The Ministry of Minor Perfidy

Ministers

Is a genuine pope. Please treat him nice.

Judge, Jury, Executioner, Avon Lady

heteropatriarchal phallocentric violence-addicted prosthetic cock smoker

He's immanentizing the eschaton as we speak

Towelboy in the Ministry Bunker and Catastratorium

Tastes better than he looks

Minister Emeritus

Windy City Mike
social democrat, ca. 1930 trade-unionist, and professor of alleged history

Perfidious Advertising

This, too can be yours

Perfidious Merchandise

Perfidious Store Thingy

Most recent entries

Monthly Archives

Syndicate

Join our Mailing List

Calendar Thingy

<<	May 2003					>>
S	M	T	W	T	F	S
				1	2	3
4	5	6	7	8	9	10
11	12	13	14	15	16	17
18	19	20	21	22	23	24
25	26	27	28	29	30	31

Hosted by:
Bloghouse, a Home for Wayward Blogs

Powered by Expression Engine

Wednesday, May 28, 2003

The left hates America? Do tell.

Recently, I have observed a great deal of rhetoric from various pundits such as those on the Fox News Channel, the Weekly Standard, this little banner above our blog, and other media outlets that profess to be conservative, right of center, what have you, about how “the left hates America.” I have some observations and questions in regard to this assertion.

First, an observation. The aforementioned pundits have a little song with a good beat and you can dance to it. The little song begins with how Reagan won the Cold War. The next line is some sort of attempt at name-calling, IE “I think liberals [MADL] are a bunch of whiners,” from Anne Coulter, for example, or Michael Moore is telling lies, from Fox News. The next line has something to do with support for the troops or war is good or something to that effect, and this often comes from people who have never served in the military nor would they allow their children to do so (I believe that it is because American wars are usually, if not always, a rich man’s war and a poor man’s fight, but this is beside the current point). A recently added line dealt with Francophobia. The new line in this ditty is how “the left hates America.”

More Perfidious Goodness...

A second observation. As I have mentioned before, debate in this country typically involves an attempt to shout the other side down and describe what their opponents think without actually consulting them. Buckethead indicated that this rhetorical methodology is acceptable; I believe it is not. But disagreements between the two of us are frequent to say the least. Be that as it may, arguing that “the left hates America” falls into the category I have described in the current paragraph.

Now for the questions. What is this left of which you (aforementioned pundits) speak? Who is this enigmatic left that you are pointing your fingers at and shouting, “J’accuse!” Oh, pardon me. In their language it is, “I freedom-accuse you!” But still, who are you talking about? At least Fox News singled out Michael Moore to provide something other than a broad stroke. But I can remember my early teen years, when I would describe myself as a leftist, my Dad challenged me to think about what that means. Similarly, I challenge the pundits, who and what are you talking about when you say, “the left”?

Second question. How do you know this left of which you speak hates America? Have you asked them? Have you polled urban areas, started with a question about their political orientation and then proceeded to ask them what they think? “Do you hate America?” the pollster asks a low-income grad student/adjunct professor in a major urban area. Has that been done? Or, do you simply glance at what has been written, taking a statement such as, “There are significant inequities and injustices in American society,” and shout, “Freedom-accuse! Such a statement as that indicates that you hate America!”

Third question. If this left does indeed hate America, what are you going to do about it? May I make a suggestion? Perhaps you could use this to discredit a political party. But hmmm, what oh what party could that be? Perhaps one that is part of this left? Maybe the SWP? The SDP? The Green party (though I take some issue with their inclusion into a left camp, but others see it that way). No, no, those parties are insignificant. Perhaps you could set your sights on the Democratic Party! Why yes! Never mind the fact that the Democrats are capitalists and just as conservative as you, still in favor of tax cuts for the rich, just at a reduced rate! Never mind the fact that the Democrats didn’t oppose the war as much as you made them out to oppose the war, who cares? There are two parties defined by their opposition to each other who really think pretty much the same thing, and this country ain’t big enough for the both of them. So go ahead, hurl insults and engage in name-calling to discredit the other party who thinks the same thing as you just has a different lever on election day! Make wild broad stroke accusations about people you haven’t even spoken to! So who cares if we’re lying or telling the truth! If we say that this one group hates America, we discredit the party that pretends to represent them only really doesn’t!

