Via Jeff Goldstein (and indirectly via Glenn Reynolds), I found a classic example of why ideology is so tedious. This highly shrill call for unleashing a "blog swarm" (of ad hominem attacks, naturally) hardly falls into the category of political punditry, or even discussion:
We should hunt down anything Greenspan has ever written, said or done that reflects poorly on him.This would include erroneous predictions, older statements which contradict things he's said recently, and anything that's just plain wrong, venal or stupid. The only rules are that it has to be true (of course) and sourced (preferably with a link, but if you're using Lexis, that's cool too - just tell us where it's from).
And for those of you who want to really get down & dirty in the trenches, we can turn this into a one-degree-of-separation venture. That is, if you can find similar material for anyone who is closely linked to Greenspan, that's fair game, too. Good examples would be Greenie's idol, the nutbag "objectivist" Ayn Rand, and Andrea Mitchell, his NBC reporter wife. (An aside: We can debate the merits of this approach all you like, but suffice it to say, there is no question that Republicans do the same crap to us all the time. If you still want to play by the Marquess of Queensberry rules, fine - but I've moved on to brass knuckles.)
Yawn. It's little more than preaching to screaming at the chorus.
I think it's fair to say that the author -- an anonymous, nameless "blogchild" of Kos named DavidNYC -- is playing a pretty one-sided game of political hardball.
I am a native New Yorker now studying law in Washington, D.C. I have always been interested in politics, and I consider myself a "blog child" of the DailyKos, a site which I cannot recommend highly enough. I am a lifelong Democrat, but my hope is that the analysis on this site is free from partisan favoritism. That is to say, I plan to examine all relevant issues rigorously, whether or not they favor Democrats.
Not that I want to spend my time trying to "hunt down" anything DavidNYC has ever said, but if I were starting a "down-and-dirty" campaign I might find it a bit embarrassing if people could accuse me of being fair in the past.
Somehow, the previous fairness looks dirty.
I'm sorry I had to dig it up, and I don't mean it as an ad hominem attack.
I certainly don't want it to appear that I'd engage in such vicious slander.
AFTERTHOUGHT: (Just wondering out loud....) If there were such a thing as a full disclosure requirement for bloggers, and if I were in love with one of Greenspan's minions, would I have to disclose that? Or is "disclosure" becoming NewSpeak for invasion of privacy?
posted by Eric on 03.05.05 at 09:56 AM
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://classicalvalues.com/cgi-bin/pings.cgi/2055
Despicable, and that's why I never read rats like Kos. And how can they smear Ayn Rand more than she's already been smeared ever since she wrote Atlas Shrugged? But why make Kos and his ilk the center of the Universe? Every time I read this and some other blogs I get the impression that I've stepped into an alternate Universe in which Kerry won the election, in which Democrats control the House and the Senate, in which pacifists are in command of our military, in which a gun-hating radical is Chief Justice on the Supreme Court, in which the propaganda of the Left-Leaning Antenna is swallowed without question, and in which the churches are dominated by the Socialist Gospel.
It's the other way around. Bush won the election and is in command of our military forces. Republicans control the House and the Senate. Rehnquist is still the Chief Justice of a basically conservative Supreme Court and his replacement will no doubt be another man like him. The blogosphere, books, radio, and other alternative sources challenge the "mainstream" media with increasing effectiveness. And most important, the churches and synagogues are returning to their old bedrock foundations in doctrine and dogma. Orthodox Jews, evangelical and fundamental Protestants, traditional Catholics, are on the rise, and there is even a renewed interest in Old Time Religions like Asatru. We are in the Second Religiousness.
The Left, as represented by Kos, is becoming increasingly rancid, that is true. But it is not only the profane side, it is increasingly the weak side (as the etymology of the word "left" indicates). That's where their shrillness and bitterness is coming from. As I've noted before, the Left has been in an ever-accelerating decline since as far back as the late 1940s. Kos and his ilk should be watched for subversive activity, of course, but otherwise should be treated with the contempt they deserve. They should be treated like the Holocaust deniers.
(I'm using "Left" in the sense that Jean A. Laponce defined that concept in his Left and Right: The Topography of Political Perceptions, i.e., the side of discontinuity, equality, secularism, horizontality, and entropy.)
By the way, James Valliant has written an excellent book soon to be available, The Passion of Ayn Rand's Critics, answering the ad hominem smears that the subversive forces have levelled against that great defender of our Western high culture.
I think what gets me is the weird defensive projectionism from "David" there is no question that Republicans do the same crap to us all the time
but I honestly cannot think of a coordinated "attack" by Republicans on a Democrat that took the form of rooting through years of associations (ooo.. flagrant fraternizations with ::gasp:: conservatives! oh my) and holding up all "predictions" that didn't come to pass as "venal and stupid."
I hear such charges all the time but no one can give me a valid example. This tactic seems to be a "borking" but Robert Bork was no Democrat.
On a side note -- speaking of Ayn Rand, why did he put "objectivist" in quotes in front of her name? Objectivism is the philosophical movement she started. It's like saying "'Marxist' Karl Marx."
He probably doesn't like the word or the philosophy and feels clever calling it into question with sarcastic argumentative quotes. (I think it's just bad writing.)
The Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler
Don?t bang your head!
Despicable, and that's why I never read rats like Kos. And how can they smear Ayn Rand more than she's already been smeared ever since she wrote Atlas Shrugged? But why make Kos and his ilk the center of the Universe? Every time I read this and some other blogs I get the impression that I've stepped into an alternate Universe in which Kerry won the election, in which Democrats control the House and the Senate, in which pacifists are in command of our military, in which a gun-hating radical is Chief Justice on the Supreme Court, in which the propaganda of the Left-Leaning Antenna is swallowed without question, and in which the churches are dominated by the Socialist Gospel.
It's the other way around. Bush won the election and is in command of our military forces. Republicans control the House and the Senate. Rehnquist is still the Chief Justice of a basically conservative Supreme Court and his replacement will no doubt be another man like him. The blogosphere, books, radio, and other alternative sources challenge the "mainstream" media with increasing effectiveness. And most important, the churches and synagogues are returning to their old bedrock foundations in doctrine and dogma. Orthodox Jews, evangelical and fundamental Protestants, traditional Catholics, are on the rise, and there is even a renewed interest in Old Time Religions like Asatru. We are in the Second Religiousness.
The Left, as represented by Kos, is becoming increasingly rancid, that is true. But it is not only the profane side, it is increasingly the weak side (as the etymology of the word "left" indicates). That's where their shrillness and bitterness is coming from. As I've noted before, the Left has been in an ever-accelerating decline since as far back as the late 1940s. Kos and his ilk should be watched for subversive activity, of course, but otherwise should be treated with the contempt they deserve. They should be treated like the Holocaust deniers.
(I'm using "Left" in the sense that Jean A. Laponce defined that concept in his Left and Right: The Topography of Political Perceptions, i.e., the side of discontinuity, equality, secularism, horizontality, and entropy.)