Quotes of the day
posted at 10:00 pm on October 4, 2009 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
“By behaving in this manner and, frankly, by writing editorials insulting average Americans not fond of reading Hayek on weekends, the elitists in the conservative ranks may entertain themselves splendidly at cocktail parties, but they are doing little to bring liberty to people thirsty for it.
There is a difference between being an elitist and being an intellectual. Of course, the movement can always use more intellectuals. We need fewer elitists. Milton Friedman is a perfect example of an intellectual who was not an elitist…
Conservative elitists will be clutching their chests when I dare list these names together, but Milton Friedman (Free to Choose), Henry Hazlitt (Economics in One Lesson), Friedrich Hayek (Road to Serfdom), and Thomas Paine (Common Sense) have a lot in common with Limbaugh and Beck.
They made complex issues easy to understand in order to promote the concepts of liberty to the greatest number of people.”
***
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »
publiuspen on October 4, 2009 at 11:31 PM
I’m not going to say that this is the one book to read, it’s just the book I’m going to recommend for the moment:
Radicalism of the American Revolution by Gordon S. Wood.
You see, the great story of America is not about race, as is often trited out–it’s about the end of the hierarchical society, and the creation of a more egalitarian society where a man could go and say he was as good as any other man–something he would not have said in a hierarchical society, where one got off the sidewalk and tipped one’s hat when the local squire walked by.
Naturally, it’s not true of course. All men are not equal in talents or abilities, and part of what Hayward et al are getting at is because of that–just because some guy has an opinion–even a conservative opinion–doesn’t mean it is necessarily worth listening to. But he should be treated as an equal before law and society–and given his chance to have his say and a chance for people to judge for themselves.
We got rid of one hierarchical society. Pray let us not bring back another, where the nobles are decided at the age of 18 when they get accepted to Harvard.
Horatius on October 4, 2009 at 11:53 PM
Yeah, but I mean come on…it’s Obama. Has the guy hatched an original thought yet? I mean, it’s been nearly a year now.
ddrintn on October 4, 2009 at 11:53 PM
+11
Heh.
Jaibones on October 4, 2009 at 11:53 PM
Now, that has the potential of being a hyperbolic statement given that you don’t know all politicians and you don’t have data on the truthfulness of politicians…
MeatHeadinCA on October 4, 2009 at 11:54 PM
crr6 @ 11:47PM
That’s funny but you know that Obama is a precedent don’t you?
Vince on October 4, 2009 at 11:54 PM
+5
If Brooks wants more people to follow him, take down Obama, Pelosi and Reid. The reason someone like Beck is more popular than Brooks is obvious: while Brooks attacks Limbaugh and social conservatives, Beck attacks to the Obama Adm and has made a real world impact. You would think an intellectual would be able to figure this out. Conservatives like results and leadership, not back-stabbing concern trolling.
pearson on October 4, 2009 at 11:54 PM
Checkers could have beat Carter in 1980, you twit.
Laura in Maryland on October 4, 2009 at 11:55 PM
^ Wait, I can think of one. To paraphrase, our Muslim population would make us one of the world’s largest Islamic countries. Now that’s originality for ya.
ddrintn on October 4, 2009 at 11:57 PM
My dear chap, she doesn’t have to out think Thomas Jefferson, she just has to out think the flailing and falling Bozo Obama.
semloh on October 4, 2009 at 11:58 PM
Liberal smirks don’t mean anything here, crrvx; you have to express yourself in clear language. So, what does that mean?
Which of Palin’s known votes and public policy positions as a Governor and Vice Presidential candidate would make a conservative prefer the positions of President Obama?
Jaibones on October 4, 2009 at 11:58 PM
I don’t think so.
ddrintn on October 4, 2009 at 11:59 PM
Oh, oh, I’ve got one of his original thoughts!!!
“Well, I should say at the outset that Skip Gates is a friend, so I may be a little biased here. I don’t know all the facts….the Cambridge police acted stupidly…”
Boring, nonhopey-changey politicians normally wait to learn all the facts before opining that cops are stupid.
18-1 on October 4, 2009 at 11:59 PM
I don’t think
so.ddrintn on October 4, 2009 at 11:59 PM
FIFY, Einstein.