My last questions. Why do these pundits feel the need to do this sort of thing? It strikes me as dirty pool. Maybe they don’t feel confident enough in their arguments or beliefs to win debates solely on the basis of those arguments. Or maybe it’s just quicker and easier to throw sand in a man’s eyes and kick him in the balls instead of a straight fight. So I’ll ask, either rhetorically or prevailing on Buckethead to pose the response on behalf of those who might or might not be his ideological brethren. Why the name-calling? Why are you insisting that the left (whatever that is) hates America? On what do you base your opinions? What are you trying to achieve? “I hate you and you hate me and you hate America.” What does this accomplish?

Too Goddamn Much Perfidy...

Posted by Mike on 05/28/03 at 06:49 PM
Partisan Politics • Permalink

Tuesday, May 27, 2003

Speaking of too much time on one’s hands

Why else are we doing what we do here?

A Canadian commentator, David Warren, makes a valid point here. Especially this:

It is the American way to stress optimism, and to be extremely empirical. They learn by doing, and did not have much experience governing demolished Arab countries. They make ghastly mistakes, and as often as not, turn around and fix them. They have, if I may make one of those generalizations about national character that aren’t all the rage, a national disinclination to panic. The media are delegated to do the panicking on their behalf, the American people are fairly hard to scare.

While carping about mistakes is valuable, in that it calls attention to them; the real important thing is that they get fixed. We are making the attempt to fix things, and the constant whining of “blood for oil” and other canards is truly off base. If you judge a nation by its enemies, we are doing pretty well.

Posted by Buckethead on 05/27/03 at 07:08 PM
Just So You Know • Permalink

An important day

Burt Rutan, founder of Scaled Composites and designer of many cool has made the first test flight of the SpaceShipOne, their entry into the X-Prize Contest.

Apparently, they are shooting for a suborbital flight by Dec 17, the centenary of the Wright Brother’s first powered flight. That would be very, very cool.

Posted by Buckethead on 05/27/03 at 06:42 PM
Just So You Know • Permalink

A fun timewaster

Useless movie quotes, from all your favorite movies. While the selection of quotes is not as thorough as I would like for some of the movies, it is a fun little website. For instance, I found this quote:

I would like to direct this to the distinguished members of the panel. You lousy cork-suckers. You have violated my fargin’ rights. This suminonbatching country was founded so that the liberties of common patriotic citizens, like me, could not be taken away by a bunch of fargin’ ice holes, like yourselves.

Posted by Buckethead on 05/27/03 at 06:40 PM
Entertainment • Permalink

Lileks rips the Matrix Reloaded

e basically fisks the movie, though I think he is a little tooo critical. Of course, he is characteristically witty as he goes about his business. I grant a lot of his points, especially about Zion, but hey, I dug the movie.

Posted by Buckethead on 05/27/03 at 05:48 PM
Entertainment • Permalink

Monday, May 26, 2003

Welcome Back Mike!

And I hope Johno feels better soon. Though likely, he will pretend to be ill for longer than strictly necessary, if only to get more attention from Goody Two-Cents.

Mike, you raised an interesting point - it is really the elephant in the refrigerator of this whole issue. Oil is why we are interested in the Middle East, but not, say, Burkina Faso. Oil is the corrupting influence throughout the region. We, and some other parts of the world, are wealthy. We got this way not because we were sitting on enormous goldmines of strategic and valuable resources. We got wealthy through industry, trade, and work. These nations fell into staggering amounts of cash through no effort of their own, and like the white trash lottery winner, it has done nothing to improve their lives beyond making possible a lenghty drunken bender. When the cash runs out, they will be worse off than before. The presence of billions of dollars in easy money is a vast temptation, especially in areas that don’t have our traditions of rule of law and so on.

More Perfidious Goodness...

