplyDelete
  85. willf6:08 AM

    Blue nosed, red faced and white knuckled.

    ReplyDelete
  86. Jaime Oria7:04 AM

    - how much she liked to do housework in the nude and maybe I should come visit some time while because their house was so private -



    Dear National Review, I never thought that this would ever happen to me....

    ReplyDelete
  87. I'm sure they'll be able to get one of our well-known and well-paid religious grifters to take care of that. "Ralph Reed, come on down!"

    ReplyDelete
  88. Internet, we love you.

    ReplyDelete
  89. montag29:07 AM

    Ah, but this is Fred Hiatt's shop, where polishing those turds has been raised to an art form.

    ReplyDelete
  90. They really and truly do.

    It is comforting for liberals to believe that the right wing is only in it for the money. For one thing, it's damned unpleasant for a liberal to contemplate the internal logic of conservative beliefs -- it's easier (and lets be honest, it's appealing to our self-regard) to believe conservatives are just idiots. And for the relatively even-keeled, open-minded left to attempt to inhabit the mental space of a right-winger, with its constricted sense of belief and its aching need for hierarchy, is just painful.

    There's no question that a lot of conservatives are pretty dumb, nor that the leaders are grifters. But it is still projection when we tell ourselves that they're like us, only dumber. They're not like us, they really believe that shit, and furthermore, they've been very successful over the past couple decades. Contemplate that, liberals.

    ReplyDelete
  91. cleter10:05 AM

    Man, I just looked at George Will's NRO column. That Obama, he's so lawless! Doesn't love the Constitution in that special way that guys with bowties and toupees do! The comments are all written by people who are quite outraged, but were apparently in an enchanted slumber from 2000-2009 and seem a little unclear about some of the origin stories in George Will's Constitution Expanded Universe.

    ReplyDelete
  92. cleter10:18 AM

    GUYS, SKIDOO IS ON DVD NOW. Amazon has it. There's also a fancy Otto Preminger blu-ray collection that inexplicably contains it.

    ReplyDelete
  93. Derelict10:27 AM

    . . . they've been very successful over the past couple decades.

    This is a very salient point, and one too often overlooked. I think a large part of the appeal that conservatives have for the average voter is that their proscriptions are straightforward, simple, and easy to understand. You don't have to think very hard to understand "cut spending and lower taxes!"

    Most liberal/progressive policies take a little empathy and a bit of thought. For example, what to do with "excess" money in the federal treasury. The conservative position is "give it to the job creators and they'll make jobs!" Easy to understand, even if it's complete bullshit in reality (wealthy invest their money in the Big Casino on Wall Street--they do not "create jobs" with it. Not even yacht-polishing jobs). The liberal position is "give it to people who are poor and struggling because those people spend it immediately and, in so doing, will boost the economy, which leads to less unemployment which in turn leads to fewer people competing for work, which means that you will likely get a raise because your labor has become more valuable." That's quite the chain of understanding you're asking someone to indulge in--and that chain gets wiped clean away by the conservative response: "What!?!?! Give money to underserving welfare queens!?!?"

    The lesson I always tried to impart to my Democratic clients was "Say it simply." Few took that to heart.

    ReplyDelete
  94. "Say it simply."

    I find allowing oneself to be a bit angry (and stepping away from the left-wing language purification rituals) can help. May I ask, are you a political consultant of some kind, that you have Democratic clients?

    ReplyDelete
  95. M. Krebs11:09 AM

    Joe Conason referred to Will as a "dyspeptic Tory." We should use that more, I think.

    ReplyDelete
  96. edroso11:18 AM

    Now all my friends know what they're getting for Christmas.

    ReplyDelete
  97. Derelict11:19 AM

    In a previous life, I spent about 7 years doing political consulting. Oddly enough, most of my clients were Republicans. They had lots of money, and their messages were stone simple to communicate. However, the overriding callousness of their ideology is what made me quit the business.

    I had a handful of Democratic clients. With few exceptions, they were horrible to work with. Their hearts were in the right place, but trying to get them to settle on anything was impossible. Most feared taking a position on an issue because they could then be called upon to defend that position. Why that was a problem, I could never discover. Many simply could not come to a coherent position--the Democratic variant of "two Jews, three opinions."

    And here's one very weird Stockholm-Syndrome aspect of our current politics that I saw firsthand: Everyone in politics at every level I dealt with (up to U.S. Senate) has internalized the idea that taxes can never, ever be raised and must always be cut. That's true of both Democrats and Republicans now. And funding even those parts of government both sides deem as crucial (i.e., defense spending) can never be accomplished by tax increases--only cuts to other spending will do.

    ReplyDelete
  98. Stockholm-Syndrome


    I'd like to capture this comment and hold it until it can come to see things my away! Absolutely agreed on that super-frustrating aspect of US politics today.