Now off to bed, you have school in the morning dearie.
Laura in Maryland on October 5, 2009 at 12:00 AM
^ There really wasn’t a big push for Reagan until the debate and until he purchased broadcast time on the eve of the election. Bush Sr would never have been able to pull it off.
If you think the GOP can throw up just anyone in 2012 and unseat Obama, you’re making a grave error.
ddrintn on October 5, 2009 at 12:02 AM
+100 for the Heinlein quote. And I agree with the sentiment.
Heinlein was a smart man.
Holger on October 5, 2009 at 12:02 AM
Which of her votes? LOL. She was a governor not a legislator. Looks like you failed history with progressoverpeace.
crr6 on October 5, 2009 at 12:03 AM
Yes, but can boring, non-hopus-pokus pols get the other O and wife to fly over to Copenhagen, wet the eyes of the masses, and still somehow convince the IOC to reject Crime City?
Now, that is something worthy of praise.
MeatHeadinCA on October 5, 2009 at 12:03 AM
I like vitriol — def: bitterly scathing, caustic. When you’re angry at ACORN advising for child prostitution, Congress taxing our grandchildren, the President usurping Constitutional power, and the government having access to your medical recortds and checking account — Nixon never would have been involved in Watergate if his Plumbers could have simply logged onto the gov’t healthdata site; when the Pres calls various politicians liars and then Joe Wilson is castigated in the press for saying the same thing in the same venue; when Dems boo and interrupt President Bush and then pretend they never did it; when they try to push through an unread healthcare bill before August and then say they never had a solid bill; when the members of Congress all say the words of the bill don’t matter, it’s just the spoken intent, the lip service, that matters; when the Pres swears before Congress that no illegal aliens will be covered by the healthcare bill and then says that he is going to accomplish this by making all illegals legal; when Congress says abortions won’t be covered but they disallow ammendments containing that language; when you know every word out of their mouths are twisted disinformation, lies and pure bull; when they say that we people aren’t smart enough to understand, let alone comment on, the laws they intend to pass, then you have a right and an obligation to vitriol.
flicker on October 5, 2009 at 12:03 AM
Knock off the condescension shit. Sweetie.
ddrintn on October 5, 2009 at 12:04 AM
If you think the GOP can throw up just anyone in 2012 and unseat Obama, you’re making a grave error.
ddrintn on October 5, 2009 at 12:02 AM
I agree! So far, Palin is the only likely candidate who appears to have the guts to take on Obama and the Chicago machine.
Vince on October 5, 2009 at 12:06 AM
Plus she’s the only one on the horizon right now that has more than an ounce of charisma.
ddrintn on October 5, 2009 at 12:10 AM
These are the types of cretins that gave us McCain.
Democrats (spit) will disparage and viciously attack the best and most conservative candidates.
Rino’s will support them in their efforts.
justltl on October 5, 2009 at 12:10 AM
Here’s HA reader recommendations so far:
Hayek: Road to Serfdom
Levin: Liberty and Tyranny
Paine: Common Sense
Goldberg: Liberal Facism
Courois: The Black Book of Communism
O’Rourke: Parliament of Whores
McCullough: 1776
Lewis: Screwtape Letters
Friedman: Free to Choose
Steyn: American Alone
Wood: Radicalism of the American Revolution
Keep adding your book recommendations. I’ll compile a list from your comments tonight and post tomorrow. Others might be interested.
publiuspen on October 5, 2009 at 12:10 AM
I think a big factor in Chicago not getting the Olympics was Obama going there and demanding them. The Euro bureaucrats who dominate the event would have felt like they were kowtowing to the Americans.
18-1 on October 5, 2009 at 12:11 AM
It appears that Mr. Obama seems to be totally preoccupied with himself, imagine how refreshing it would be to have a politician consider the citizens for a change.
Cindy Munford on October 5, 2009 at 12:11 AM
Well said, and TRUE!
Gang-of-One on October 5, 2009 at 12:11 AM
Hence, the question, what conservative could reject her for Obama? Even though I absolutely despise McCain (and have since 2000, but being an evil Imperial Stormtrooper I suppose that’s expected), there’s no way I could reject him for Obama. Hillary on the other hand…
jarodea on October 5, 2009 at 12:11 AM
You’d support Hillary over Obama?
