Quotes of the day
posted at 10:40 pm on March 5, 2010 by Allahpundit
“But the Tea Partiers are closer to the New Left. They don’t seek to form a counter-establishment because they don’t believe in establishments or in authority structures. They believe in the spontaneous uprising of participatory democracy. They believe in mass action and the politics of barricades, not in structure and organization. As one activist put it recently on a Tea Party blog: ‘We reject the idea that the Tea Party Movement is ‘led’ by anyone other than the millions of average citizens who make it up.’
“For this reason, both the New Left and the Tea Party movement are radically anticonservative. Conservatism is built on the idea of original sin — on the assumption of human fallibility and uncertainty. To remedy our fallen condition, conservatives believe in civilization — in social structures, permanent institutions and just authorities, which embody the accumulated wisdom of the ages and structure individual longings.
“That idea was rejected in the 1960s by people who put their faith in unrestrained passion and zealotry. The New Left then, like the Tea Partiers now, had a legitimate point about the failure of the ruling class. But they ruined it through their own imprudence, self-righteousness and naïve radicalism. The Tea Partiers will not take over the G.O.P., but it seems as though the ’60s political style will always be with us — first on the left, now the right.”
***
“What [Gray] means with that — and what he takes an entire book to explain — is that we in the West have become enamored of the idea of a Utopia achievable by politics. Last summer in a Templeton-Cambridge seminar, Gray, who is himself a religious skeptic, made a case that the so-called New Atheists are actually secular utopians, and as such, religious-minded. In ‘Black Mass,’ Gray traces the utopian impulse — the idea that we can create a kind of heaven on earth — throughout Western intellectual history. He argues that the obvious forms of secular utopias — the Nazi racialist version, and the various communist versions — may have been the most deadly, but that the belief in human perfection pervades Western political thought. For Gray, this is primarily a religious impulse, because it is based on faith about human nature that cannot be squared with the known facts…
“This is why I’m so alienated from politics these days. It’s fine and indeed necessary to be visionary, and to have an agenda for effective, positive reform. But that’s not the same thing as utopianism, which by definition is a philosophy built on an impossible dream. I got into a heated e-mail discussion yesterday with a Tea Party sympathizing friend who said that the government is ‘evil.’ Wrong. The government is no more evil than are big corporations, Wall Street bankers, university professors, media barons, Pentagon generals or anybody else. I am sick of the way our government leaders and our financial titans behave, and I think they do not have the best interest of the country at heart. But to declare them as an entire class ‘evil’ is not only to be unserious about the challenges facing us, but it’s also to run the risk of a kind of utopian thinking that can destroy lives and whole societies.”
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: 1 2 Next »
Just like ACORN…
… Who knew?
Seven Percent Solution on March 5, 2010 at 10:44 PM
Hence both the Tea Party and conservatives being for free market principles and against government bailouts. If politicians try to predetermine the outcome of everything, nothing can work in this country. But why am I wasting my time arguing with David Brooks? The man is still fixated on Obama’s pants.
Doughboy on March 5, 2010 at 10:47 PM
Which of those has a virtual monopoly on force?
Chip on March 5, 2010 at 10:49 PM
Didn’t even have to click to know it was Dreher.
Purple Fury on March 5, 2010 at 10:49 PM
Brooks is either dishonest or lazy. I also suspect he is a simplistic phuk.
CWforFreedom on March 5, 2010 at 10:54 PM
Brooks and Dreher are right… but there is no force for conservatism anymore… the whole system is going to collapse…
ninjapirate on March 5, 2010 at 10:54 PM
Leftists can’t seem to do anything but Project.
It’s one of their biggest physiological problems – maybe they should all ‘drop-out’ of society and get their minds right before they rejoin the rest of us in the real world.
Chip on March 5, 2010 at 10:54 PM
Every thing written by the men who founded the United States is based on the knowledge of human imperfection and how human character flaws use the power of government to enslave. Every word in our founding documents are intended to counterbalance that human imperfection with competing interests in the hope that a natural balance would prevent one single man, or single group from achieving total domination.
Skandia Recluse on March 5, 2010 at 10:55 PM
Man, this Brooks guy is really into using Soviet propaganda tactics.
darwin on March 5, 2010 at 10:56 PM
Why go there?
