They'd never cut it. Malaysia may be a hair away from being a police state in some ways, but its more censorious politicians tend to be flamboyant, charismatic spotlight-stealers (the obvious example being Mahathir Mohamed). They may be paternalistic statists, but they have real style. (Steven Malcolm Anderson would love them, if in fact he doesn't already.) Our censorious American politicians, on both right and left, are just boring little ninnies.

Stevens makes Republicans look bad, indeed. He makes People look bad. But other Republicans need not jump ship, in contrast to what I think Jarvis might well be forced to do, given the strength of the Leftists/Deaniacs who have about gained control of the Democratic Party.

Jarvis is becoming not a "true" liberal, for merely disagreeing with the Party line demanding opposition and even hate of Republicans as its only policy. He's painted as a fake or an opportunist only. This is false.

I'm getting ready to try to hammer Stevens and even the FCC itself, whose standards literally cannot be made to make sense. I know they will really care! But maybe the blogosphere will make them "care".

http://bdroppings.blogspot.com/2005/03/ted-stevens-wants-to-apply-decency.html

Libertarian leaning conservatives tolerate social conservatives setting decency standards for public media. Stevens' call for more regulation of private broadcasts threatens to fracture the conservative coalition. I hope someone gets this message across to him and to other social conservatives. This is a wedge issue for the Dems.

Why are you so surprised? Us libruls have been saying much the same thing for decades. So why do you insist on trashing us? It's not our fault you were too busy crying about government regs to see who your real enemies were, and stand up to them.

As the Bolsheviks once said to Tsarist troops: DON'T FIGHT US -- JOIN US!

I'll fight both the Left and the Right when they attack individual freedom. I'm against censorship, even of Communists, Holocaust deniers, anti-homosexual propagandists, etc.. I'm against government control of the media, whether it be TV or newspapers or books or blogs.

Sean Kinsell:

That was very funny about me. As for totalitarians with style, we do have Pat Buchanan, Tom Coburn, and Santorum. Matahir is an interesting enemy, he makes Buchanan look liberal by comparison. Hell, he makes the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" look liberal by comparison! Bin Laden, etc.? I once wrote a story, "The Burning Dream", about an evil lady who hated everything about Western civilization and loved Third World dictators. Her style was fascinating to me, which is why I enjoyed writing about her. "The Land of Law and Order", all of them, as David Lynn Smith and I called it when we created our spectrum.

That's why we defenders of freedom, the individual, and Western values must have style to match and overcome that of the enemy. We must be full of conviction and passionate intensity. Sexiness, Selfishness, Polytheistic Godliness. The Ego striving for the Infinite. The total passion for the total height. Conservative Lesbian Individualist Theology.

"That was very funny about me. As for totalitarians with style, we do have Pat Buchanan, Tom Coburn, and Santorum."

Buchanan, I'll give you. That man doesn't do anything half-way. Coburn and Santorum I don't find charismatic or compelling. They're so...desiccated. Mahathir had real life force--when he announced his retirement, his faction swarmed the lectern and begged him tearfully not to go, and you could believe they meant it.

I was thinking of Santorum's famous "man on dog" speech. But more, Coburn's speech about lesbianism in the girls' restroom. That's much more interesting than anything the Leftists like to talk about!