Most sane people would support nearly anyone over Palin. If you can sit in the white house for four years without setting yourself on fire you’d do a better job than Palin would. I wouldn’t trust her with scissors let alone the Presidency. (for progressoverpeace that’s:”Precedency”)
crr6 on October 5, 2009 at 12:15 AM
The more charismatic candidate has won every election since at least 1968…
18-1 on October 5, 2009 at 12:15 AM
I was of the same mind as you during the campaign over Hillary, McCain, and Obama. I knew Obama would be competing for the title of worst US President ever, but it still amazes me just how much better a presidency “like Clinton’s but a little worse” would be.
jarodea on October 5, 2009 at 12:15 AM
50 years ago when Nixon lost, we didn’t have the internet and talk radio. Everything was filtered through the state run press. Things are different today. Political movements can be made much more quickly, momentum gained much more quickly.
I think the pissed off moms are going to be THE election voting block that is going to turn the establishment upside down in the next 2 election cycles.
karenhasfreedom on October 5, 2009 at 12:16 AM
Listen to her, she has condescension she can spin you
Condescension that will linger within you
She’ll sing you stories of condescension that will sting thee
And make you come to dread the condescension that will be
PercyB on October 5, 2009 at 12:17 AM
I would agree with you, but I thought that Obama was supposed to be oh so charming… I guess that’s only the case when he’s community organizing and going to Reverend Wright’s church o’ hate.
Honestly, I think he could have gotten Chicago the Olympics had he
1) tried to bribe someone (*shudder)
2) actually talked and listened to people for several days…
Instead, he completely failed. He would have been better sending Oprah to Samoa to build a hospital, but alas, it appears lefties just don’t care.
MeatHeadinCA on October 5, 2009 at 12:17 AM
Some people hate the Clintoons to the point of blindness. Hillary is just as radical as Obama, but she is a white woman and wife of a successful president.
She would’ve been stealthier and her political skills are very very dangerous.
Holger on October 5, 2009 at 12:17 AM
I’ll bet she could’ve gotten an Olympics to Alaska.
ddrintn on October 5, 2009 at 12:17 AM
Maybe Jailbones was talking about votes Palin made while a member of the Wasilla PTA? I heard her stand on reducing lunch prices 25 cents was very controversial.
LMAO.
crr6 on October 5, 2009 at 12:19 AM
A re-election campaign is always a referendum on the incumbent. The opponent just needs to be acceptable. Reagan didn’t persuade many people in 1980 – he assuaged their fears that he was a crack pot and a warmonger. Bush didn’t need to do that. People already knew him as an establishment Republican from his time as head of the CIA and chairman of the Republican Party during Watergate. Bush was an adequate campaigner and would have won with 54%. (Anderson would not have run, and his 7% would have broken at least 2 to 1 for Bush). Facts: interest rates, unemployment and inflation were all at or near double digits, and Carter said it was our fault because we suffered a malaise. Our embassy had been siezed in Iran and 54 hostages taken while Carter dithered.
Ted Torgerson on October 5, 2009 at 12:19 AM
Sharp rhetorical question.
Gang-of-One on October 5, 2009 at 12:19 AM
Pffffft.
ddrintn on October 5, 2009 at 12:19 AM
But the real question is, could she (Palin) given a speech that wouldn’t have left a dry eye in the room…
MeatHeadinCA on October 5, 2009 at 12:20 AM
Publiuspen since you are soliciting suggestions, you might consider :
“Money Mischief” by Milton Friedman and
“The Constitution” by Page Smith
“The Constitution” will put today’s raucous debate into perspective.
Skandia Recluse on October 5, 2009 at 12:21 AM
Well that’s taken for granted I would support Hillary over Obama. Funny thing though is that no matter what you think of her, Palin wouldn’t have been president (at least not for the full term). Instead we have in President Obama someone who causes any sane person to wish we could upgrade to someone who could merely sit in the White House for 4 years without setting themselves on fire.
jarodea on October 5, 2009 at 12:21 AM
Most all sane people would now support nearly anyone over Obama. If you could sit in the white house for 8 months without practically setting the country on fire you’d do a better job than Obama is. I wouldn’t trust him with a spoon let alone the Presidency.