They never can seem to keep ammo in stock.
Chip on March 5, 2010 at 10:57 PM
Why do the babblings of Brooks keep showing up here? Why not just show videos of monkeys flinging their feces?
neurosculptor on March 5, 2010 at 10:58 PM
‘utopian’? You know I’ve read that twice and it baffles me.
He seems to be grooving along in some esoteric niche that common folk like myself just don’t get.
jeanie on March 5, 2010 at 10:58 PM
Perfect juxtaposition, Allah.
Dreher is right about the West’s tendency to Utopianize—to attempt to perfect society through politics—and Obama and his cadre are hell-bent on immanentizing the eschaton by any means necessary.
So the TEA Partiers stand up and say “NO WAY JOSÉ: That’s Unconstitutional,” and they say it precisely because they know that you can’t perfect humanity by political means.
And Brooks sees it as an anti-civilization movement?
What a maroon! What an ignoranimus!
dicentra63 on March 5, 2010 at 10:59 PM
What in blazes is so darned unclear about \”stop spending all our money\”?
Splunge on March 5, 2010 at 11:00 PM
So we’re agreed that it’s evil, then?
Lehosh on March 5, 2010 at 11:01 PM
What would David Brooks know about conservatism?
I am sure he could go on about haberdashery in embarrassing detail. Conservatism… not so much.
sharrukin on March 5, 2010 at 11:01 PM
But the government is omnipotent and has overwhelming coercive power. In the end that constitutes the final and decisive means of arbitration. There is simply no comparison between the dangers of government and the dangers of corporations.
rplat on March 5, 2010 at 11:01 PM
Which ones are we paying for, thru our tax dollars? Which ones are supposed to be good, and responsible stewards of their titles, positions, and responsibilities we honor them with, when we vote for them?
That’s why we should hold our elected officials to a higher scrutiny, than the private sector. The tools at Enron were punished for their deeds. Will Obama, or any of his goons ever face the gavel of a judge? Hardly!
capejasmine on March 5, 2010 at 11:04 PM
Because one of those would be a major exposition of the flinging of pungent excrement and the other would be videos of primates that are more intelligent than most NYT columnists.
Chip on March 5, 2010 at 11:06 PM
Yes, and they don’t have to worry about wasting money – they can simply take more from the taxpayers.
They don’t have to worry about breaking the rules – because they make the rules.
Isn’t that real convenient for them?
Chip on March 5, 2010 at 11:09 PM
David Brooks has been eating magic mushrooms again.
Rod Dreher’s attempt at analyzing Brook’s article baffles me. How does this fall into a “Black Masses” analogy?
It seems neither understand what Tea Party’ers are about.
Kini on March 5, 2010 at 11:10 PM
I hope Brooks can cook or something ’cause he sure can’t think straight. That made my brain hurt. Indeed, let’s cue up the moneys flinging away.
Mojave Mark on March 5, 2010 at 11:10 PM
This utopia V.S. conservatism narrative is non-sense. The whole point of conservatism (as I understand it) is to uphold the principles of the founding. And the USA was founded by extreme radicals, in the purest sense of the term. As far as calling people evil, why not? If you think that taxation to fund the welfare state is theft, then those who organize it are indeed evil.
ebrawer on March 5, 2010 at 11:10 PM
Conservatives do NOT believe people are ‘perfectable’. That is one of the major differences between leftists and conservatives. The utopian yearning Brooks is talking about has little or nothing to do with conservatives.
He is afraid that his DC insider days are numbered and wishes to tar those peasants pounding at the gate with anything he can get his hands on.
sharrukin on March 5, 2010 at 11:15 PM
All that high flyin’ stuff throws me too. Utopia means “no where” and I believe the term is somewhat critical as it implies an unattainable, perfect state. Like a political version of a perpetual motion machine. Just google it for some philosophers and political scientists who have grappled with it.
IlikedAUH2O on March 5, 2010 at 11:15 PM
Here’s the thing, Brooks and other “politically wise” *conservatives* don’t have the same conservative values that most of us do. They either see the Founders as radicals (in the bad sense) or they simply rationalize their Big Government Conservatism only using the Founders when convenient.
I’m fine not being identified as a Brooksian Conservative – conserving Big Government.