If it is the case that representative government is impossible in the corrupting presence of oil wealth, then the Middle East is screwed for the foreseeable future. Hybrid cars reduce the need for oil, but do not eliminate it. Electric or fuel cell vehicles only change the way oil is used - instead of burning it in your car directly, oil is burned in power plants. Germany used synthetic fuels in the second world war, but only because they had no other choice. They are, and are likely to remain very expensive. Also, oil is used for plastics and many other things besides fuel. Unless fusion power becomes magically available, or the left stops opposing fission power, oil and coal remain the only viable sources of energy.

But Arab totalitarianism is not co-extensive with oil wealth. Egypt has no appreciable oil reserves, nor does Syria. Libya has some, but Algeria doesn’t. Lebanon, Tunisia and Jordan seem somewhat freer and to our eyes better. While forming a republican government in Iraq may be difficult, it is worth the effort.

To move on to Johno’s question, the only way to foster republican ideals is to begin at the lowest level. Touqueville observed that the root of the American experience with democracy was that we practiced it at every level, both by electing city councils, mayors, sherriffs, and dogcatchers; and by participating in civic organizations that elect leadership. These everyday experiences give us the confidence to believe that when we vote for and elect leaders on the national level, the system is working the same way that we experience it on the local level. Totalitarian regimes try to extinguish all relationships except that between the individual and the state. Iraq has little in the way of civic life. The only way to start the process is to - before allowing any national elections - give the Iraqis control over their local affairs. Set up a system of munipal government where the people elect their city councils, mayors, sherriffs and dog catchers. Then, when they have some experience, move on to regional and then national elections. This could work.

And as for Mike’s comment on end results of democracy - we can interfere if they don’t get it right. Do you think we wouldn’t have intervened in Germany if there had been a communist takeover from within, in 1950? We will not allow a fundamentalist theocracy to take power, and hopefully not another authoritarian state either. We have a responsibility, now that we have libervated Iraq, to give them a responsible government. They don’t have experience with that, so we can provide training wheels for the early stages, until they have more skill and confidence.

Too Goddamn Much Perfidy...

Posted by Buckethead on 05/26/03 at 09:27 PM
War • Permalink

The Big Question

To respond, albeit a bit late, to John’s big question, how oh how shall the United States foster republican government in Iraq and Afghanistan, I’ll offer my thoughts. First, this begs the question, is it the place of the United States to foster any sort of government in those countries? Well, we broke it so we’d better buy it. At this point it does seem irresponsible not to lend a hand, seeing as we’re pretty much the folks that punched them in the nose. I’m uncomfortable with American conduct viz-a-viz those countries, but what’s done is done, and I admit that fostering republican governments is probably the way to proceed at the moment.

The thing is, if those republican governments should return a majority of anti-republican parties who want to remake the political structure of their own country, then tough. We can’t say, “You can have a representative government, provided they play ball on our field by our rules.” We used to say, “You can have a repressive dictatorship (and we said this to Hussein as well) provided you play ball,” so no more of that shit. Pays your money, takes your chances.

More Perfidious Goodness...

Posted by Mike on 05/26/03 at 08:37 PM
War • Permalink

Man Down! Man Down!

Just a quick note that I have been temporarily felled by a mysterious illness that I first mistook for allergies, then for a hangover, then for the SARS. It’s just a nasty, wicked, evil cold. But it hurts. I am in the loving care of Goodwife Two-Cents until I am better. I am also barred from watching or talking any politics, as Tom Daschle is starting to look like my daddy. I hope I feel better soon.

Posted by Johno on 05/26/03 at 04:26 PM
Just So You Know • Permalink

Sunday, May 25, 2003

Look:

Crackheads

Posted by Buckethead on 05/25/03 at 11:24 PM
Darwin Award Contender • Permalink

Kaus has an interetsing take on the whole Blair thingie at the Times of NY:

Kaus says:

It turns out we weren’t reading the reporting of the famous, cream-of-the-profession Times employees, but the reporting of unidentified “stringers” we’ve never heard of. ... Conventional journalists sometimes sneer at blogs because there’s no way for a reader to know whether what a random, unknown person says on his Web site is true. But it sounds as if the Times is not so different from a blog after all--what you are reading is really the work of random, unknown “legs” and stringers. ...