MB4 on October 5, 2009 at 12:21 AM
At least maybe she didn’t vote “present”.
LOL…OK, find your “acceptable” candidate. I’ll sit back and watch in 2012.
ddrintn on October 5, 2009 at 12:24 AM
The WH is currently on 24h fire watch….
Caper29 on October 5, 2009 at 12:24 AM
President Obama may very well be the best thing to happen for the Conservative Movement since Ronald Reagan.
Holger on October 5, 2009 at 12:24 AM
Points for creativity for both of you. Maybe next time you can create an entire comment from scratch!
crr6 on October 5, 2009 at 12:25 AM
I take it, sir, that you do not approve of your lot in life.
PercyB on October 5, 2009 at 12:25 AM
Publiuspen
I would recommend the Gulag Archipelago.
It will open your eyes about communism.
Also books by Robert Conquest such as the Harvest of Sorrows.
Dhuka on October 5, 2009 at 12:26 AM
On the lunch price reduction issue? True, she did take a very strong stand on that.
crr6 on October 5, 2009 at 12:28 AM
Always use the proper tool for the proper job. No need to use a sledge hammer to swat a fly when just holding a mirror in front of you and your dear leader should more than suffice.
MB4 on October 5, 2009 at 12:28 AM
This quote is going to haunt you when Obama lights himself on fire.
jhffmn on October 5, 2009 at 12:30 AM
Yeah I do, but be sure not to lose any sleep over it either way.
ddrintn on October 5, 2009 at 12:31 AM
Well done dear. See how much better it feels when you come up with it all by yourself?
crr6 on October 5, 2009 at 12:31 AM
Beat me to it, not like crr6 and Obama don’t make it exceeding easy.
jarodea on October 5, 2009 at 12:32 AM
Oh, come on now! Michelle keeps the matches hidden…
MeatHeadinCA on October 5, 2009 at 12:32 AM
Which makes her more qualified than Obama already then. I take it she didn’t have to consult SEIU before voting.
ddrintn on October 5, 2009 at 12:34 AM
Mild criticism though, and don’t take this too hard.
The comment doesn’t quite work because you swat a fly by holding a mirror in front of Obama.
But other than that it was great!
crr6 on October 5, 2009 at 12:34 AM
It’s a Precedency for everyone. You guys say “historic” far more often than I say “Precedent”. You morons are the ones who wanted a Precedency instead of a Presidency. That’s how you people operate. It’s the deadliest stupidity this world has ever seen.
progressoverpeace on October 5, 2009 at 12:36 AM
All Palin has to do is convince the country she won’t use the economy as an excuse to give blank checks to the people that got her elected and call it a stimulus package.
Besides, given that unemployment will be sky high the country will be ready for something completely different. Her biggest appeal is she’s the candidate most likely to drive the liberals destroying the country to Canada.
jhffmn on October 5, 2009 at 12:36 AM
LOL…yeah, Teh One even had the teleprompter shedding a tear or two.
ddrintn on October 5, 2009 at 12:37 AM
Maddow has called R.S. McCain out as a racist on national TV. If what she said were lies, then she committed libel, and R.S. should file a lawsuit. If he doesn’t…you have to ask the question ‘why?’
WisCon on October 5, 2009 at 12:37 AM
TOTUS a real patriot? I find that hard to believe given he dates Chris Matthews’ leg.
MeatHeadinCA on October 5, 2009 at 12:38 AM
I was trying to teach you a lesson using your own words, speaking in your own tongue, so to speak, that you might better understand. But even that seems to have failed to penetrate.
MB4 on October 5, 2009 at 12:40 AM
Possible events for the Alaska Winter Olympics:
*RINO Toss
*Triathlon: 10 miles on Snowmachine, post 1,000 words on Facebook, run 5 miles
*Hockey Mommin’ (most kids wins)
*Polar Bear Wrasslin’
*Ethics Complaint Slalom
Mr. Wednesday Night on October 5, 2009 at 12:40 AM
I don’t know….it’s pretty close!
crr6 on October 5, 2009 at 12:40 AM
A swing and a miss. That’s your third strike in one comment thread, better luck next time.