MeatHeadinCA on March 5, 2010 at 11:15 PM
Everyone seems to have this need to categorize the Tea Parties as somehow out on a fringe, as if they cannot comprehend that people are tired of the government intruding in their lives, tired of paying taxes for the benefit of those who don’t deserve it, and really tired of morons masquerading as pundits who keep trying to categorize the Tea Parties as out on some fringe.
It’s not that difficult. Surely these bright people with expensive educations understand, don’t they?
n0doz on March 5, 2010 at 11:16 PM
Brooks needs to give up the tampons and get something with wings!
abobo on March 5, 2010 at 11:17 PM
Yeah, ’cause when I’m at a rally, and all those signs calling for fidelity to the U.S. Constitution, resurgence of state’s rights and sovereignty, and demanding that the political class be held to the same legal standards as regular citizens, the first thing that pops into my head is how crazy anti-establishment it all is.
“Down with the establishment!!! Up with a 200 year old document that establishes the proper rolls and functions each branch of the Federal Government and their relationship with the various states who retain sovereignty!!!! And up with an economic model equally old and rigid in both its application and natural consequences, wherein each man by his God given freedom pursues his happiness which in turn benefits his fellow man with various goods and services, and wherein malevolent acts are punished with market mechanisms which are brutally corrective if left alone by governments!!!!!!!”
Ah yes. Those 10th amendment loving, Federalist Papers reading, Adam Smith cheering, Constitution hugging, teabaggers are just your everyday average antiestablishment anarchists. Sheesh.
Weight of Glory on March 5, 2010 at 11:17 PM
Anyone see this? Tea parties are heading to DC to storm the halls of congress from March 10-31 to push back the HC agenda.
Exit question… Will David Brooks join the Nazi fun?
http://dailycaller.com/2010/03/05/tea-party-coalition-plans-to-%E2%80%98take-the-town-halls-to-washington%E2%80%99
katy on March 5, 2010 at 11:18 PM
YAWN……..
…….another day, another RINO Cocktail “Republican” telling us what idiots normal, country loving people are.
If only we would listen those D.C. Republicans that know so much more than we do.
I am fully convinced that if this Administration ever felt the need to put people on rail cars and head them off to FEMA “Reeducation camps” with large gas ovens that BROOKS, PARKER and a few others would write pitiful, whiny columns about what pressure that Obama was under that he HAD TO DO IT for the sake of the country.
God help this collapsing country!!!!
PappyD61 on March 5, 2010 at 11:18 PM
Brooks — Bah; I’m going back to the movie thread.
AZfederalist on March 5, 2010 at 11:19 PM
The worst part is that these guys are the alternative to Obama! They will do everything in their power to block an actual conservative from becoming the Republican candidate.
sharrukin on March 5, 2010 at 11:22 PM
David Brooks is a fool. The Tea Party will of course take over the GOP and for a time it will be good, but they will become complacent and corrupt, and then they will become the GOP. The process will then have to be repeated. Life is cyclic.
DFCtomm on March 5, 2010 at 11:22 PM
Both of these articles (the excerpts, here) seem pretty stupid. Utopianism is a nice way of describing the simple-minded STATICIST world of many. It is not that they are pursuing utopia, so much, as their brains (or their deformed personalities, in many cases) cannot comprehend the idea of a dynamic, growing world. They see the world as a static, unchanging place, and form their political ideologies about this. Utopian ideas then intrude as sales gimmicks – to sell their simple-minded ideas to themselves as much as to sell them to others.
This staticist view of the world is distinctly leftist, and is the great reason why leftists are always interested in centralizing power and control – after all, centralized control is efficient and smart for a static environment. Then, once they build these centralized systems of control, they force a great amount of stagnation on the environment, since they are static central committees that will exert pressure on everything to conform to them.
The key with Western thought is not that utopians become staticist when met by reality, but the opposite; it is the staticist mindset of leftists that leads them to imagine the static, unchanging utopia that exists … if one could only find the secret combination of correct centralized committees and the secret procedures that make everything click into place.