    ReplyDelete
  99. M. Krebs1:01 PM

    Recently Letterman recalled one of Groucho's gems: On You Bet Your Life (I assume) a contestant had 14 kids, to which Groucho replied, "You know, I love a good cigar, but I do take it out now and then."

    ReplyDelete
  100. Eh, I'm holding off until (1) Jenn actually writes it, and (2) there's an anime adaptation.

    ReplyDelete
  101. cleter2:17 PM

    Nothing says "Happy Birthday, Baby Jesus!" quite like a DVD bargain bin Preminger catastrophe.


    There's also a pretty pompous New Yorker review of the Skidoo DVD, containing words like "visually balanced, dialectically charged compositions" and so forth. I suspect the New Yorker review guy has about 12 paragraphs that he uses interchangeably to generate all the reviews, and then does a find-and-replace on the name of the movie. You could probably parlay that technique into a pretty good gig at NRO.

    http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/movies/2014/01/dvd-of-the-week-skidoo.html

    ReplyDelete
  102. Derelict2:46 PM

    "Enchanted slumber" is the term, alright. I remember about six months into Obama's first term getting into a discussion with a rightwinger about how "Obama's bankrupting the country because he wants to make the debt go up." When I pointed out that the unbridled spending of Bush must have made him really outraged if he so concerned about the deficit, he just gave me this completely blank look.

    Bush instantly became the "unpresident" who will be purged from conservative history. He'll be seated right next to Gerald Ford and George H.W. Bush as presidents the right has had to completely disown. St. Ronnie is getting close to that treatment, but vigorous whitewashing efforts ("Reagan never raised taxes! He only cut taxes!") keep the dream alive. Which is a good thing for Republicans. They'd have to go all the way back to Teddy Roosevelt to have an acceptable president--and even he's not top notch (established those national parks and broke up all those trusts).

    Scorecard:

    Bush the dumber: Disowned for obvious reasons
    Bush the smarter: Raised taxes and presided over a bad recession.
    Reagan: Raised taxes, suggested working with Democrats. Still, so popular at the time that he's gotta be a saint!
    Ford: Failed to bring country out of stag-flation, hated by most when he left office.
    Nixon: Only president in history to resign office. Talked to the commies. Bad.
    Eisenhower: Spent money on interstates, warned against military-industrial complex. Probably an under-the-counter commie.
    Hoover: Great Depression.
    Coolidge: Set stage for Great Depression.
    Harding: Died before being impeached over Teapot Dome.

    So, not many viable Republican presidents over the last 100 years.

    ReplyDelete
  103. Meanie-meanie, tickle a person10:46 PM

    Yetis with tentacles?

    ReplyDelete
  104. Hey, thanks for the link.


    I liked the video clip about the movie on that page. It made me very curious to see the movie, if only to see Groucho Marx playing the role of God.

    ReplyDelete
  105. True, but I am thankful for his concise definition of a conservative as a "a fellow who is standing athwart history yelling 'Stop!'"


    It was a remarkable honest thing for him to say, and it conveys nicely the utter futility of the aims of the conservative movement.

    ReplyDelete
  106. Yes, the conservatives benefit greatly from their presentation of simple solutions to complex problems.


    I've just spent the last several minutes trying to find a link to a study I heard mentioned on a podcast I've heard (to no avail.)


    In the study, various questions about societal problems were presented to test subjects, and they were given decreasing amounts of time to answer each round of questions. The researchers found that the less time the subjects were given to think about the problems, the more conservative their answers tended to be.

    ReplyDelete
  107. Halloween_Jack9:57 AM

    Funny how W has pretty much disappeared from the public eye (his crap paintings notwithstanding), leaving also-rans like Romney and McCain to take potshots at the POTUS because they have no records of their own to compare with Obama's. Guess we all know the answer to "Miss me yet?", huh?

    ReplyDelete
  108. Halloween_Jack10:03 AM

    Or anything with Clark Gable or Jimmy Stewart. Hell, even Gene Roddenberry got a Distinguished Flying Cross.

    ReplyDelete
  109. Derelict10:16 AM

    I find Bush's artistic efforts interesting. The guy doesn't really have much talent--certainly his paintings don't even rise to flea-market quality. Yet, he insists on showing them to the public.

    I can only guess that he's surrounded by people who act like they're his friends, but really don't like him. "George, that painting's gorgeous! You really need to go on the Tonight Show and hand that to Leno!"

    ReplyDelete
  110. Halloween_Jack10:16 AM

    That's... an interesting list. While some of those towns surely deserve the reputation (arguably, Pekin, whose high school teams were still known as the "Chinks" until 1908, still does), a lot of that is pretty thin gruel.

    ReplyDelete
  111. Halloween_Jack10:20 AM

    Pure gold: https://twitter.com/ProfJeffJarvis/status/480095197662294016

    ReplyDelete
  112. J Neo Marvin11:32 AM

    Doing my best David Bowie as Pontius Pilate homage.

    ReplyDelete