Probably because it wouldn’t be worth the effort with Soros or some other dem billionaire supporting Maddow. I’m not a lawyer but itsn’t it also pretty difficult proving libel in the US? As I understand it, and I could easily be way off, all Maddow would have to do is find one thing RS McCain has written that could be considered racist to win.
jarodea on October 5, 2009 at 12:43 AM
Question of the day for everyones favorite looney wingnut, progressoverpeace.
How come the racist fascist Precedent and his junta haven’t imposed martial law on America?
crr6 on October 5, 2009 at 12:44 AM
It does work as “swat a fly” is a metaphor, grasshoper.
MB4 on October 5, 2009 at 12:44 AM
Probably as he does not dare rather than from lack of desire.
MB4 on October 5, 2009 at 12:46 AM
It’s the Palin-hating troll with his talking point for the night. Anything you say to it will get the same response.
That’s crap6’s strategy, and he/she does it every time he/she gets on a Palin thread
and this is what he/she thinks of all of you
Janos Hunyadi on October 5, 2009 at 12:46 AM
Yeah, these are the guys who buy laminated Obama dreck at the NYT Obama Merchandise Mart.
And interfere with Date Night?
ddrintn on October 5, 2009 at 12:48 AM
The audacity of hope was for his campaign
Tyranny and thuggery are for his reign
His candidacy was rather like that of a Henry Houdini
His presidency is shaping up to be much more like that of a Benito Mussolini
Although he tries to slip it all in under another guise
To all his fascist action most foul we must still be wise
In spite of all the Houdini lies
Dancing in Obama’s Mussolini eyes
MB4 on October 5, 2009 at 12:49 AM
Well to be a metaphor it should work in both senses of the term/word. You can’t “swat a fly” by holding up a mirror to Obama.
Maybe you should have said “why swat a fly with a sledgehammer when you can swat it with a relatively small mirror?”
That might have worked a bit better. Still a stretch though.
Ah well, you’ll get one right someday.
crr6 on October 5, 2009 at 12:49 AM
crr6 on October 5, 2009 at 12:34 AM
It’s tempting to respond to people like you regarding your criticism of Palin as being an idiot, but you think Obama is smart. I think that says a lot.
TTheoLogan on October 5, 2009 at 12:51 AM
note the depth of crap6’s intellect, as he/she works the same talking point as tonight
Repeating the same garbage on the same junior high level
Janos Hunyadi on October 5, 2009 at 12:51 AM
Hayek: The Constitution of Liberty (MUST READ – brilliant beyond explanation)
Rand: Capitalism the Unknown Ideal (Pure, unwavering defense of capitalism to the degree that child labor is explained)
Muravchik: Heaver on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism (Endorsed by Sowell as the history of socialism)
Ellis: Founding Brothers (Shatters the myth of the hypocritical and racist founders in the chapter on slavery)
Huxley: Brave New World
Bloom: The Closing of the American Mind
V15J on October 5, 2009 at 12:52 AM
Thanks for making my point … again. People must think I’m paying you, or something.
I’m not one who believes he wants to be dictator for life. I believe that The Precedent wasnt’s to do nothing but exact revenge on the US and the West. He’s been doing that and is working to inflict as much pain and damage as he possibly can. He’s already openly supported a communist dictator wannabe’s attempted coup in Honduras – one in which even another ally of Zelaya’s admitted that the Hondurans followed their Constitution (though Arias thought Honduras had the dumbest COnstitution, since it was so anti-dictator). The Precedent is one of the COCOA-Puffs. He’s doing his best. When the credit crisis returns, you’ll see what he does. Look at what he’s done without the crisis and multiply that by 10000.
But The Precedent’s real interest is in seeing the US a smoldering ember. That’s his dream, and he’s been doing his best, as everyone has seen.
progressoverpeace on October 5, 2009 at 12:53 AM
No, I think the way I said it was just fine for any thinking person and certainly better than your suggested alteration.