In the end, though, leftists are staticists, and through that they are a stagnating influence on any society stupid enough to let them out of their sandboxes. Since stagnation is death, in nature, leftists are the angels of heat death, pushing society to stall and disintegrate in a surge of entropy and encroachment from outside.
neurosculptor on March 5, 2010 at 11:23 PM
Both groups are also like each other in that they do not advocate crisp creases in the front of their pants.
RMOccidental on March 5, 2010 at 11:24 PM
Please! Stop quoting this moron. He does not understand conservatism nor does he understand conservatives. Think about it. If he made any sense at all, would the NYT publish his work?
ROCnPhilly on March 5, 2010 at 11:25 PM
WTF is the ‘new left’? Left is left and all of it is bad for this country which is the reason there are tea parties.
Brooks and company are showing their intellectual stupidity again.
docdave on March 5, 2010 at 11:26 PM
Your assuming that they are bright, in the sense of intelligence.
They, Brooks, et al, cannot stand people in the Tea Party because they are Americans. I don’t know what Brooks is, but I know what he isn’t, a conservative.
They want to pigeon-hole the Tea Parties as something other than main-stream America revolting to Big Government. Brooks feeds off of Big Beltway Government and he’s shameless about his love for it.
Kini on March 5, 2010 at 11:26 PM
The government is no more evil than are big corporations, Wall Street bankers, university professors, media barons, Pentagon generals or anybody else.
this guy must have missed reading Thomas Paine in school. Of course government is evil but it is a necassary evil. that is why the founders believed in limted government. To limit the evil that man can do to its fellow man. government is the idea of giving people power over others for the express purpose of allowing civilization to occur. Without government you have anarchy. that power if left unchecked will corrupt the wielder and make that person evil. It is the power that a government has that makes it an evil yet it is that power that a government needs to enable society to function. Therefore the only answer is to bound that government with limited powers so that on one hand it can do its job but on the other hand its evil does not run wild in the streets.
Conservatism is built on the idea of original sin — on the assumption of human fallibility and uncertainty. To remedy our fallen condition, conservatives believe in civilization — in social structures, permanent institutions and just authorities, which embody the accumulated wisdom of the ages and structure individual longings.
It also believes in the consitution as the foundation of that civilization, insitutions, and authorities. and that document limites the power of those authorites and the accumulated wisdom does not reside in insitutions of man but in God and the people. Everything about the present federal gov is anti-conservatism since about 22 years ago.
unseen on March 5, 2010 at 11:28 PM
I’m fine not being identified as a Brooksian Conservative – conserving Big Government.MeatHeadinCA on March 5, 2010 at 11:15 PM
Wouldn’t that be the definition of a Liberal?
Kini on March 5, 2010 at 11:28 PM
Sigh
Kini on March 5, 2010 at 11:28 PM
Brooks is full of crap. Well written crap but still crap.
MCGIRV on March 5, 2010 at 11:29 PM
Well, I thought so, but I have heard the term “Big Government Conservatism” thrown around… I believe it is related to Compassionate Conservatism.
MeatHeadinCA on March 5, 2010 at 11:31 PM
That sounds a lot more like Christianity than it does conservatism. Conservatism rests on a separation of Religion and government. Do we want America or do we want Saudi Arabia?
MB4 on March 5, 2010 at 11:31 PM
Why are intellectuals so stupid?
peacenprosperity on March 5, 2010 at 11:34 PM
No that is what conservatism is. Why else prevent the power of government from growing unless man’s basic nature cannot be trusted?
Saudi Arabia is Muslim, not Christian and if you do not understand that difference you need to do some reading.
sharrukin on March 5, 2010 at 11:35 PM
Beacause allah and ed aspire to be invited to dinner with him
peacenprosperity on March 5, 2010 at 11:37 PM
This is sick..I keep thinking about disgusting creatures when I think of politics!
BTW, I believe that the tea party is trapped. they don’t have the poll results and organization to mount a serious threat to either party. The MSM has to spin the news and public opinion against them so long as they are a threat to their beloved liberals.
Unless we have an economic meltdown and bankrupcy leading to a depression, the worry about debt and big government will remain important to people and and we will have more Scott Browns.
And look how he started voting as soon as he hit town.
A balanced budget amendment and control of spending is a long way off.
Right now we are trying to deworm a dog with no medication and putting the parasite’s leader’s in charge of the food bowl.
IlikedAUH2O on March 5, 2010 at 11:37 PM
Brooks’ entire argument is irrational. There’s nothing at all “Utopian” about smaller government. There’s nothing “Utopian” about fiscal responsibility. These things used to exist: on Earth, in America, in reality, not “Utopia”.
FloatingRock on March 5, 2010 at 11:38 PM
Brooks and Dreher are both a bit puffed up in their estimation of themselves.
There’s far more intelligence and insight in the analysis you can find from many comments here and from posts in the Green Room by those who are not “professional” journalists.
INC on March 5, 2010 at 11:38 PM
La, but someone has to strike a pose
And bear the weight of well-tailored clothes
And that is why the lord created men!
Adam was a gentleman in Eden!
Though his body was admired
You will grant the adding of a fig leaf was inspired!
If you’re out to make a splash, cherie
Do know your haberdashery
Buttons, buckles, ruffles and lace
Represent the human race!
PercyB on March 5, 2010 at 11:40 PM
If we were to accept that definition of Conservationism, then why not redefine Conservationism as Multiculturalism.
Why not call the Constitution a living document that needs to evolve with the changing times?
When you define the boundaries of a buildings foundation and build beyond its center of gravity, the building will eventually collapse on itself. Meaning, the roots of conservationism is planted with principals of less government, less regulation, low taxes and lives within its means. Like most ordinary people live, or have to in order to survive.
Kini on March 5, 2010 at 11:40 PM
Aw honey, we like to think of it as “our money”
Ingenue on March 5, 2010 at 11:41 PM
I can just see Brooks singing that in the DC Insiders Musical starring Peggy Noonan, Kathleen Parker, David Frum, and Christopher Buckley. Maybe set to some catchy pop tunes!
sharrukin on March 5, 2010 at 11:45 PM
Certainly not Saudi Arabia, a world without bikini’s would be horrible.
Although, conservationism, like the Constitution, has its foundation in Christian values. If it were Islamic values, then we’d be a pretty sexually frustrated nation.
I can imagine what that would be like, the preamble would start, “We The People, Protect Your Heads From Removal“
Kini on March 5, 2010 at 11:46 PM
Can I have control of the armed forces, police and IRS, then?
John the Libertarian on March 5, 2010 at 11:48 PM
Well, first of all, I’m fine calling Compassionate Conservatism or Big Government Conservatism statism.
But that said, without going on a whole purity test binge, there are many “conservatives” that I’m sure you have encountered that are not only comfortable with the size of our government… they actually prefer things this way.
MeatHeadinCA on March 5, 2010 at 11:49 PM
The Founding Father’s understood that not even Religion could perfect man. While the overwhelming majority of them could be classified as Orthodox Christians they were also students of History. All they had to do was look at recent European history, the 1600s being the most recent example they had, to understand the pitfalls of that idea.
So, instead they went with the idea of a system of Government that allowed People to pursue their own interests with Government’s only enforcing criminal laws and mediating between the Citizens in civil cases and not erecting a State run Church like most of Europe at the time had.
Holger on March 5, 2010 at 11:49 PM
I think you mean conservatism. And if you do, then no, it has its foundation in libertarian values. At least the Bill of Rights portion.
John the Libertarian on March 5, 2010 at 11:50 PM
No, it is not. That is what religion is.
Having such a low opinion of man’s basic nature would argue for a more powerful government to suppress it, which is a basic core of “progressivism”, not conservatism. Reagan wanted smaller government and, by and large, had a high opinion of man’s basic nature.
If that is your “take away” then you seem to have missed the point completely.
MB4 on March 5, 2010 at 11:51 PM
Well, Washington’s Spending is rather monstrous.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_uIwcgVHMQ
MeatHeadinCA on March 5, 2010 at 11:54 PM
It must be frustrating for Brooks to be so irrelevant at such an important time in out nation’s history. He’s spent his whole adult life trying to be ready to influence important moments like these, and nobody important to the moment cares what he thinks.
TheBigOldDog on March 5, 2010 at 11:55 PM
Thank you for nailing this fundamental worldview. Conservatives and libertarians believe man is inherently good and should be given freedom to pursue his happiness. Liberals and statists believe man is inherently bad, or weak, and should be controlled.
John the Libertarian on March 5, 2010 at 11:57 PM
Huh? I somewhat disagree. I believe (and I’m not alone amongst conservatives and libertarians) that men are flawed and therefore no one flawed man should regulate another.
MeatHeadinCA on March 5, 2010 at 11:59 PM
With all due respect.
Conservatives that I know would, prefer a smaller government, less regulation and less taxation.
If you are defining Compassionate Conservatism or Big Government Conservatism as statism. I don’t think that defines what true Conservatism is.
Kini on March 5, 2010 at 11:59 PM
That said, while the left believes that regulation can solve man’s problems, the right is all about empowering the individual so that he/she may find ways to improve themselves.
MeatHeadinCA on March 6, 2010 at 12:01 AM
I never claimed it was true conservatism. I simply am saying that there are those that call their ideology Compassionate Conservatism. That doesn’t mean they are true conservatives. Just as Liberals are anything but liberal…
MeatHeadinCA on March 6, 2010 at 12:03 AM
It would be called the Serenade of the fools, fops and nitwits.
PercyB on March 6, 2010 at 12:03 AM
Agreed. We’re all flawed and none of us is without sin. And government is a necessary evil. But the desire for an overwhelming state power to regulate our lives would predicate on the belief that man cannot do it himself.
John the Libertarian on March 6, 2010 at 12:04 AM
Er, Um, my bad. Yes I meant conservatism and not conservationism. As for the Bill of Rights, I would say it’s a 50/50 blend of both conservatism and liberalism.
Kini on March 6, 2010 at 12:04 AM
How does being flawed cancel out the idea that Man is Inherently Good?
Holger on March 6, 2010 at 12:04 AM
Thank you for nailing this fundamental worldview. Conservatives and libertarians believe man is inherently good and should be given freedom to pursue his happiness. Liberals and statists believe man is inherently bad, or weak, and should be controlled.
John the Libertarian on March 5, 2010 at 11:57 PM
the founders believed and I do also that while man is inherently good, the temptation that comes with unlimited power is too much for man to resist. therefore the power of government (the temptation fo unlimited power is inherently evil and must be limited to ensure that man’s inherently good is not tempted by the evil._
unseen on March 6, 2010 at 12:06 AM
Beg to differ and so do some of my friends!
“Of all the dispositions and habits, which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.” George Washington,
“We have been assured, sir, in the sacred writings, that ‘except the Lord build the house they labor in vain that build it.’ I firmly believe this; and I also believe that without His concurring aid we shall succeed in this political building no better than the builders of Babel; we shall be divided by our little partial, local interests, our projects will be confounded and we ourselves shall become a reproach and a byword down to future ages. And, what is worse, mankind may hereafter, from this unfortunate instance, despair of establishing government by human wisdom and leave it to chance, war, or conquest.” Benjamin Franklin
“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” John Adams
“Men are qualified for civil liberty in exact proportion to their disposition to put moral chains on their own appetites—in proportion as their love to justice is above their rapacity;—in proportion as their soundness and sobriety of understanding is above their vanity and presumption;—in proportion as they are more disposed to listen to the counsels of the wise and good, in preference to the flattery of knaves. Society cannot exist unless a controlling power upon will and appetite be placed somewhere, and the less of it there is within, the more there is without. It is ordained in the eternal constitution of things that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters.” Edmund Burke
“Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?” Thomas Jefferson
The Christian idea of original sin is fundamental to Republican democracies.
Leftists believe in a utopia on earth. The ‘New Man’ of Soviet Russia and Fascism, and the ‘Aryan Man’ of Nazi Germany. They always fail to achieve this due to flawed human nature and thus always resort to force in an attempt to forge the New Utopia.
Libertarianism (some forms) believes the same which is why some call it the Marxism of the right!
sharrukin on March 6, 2010 at 12:07 AM
Brooks is a liberal tool paid to be a pseudo-conservative…complete shill for the left.
DCJeff on March 6, 2010 at 12:07 AM
He’s a real Control Freak Man
Ruling in what he wants to be a vassal land
Making all his controlling plans
For everybody
Doesn’t listen to an opposing point of view
Control Freak man, ruling all he thinks is his purview
Control Freak Man, he had better listen
He don’t know with what he’s messin’
Knows already just what he wants to do
Doesn’t he seem more and more like Hitler and Mussolini to you?
He’s a real Control Freak Man
Ruling in what he wants to be a vassal held land
Making all his controlling plans
For everybody
He’s as blinded by his lust for power as he can be
Just sees what he wants to see
He’s got such a God delusion point of call
Control Freak Man can you even see America at all?
Knows already just what he wants to do
Doesn’t he seem more and more like Hitler and Mussolini to you?
He’s a real Control Freak Man
Ruling in what he wants to be a vassal land
Making all his controlling plans
For everybody
About Control Freak Man we should all worry
To destroy all America built he is in a hurry
If he controls everything his fascist way
It will be a forlorn day
Hes going to leave it all a mess
Anyone of sound mind must confess
He’s a real Control Freak Man
Ruling in what he wants to be a vassal land
Making all his controlling plans
For everybody
MB4 on March 6, 2010 at 12:08 AM
Well, I’m not sure exactly… just brainstorming late on a Friday night…
Here’s the thing. If one is born flawed (sinful or what have you), then there would have to be a moment of redemption, if you will, for one to become inherently good. Evil exists. We all have evil tendencies. I’m not prepared to say man is inherently good, although I’ll agree man has the potential to do good and to better himself.
That said… we sound like a bunch of misogynists … where are the women?
MeatHeadinCA on March 6, 2010 at 12:08 AM
I am of the notion that we should render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s. While I agree our nation was founded on Judeo-Christian philosophy, I leave the realm of faith out of politics entirely. God asks that we come to Him willingly of our own. Paul the Apostle would argue that law is no substitute for grace.
John the Libertarian on March 6, 2010 at 12:13 AM
So now it’s just a full fledged assault by the media on delegitimizing the Tea Party movement.
Too late, f***tards. While you were busy calling them “teabaggers”, they were busy mobilizing.
LibTired on March 6, 2010 at 12:15 AM
Well said, especially the first part.
FloatingRock on March 6, 2010 at 12:17 AM
Reagan may have had the 11th Commandment, but here is the 12th Commandment: you can never go wrong riffing on the Beatles.
John the Libertarian on March 6, 2010 at 12:18 AM
Well, I’ve spent quite a number of years carrying the flag of the ‘Old Conservatism.’ And I can say with conviction that the religious issues of these groups have little or nothing to do with conservative or liberal politics. The uncompromising position of these groups is a divisive element that could tear apart the very spirit of our representative system, if they gain sufficient strength. Being a conservative in America traditionally has meant that one holds a deep, abiding respect for the Constitution. We conservatives believe sincerely in the integrity of the Constitution. We treasure the freedoms that document protects. By maintaining the separation of church and state, the United States has avoided the intolerance which has so divided the rest of the world with religious wars. Can any of us refute the wisdom of Madison and the other framers? Can anyone look at the carnage in Iran, the bloodshed in northern Ireland, or the bombs bursting in Lebanon and yet question the dangers of injecting religious issues into the affairs of state?
The religious factions will go on imposing their will on others, less the decent people connected to them recognize that religion has no place in public policy. They must learn to make their views known without trying to make their views the only alternatives. We have succeeded for over 200 years in keeping the affairs of state separate from the uncompromising idealism of religious groups and we mustn’t stop now. To retreat from that separation would violate the principles of conservatism and the values upon which the framers built this democratic republic.
- Barry Goldwater
I am of a sect by myself, as far as I know.
- Thomas Jefferson
It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are 20 gods, or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.
- Thomas Jefferson
I have examined all the known superstitions of the world, and I do not find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology. Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned. What has been the effect of this coercion? To make one half the world fools and the other half hypocrites; to support roguery and error all over the earth.
- Thomas Jefferson
MB4 on March 6, 2010 at 12:19 AM
I look at it this way:
Most people want to be left alone as much as possible and allowed to live their life as they see fit with as little moral busy-bodying from others as possible. They agree that if you hurt others there should be consequences. They don’t want to hurt people who don’t deserve it and sometimes forget to think before they do something.
Flawed yes, but that doesn’t mean we are incapable of Good and are doomed only to do Evilness and require a government of equally flawed individuals to ‘Perfect’ us.
Man does best when left to his own devices, when allowed to pursue his own interests with the only restraints are do not hurt others, there will be no nanny government to take care of you if you fail and you owe it to others to allow them to do the same because they allow you to do the same.
Holger on March 6, 2010 at 12:24 AM
Jefferson didn’t live around muslims :)
He assumed a type of civility that was particular to Christian society.
neurosculptor on March 6, 2010 at 12:25 AM
The left is so desperately trying to define in their terms what they have no definition for.
The Tea Partiers are brilliant in staying away from designated leaders and forming only networks not not a formal organization.
Speakup on March 6, 2010 at 12:26 AM
Although they may not approve of my improvements.
MB4 on March 6, 2010 at 12:27 AM
A fortunate man, indeed.
MB4 on March 6, 2010 at 12:28 AM
I pretty much agree with you on everything. My only point is that without a conscious choice to do the wrong thing, people will do bad things. I think this is one reason we don’t want to be regulated (well, sometimes we sure act like we do :/ ). We know that no “perfected” man is going to regulate without corruption
MeatHeadinCA on March 6, 2010 at 12:30 AM
Well the founders did not agree with you and I will take them over Libertarians any day.
They rejected the establishment of a state ordained Christianity such as England had. That is NOT the rejection of Christianity as part of society, or as fundamental to good government.
The numerous plaques quoting scripture on every other building they erected and in the founding documents point very clearly to that.
Hamilton: “In contriving any system of government. . . every man ought to be supposed a knave; and to have no other end in all his actions, but private interest. By this interest, we must govern him, and by means of it, make him cooperate to public good, notwithstanding his insatiable avarice and ambition.”
sharrukin on March 6, 2010 at 12:30 AM
Alinsky is geared toward Institutions, Governments and Businesses.
It is not so capable against leaderless grass-root movements of people.
Holger on March 6, 2010 at 12:31 AM
Yeah, but he did kick their arses on the Barbary Coast.
John the Libertarian on March 6, 2010 at 12:31 AM
Brooks’ longing for acceptance as an elitist colors his commentary on the world today. While he considers himself an elite, his writings give him away.
d1carter on March 6, 2010 at 12:31 AM
I love the smell of anarchy in the morning…smells like victory.
HornetSting on March 6, 2010 at 12:32 AM
Wait, am I missing something. Perhaps I came to the conversation late, but are you claiming that L/libertarians reject Christianity?
MeatHeadinCA on March 6, 2010 at 12:33 AM
Can we call him muslim sellout now ?
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.c429eac8e6bddb6d430d2b4d28386dd9.551&show_article=1
Its not like our country is in a constant danger because of them
macncheez on March 6, 2010 at 12:35 AM
Which makes them even more destructive, because then they start flailing around and take our words, pervert and abuse them, and render them useless for anyone. I was incensed at the way The Precedent and his minions destroyed the word “competition” in this health scare fiasco. Every time they said, “… and we have to have the federal government open a health insurance company and ‘provide competition to the private sector’” it made my stomach turn. And the GOP did a very poor job of attacking that idiotic abuse of competition and how the markets work. The Precedent and the dems were making a general argument that the federal government can run any company better than the private sector and no one bothered to ask a dem about this, even once. It was truly infuriating.
… and now the word “competition” has been seriously injured, as were so many important words before …
The structure of the organization is an emergent property of the individuals comprising it. The structures of spontaneously formed groups on the right will always differ, in general, from those on the left.
neurosculptor on March 6, 2010 at 12:36 AM
Being part of society is one thing; running government along religious lines is quite another; and Jefferson called Christianity a superstition and seemed to reject organized Christianity altogether.
MB4 on March 6, 2010 at 12:38 AM
Chaos always wins because it’s better organized.
MB4 on March 6, 2010 at 12:40 AM
The teaparties are best when focused on specific issues. Not on personalities.
I think that’s one part of Palin’s message I very much appreciate, too.
AnninCA on March 6, 2010 at 12:41 AM
Wow. Wonder when he’ll be having the Christian or Jewish entrepreneurship summit.
I’d have to say this looks a bit like redistribution of wealth.
Rob the Americans and give to the poor oppressed Muslims
katy on March 6, 2010 at 12:41 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »