QandO

May 24, 2004

Blog Rolling
Posted by Jon Henke

*** Jane Galt Mindles H. Dreck finds a pretentious academic twit...

Sigh. the anthropologist wears blinders

That's an interesting question: should a public intellectual have the right to be a right-winger? Actually, I don't even know how to respond to that. By definition, one thinks of public intellectuals as critics of power.

One more small knife in the back of open-mindedness in academia. I'm sure right-leaning faculty everywhere are waiting for his permission.

Oh, and if he's serious about criticizing power, can we expect this "Public Intellectual" to join the Libertarian movement? I'm just asking. But it's really a rhetoric question.

*** At Obsidian Wings, Sebastian Holsclaw has an interesting post on recent assertions that our entry into the Middle East is "playing into bin Laden's plans".....

It is an uncommonly silly idea.

This is the Western/Che concept of terrorism to provoke overreach. It has nothing to do with Al Qaeda. Bin Laden has said time and time again that America's big crime is in its intervention in the Middle East. His beef with the West is that our presence tempts Allah's followers into sin. He hates that Western troops protected Saudi Arabia from Saddam. He thinks that the Jews ought to be expelled from Israel as part of an effort to reclaim all lands ever held by Islamic power. His whole plan is about getting the West OUT of the Middle East. Look at his recent offer to Europe. He will agree to stop bombing them if they agree to get OUT of the Middle East. Bombing the WTC wasn't about tricking the US into Afghanistan. He believed that we were so weak that we would not attack him in retaliation.

Clearly, if that was his plan, it has failed miserably.

*** This piece from Dean Esmay probably deserves more fleshing out than I'll give it here, but I want to note it...

[Politicians] distort and manipulate. Both parties are equally to blame for it, and the root cause of it is not dishonesty but because the way the rules are set up, and the way citizens have traditionally had access to information, it is virtually required that you put the most positive possible spin on your own record and the most negative possible on your opponent's--and the game's been set like that for so long there's almost no getting around it.

Call it "lying", "selective editing", or "spin"....I think we've probably gotten ourselves into a situation wherein neither Party can win without it. Anybody can game the system by simply plying the information streams with the right amount of spin - and the resulting loss of credibility will generally be outweighed by the comensurate gains among the majority of people who just don't pay that much attention.

I'm sure our (mostly) Rightwing readers are wondering right about now how I could believe that Republicans are as guilty of this spin as "those horrible, lying Democrats!". I'd recommend trying to read as much from the left side of the aisle as from the right....and try to treat both sides with the same skepticism.

If you still believe we can divide up partisans into "Democrats/Fools/Liars" and "Republicans/Good people" (or vice versa), then it's going to be hard for you to ever engage in political discourse. I know I wouldn't want to deal with somebody who assumes I am morally/intellectually deficient based on my political beliefs.

*** The Commissar has a new BlogoMap up, this time of "Kablogh, the holy city of the Ri'ight sect". We occupy the QandO Canal. (and we will defend it to the death! Or until lunch! Whatever!)

*** INDC Journal has passed the 100,000 visitor mark in about 4 months. As Jimmy from Suburban Sundries Shack writes, Bill is "the premier moonbatologist on the web". Yes, he is a veritable Jacques Cousteau of the fringe. Congratulations.

*** While I miss CointelPro Tool a great deal, I must admit, its deathbed incarnation is....interesting. What do you suppose he can bench press. Come on, what do you think? Take a guess. 315 pounds, maxing out at 400! (inside; if you get it, god bless)

TrackBack