Of course, in other ways the Times and the typical blog are very different forms of journalism. One obsessively reflects the personal biases, enthusiasms and grudges of a single individual. The other is just an online diary! ...

I don’t quite understand his motivation - working at the Times in his twenties, great job prestige, etc. And he goes and makes shit up. Journalism is not hard. I am doing something like journalism right now, in my underwear. It would really be journalism if I called someone and interviewed them. But he was getting paid real money to write for a living. Didn’t he realize that when you plagiarize, and put the results in the most important and widely read paper in the country, someone will notice? Holy Jeebus, what dimwitted jackassery.

Blair is pathetic. The real shame falls on the editorial staff and there meese stuffed animals, who should have applied some standards and integrity to the “Paper of Record.”

Posted by Buckethead on 05/25/03 at 10:45 PM
Unmitigated Gall • Permalink

Saturday, May 24, 2003

Top Ten Greatest Books of All Time About Guys Named Steve

10. War and Peace and Steve
9. The Seven Habits of Highly Successful Steves
8. The Grapes of Steve
7. The Steves of Wrath
6. Steve Grapes Steve Wrath Steve Steve
5. Men are From Mars, Women are From Venus, Steve is From Cleveland
4. Where’s Waldo? Is He With Steve?
3. Time Life Mysteries of the Unknown, Volume VIII: “Mysterious Guys Named Steve”
2. The Joy of Sex with Steve
1. The Bible (King Steve Version)

From David Letterman, by way of the dusty corners of my hard drive. I think this is from the last millenium. The Cleveland bit was actually in the original. Go figure.

Posted by Buckethead on 05/24/03 at 08:27 PM
Entertainment • Permalink

Woooohoooo!

High speed internet at last, High speed internet at last, thank God Almighty, High speed internet at last.

[Update] Now I can download artistic photographs (of a completely morally uplifting and non-prurient nature, of course) 50 times faster!

Posted by Buckethead on 05/24/03 at 03:20 PM
Just So You Know • Permalink

Friday, May 23, 2003

I am going to go home

And get drunk on Marion Barry’s. Then I’m going to send Cox Communication an invoice for the hours I spent on the phone getting them to do the obvious. ("hmmn. the work order says ‘cable modem,’ maybe we should leave one for the nice customer.") I bill at $120/hour. They wasted two and one quarter hours of my precious time. That’s four months free cable.

What is a Marion Berry you ask? This drink, invented by the estimable Jonah Goldberg and his cohorts, is “a concoction of Jagermeister, Kahlua, bourbon and Coke. Why this collection? Because we wanted a drink “so black not even the man could keep it down.”

[Update] And, yes, I do have the necessary ingredients. Getting the wife’s permission is a different matter.

Posted by Buckethead on 05/23/03 at 08:51 PM
Just So You Know • Permalink

Homeward bound

And hopefully the fucktards at Cox Communications will actually have made the leap to competence and delivered the cable modem they should have left in my office when they ran the cable. “We can’t promise to have it there by this evening. But we have scheduled a service call for tomorrow between 8:00 and 1:00. You’ll definitely have it by tomorrow.” Jeebus. I should have had it Wednesday, jackass. Three years of excellent service from DirecTV made me forget the thumb-fingered, stumbling fuckwittery of the cable industry.

Posted by Buckethead on 05/23/03 at 08:42 PM
Darwin Award Contender • Permalink

Sentimentality

I meant that in the sense that those who freak over nukes have a problem with nukes over and above any real concern about the destructive power or utility of explosives of a given size. This is sentimentality, rather than a rational appraisal of the utility of a given weapon. Fallout is bad, but very limited. A 1/100 Hiroshima nuke (150 tons, far bigger than any practical conventional explosive, and twenty times more powerful than the Daisy Cutter.) would probably release less radioactivity than a coal fired powerplant. And radioactivity, while sometimes dangerous, has no supernatural power to harm, especially when compared to the chemical by-products of a conventional explosive.

In any event, we would almost certainly never use them. The threat would probably be sufficient for most purposes.

Posted by Buckethead on 05/23/03 at 08:36 PM
War • Permalink

Page 3 of 8 pages « First < 1 2 3 4 5 > Last »