Ah well, you’ll get one right someday, maybe. Although, on the other hand …
MB4 on October 5, 2009 at 12:53 AM
That is my favorite.
progressoverpeace on October 5, 2009 at 12:55 AM
Have you saved all the comments I’ve made this week on your computer Janos? I made a bunch on the 2nd amendment thread from Tuesday, make sure you get those.
Also, would you mind sending me the ones I made in mid-September? I had some pretty good one-liners in a Palin thread and I’m sure you saved those. I don’t really feel like going through the archives and finding them myself.
Thanks!
crr6 on October 5, 2009 at 12:57 AM
Thank you for finally explaining that to ccr6.
Gang-of-One on October 5, 2009 at 12:57 AM
Right. So why not impose martial law and ram his agenda through without the consent of the courts or Congress? Him and his junta are fascist racist idiot-in chiefs who want to destroy America right?
crr6 on October 5, 2009 at 12:58 AM
Actually we are the ones who are paying him. That is about to end though and we will be demanding a full refund and penalties from him for complete failure to perform even at minimal standards. His mom begged us to hire him even at just the entry level position that he got. Last time we listen to her.
DasObamaReich on October 5, 2009 at 12:58 AM
heh. I’ve seen him “explain” it before. I just think it’s hilarious he calls Obama that all the time like it’s a little game or something. He’s no better than the McBushitler morons.
crr6 on October 5, 2009 at 1:00 AM
There is also a difference between being an elitist and being one of the elite. I am an elitist, but without considering myself one of the elite. And it seems one must beware looking down on elitism and elitists, for a reason that should be obvious, on reflection.
Kralizec on October 5, 2009 at 1:00 AM
Ah well. Agree to disagree.
I expect a little more from you next time you make a metaphor involving fly swatting, sledgehammers and mirrors though!
crr6 on October 5, 2009 at 1:02 AM
You do now, after it’s been explained to you. LOL.
You kill me. My label is 100% accurate. It’s the only reason he was elected. The moron’s supporters say Precedent with pride. They think it’s a great thing. Designer Kenneth Cole thinks it’s really cool. Don’t you want to buy one of his “Precedent Obama” T-shirts?
progressoverpeace on October 5, 2009 at 1:07 AM
You will expect more from me and I won’t expect more from you. That should balance out in a sense anyway, I suppose.
DasObamaReich on October 5, 2009 at 1:09 AM
well said AP.
disillusioned on October 5, 2009 at 1:10 AM
AP didn’t write that…
crr6 on October 5, 2009 at 1:12 AM
I say Governors get to vote when they Vito or Sign a bill. A Big vote it is, very Big indeed.
IowaWoman on October 5, 2009 at 1:14 AM
Only on HA can someone with the username “DasObamaReich” attempt to patronize you. Classic.
crr6 on October 5, 2009 at 1:15 AM
Love MSNBC talking about the lack of influence of talk radio. Their six viewers are all nodding in agreement. And the Republican strategist who says the Republican party must be “modernized.” He’s the type we need to get rid of before it’s too late. I really think we are heading toward a third party. And I think everyone’s right…it may be a losing party at first, but I think it will be a long term thing and will eventually bring the country back from the brink. The losing party will be the Republican Party in the long run if they don’t lose their corruption, elitism and democrat lite ideas.
Christian Conservative on October 5, 2009 at 1:15 AM
Inability to think outside the box. The martial law move is neither in Alinsk’s rule book nor any Acorn guide for communist organizers. Doh! I meant community organizers. What the hell? Same diff.
Gang-of-One on October 5, 2009 at 1:16 AM
Your interpretation of our democratic processes might have had more credibility had you spelled “veto” correctly.
Ohhhh Palin supporters…
crr6 on October 5, 2009 at 1:17 AM
Pretty much.
Well it’s been fun gang. Sweet wingnutty dreams to you all!
crr6 on October 5, 2009 at 1:18 AM
Because they forgot to take away the guns first.
Socmodfiscon on October 5, 2009 at 1:19 AM
One think for sure. crr6 has got to be good for caffeine sales.
KentAllard on October 5, 2009 at 1:20 AM
…on the other hand, who cares as long as the fly gets swatted?
Gang-of-One on October 5, 2009 at 1:27 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »