« "Most of the harm in the world is done by good people, | Main | Fixing the fast-food strike »

September 9, 2013

Why America Is Saying 'No' [Bumped]

There is something going on here, a new distance between Washington and America that the Syria debate has forced into focus.
The Syria debate isn't, really, a struggle between libertarians and neoconservatives, or left and right, or Democrats and Republicans. That's not its shape. It looks more like a fight between the country and Washington, between the broad American public and Washington's central governing assumptions. Peggy Noonan: - WSJ.com

Posted by gerardvanderleun at September 9, 2013 9:30 AM. This is an entry on the sideblog of American Digest: Check it out.

Your Say

How about that! Sometimes, we push back. Sometimes we get angry. Sometimes, stupid, ineffective, unethical, lying politicians lose their job. 2014 elections will be interesting....

Posted by: Tom at September 7, 2013 7:20 AM

Noonan has seemed to have lost her bearings in recent years. In this editorial she seems to have regained them.

Posted by: Jimmy J. at September 7, 2013 9:53 AM

Gimme a shout when it gets to boots on the ground and steel in hand. I'll join "the broad American public" in ousting the scurrilous sumbitches.

Methinks we are moving from the ballot boxes to the tar & feathers.

Posted by: chasmatic at September 7, 2013 12:09 PM

Noonan never lost her bearings, because she never had any. She once admitted that Reagan rewrote her speeches for him until she got the hang of it, becoming became a Reaganite for a spell. And so on. Noonan is a talented cipher, like Barry. Why she took right to him.

Posted by: james wilson at September 7, 2013 1:09 PM

Methinks we are moving from the ballot boxes to the tar & feathers.

Man, I hope not, but it feels more likely by the hour. Riots are ugly, ugly things, no matter which side you're on.

Posted by: Rob De Witt at September 7, 2013 1:11 PM

What assumptions are those though? I am not sure I understand the reasoning behind this one at all. Does Obama figure a good bunch of macho air strikes and missiles will help midterm elections? I just don't get it.

This is bringing America together though. Almost nobody wants this except a few politicians and sycophants.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at September 7, 2013 1:43 PM

What assumptions are those though?


I think the meme BHO is going for is "I tried to Do The Right Thing, but those Evil Republicans(tm) would not let me". Yeah, the E.Rs, most of Congress, and the American people.

Basically, this is battlespace preparation for the 2014 elections.

Posted by: SteveS at September 7, 2013 2:41 PM

Just remember what Bill Clinton said--it's just so hard that nobody could succeed.

Posted by: Jason in KT at September 7, 2013 4:32 PM

She should write a book about the yawning chasm between those of us out here in the country, let's call it Country Class, and the ruling elites in DC NY LA, let's call them the Ruling Class. Then she should give all royalties to Angelo Codevilla because he already wrote that book.

AC also didn't embarrass himself by lecturing the Country Class about the benefits of giving this Obama guy a chance and then have to retract it.

Noonan is typical of the 40 to 50% of the party that will not consider for even a moment that it is long past time for all of the willfully ignorant and chronically gullible to stop advising the rest of us to try out the same old plan for surrender or destruction, as if they are new and reasonably likely to work. These people are competing to be the most reasonable pundit or voter. If they have to hand an arsonist a flaming torch to see if he really wants to burn down the country, so be it. Nothing will get in the way of their pursuit of demonstrating they can be talked into anything.

To actually reach an opinion based on anyone else's experience is to be closed-minded and require you know facts and history. Better to just have an infinite well of generous feelings and the naive spirit of a new fawn. Thax@ nice. We may be destroyed if she is wrong, but Gee Dee-it she will prove she is nice.

Posted by: Scott M at September 7, 2013 5:56 PM

Noonan: another word for Air Head.

Dan Kurt

Posted by: Dan Kurt at September 7, 2013 8:04 PM

Rob - you're right "... ugly, ugly things ..." but uglier for the losers. Us common folk are coming to the conclusion that the frog-in-the-pot option might be worse than flat out & fuck it, winner take all.

"rather die on my feet than keep livin' on my knees", (origin unknown but the sentiment is valid). Our Revolutionary forefathers came to that conclusion.

Posted by: chasmatic at September 7, 2013 9:25 PM

The older I get the less confidence I have in the conservative; in his true level of understanding, commitment, or courage. Including my own. Tar, feathers, riots, and revolution may happen--probably not--but the results would not in any event be directed by conservatives. The democratic mind is very weak and quite suggestible. All conservatives are democrats as well.

Posted by: james wilson at September 7, 2013 11:19 PM

@James Wilson, I am concluding the same thing. Including myself along with the people I criticize, it seems our side is fully disarmed once we make our point, or correct the record. Even though we are a plurality, if not majority, in this country we sit around and are passive witness to what the fervent minority force on us. Why is that?

There was no shortage of US conservatives criticizing UK/European conservatives back in the day when they were implementing civilian disarmament, cutting their military and leeching of the US, etc., etc., etc.. We concluded unkind things about those people that would not even resist their masters' every whim. We have no room to talk. We have a history of exceptional behavior as a country, if not each of us individually. We had it and we've talked as it was take from us. The Euroweenies hadn't had it for a generation to a century. It's easier for me to understand why they didn't fight back than why we to this moment are not fighting back.

Mark my words, the frontrunner in the GOP nominating process will be the most feckless, status-quo defending weenie in the field. And we will witness the very people who are prominent now cataloging the feckless nature of the GOP and the daily assault on the country by Obama change and start defending, no demanding, our only viable option is the feckless, status-quo defending weenie.

Does anyone have ideas of what to do or know of organizations that can organize action? Enough with the diagnosing, as if it all hasn't been accurately diagnosed over and over. The Left has published various books on direct action, we can use their tactics. But our people won't even speak up in their union meeting, in a classroom, at work, etc. It's my opinion the most important thing is not to wait until the exact right plan is presented, but do something, anything now and work on the details as the situation changes. That's why I've been beating this dead horse about argue with Liberals every day. You don't have to win, you just need the practice. There is a world of difference between listening to Rush, thinking you got the arguments down, and actually speaking up.

A good first step is to just ask questions. This puts the Liberal on the defense and forces him to come up with answers. An easy pattern is not to ask him should we do X, yes or no. But if raising the minimum wage makes it harder for teens to get jobs would you still support it. Don't let him change the question into anything else. He will try to change it into "you don't believe in the min-wage?" Whatever he accuses the policy of doing or not doing, just keep asking if the policy has this bad effect would you still support it. So on Syria, if lobbing cruise missiles into Syria helps al Qaeda, would you still support it? Syria, if lobbing cruise missiles into Syria doesn't prevent another gas attack, would you still support it?

You can stop at any point if you lose your footing. If you only ask the question it's not like you are losing the point if you stop quickly.

Our side needs to develop their fighting muscles. Every missed opportunity is a victory for the Left and another wasted day. The one limit I would always argue against for the foreseeable future is violence. That is the worst thing someone on our side could do. It must be avoided, but we must not remove the possibility from our opponent's fears. They need to fear us, we just do too much to assure others we are harmless. That's not being nice that is inviting them to harm us sooner.

Posted by: Scott M at September 8, 2013 12:22 AM

Three aphorisms come to mind. They are easy to read and easy to dismiss as simplistic but the truth of them won't go away:

You won't get the hay into the barn by standing around talking;

A mediocre plan put into action is better than a perfect plan still sitting on the couch;

Never bring a knife to a gunfight. Meet threats with equal or superior force.

Posted by: chasmatic at September 8, 2013 6:27 AM

I wonder if this all wasn't just an idiotic staring contest in which President Obama, assured by his advisers (especially newly-promoted Susan Rice and Ms Powers) that Syria will back down, tried to intimidate Assad. Assad, knowing a pathetic, linguini-spined loser when he sees one, shrugged. And there's always the very real possibility that the rebels used the gas and blamed Assad. Now stuck with all the speeches, he's trying to bluff his way through it.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at September 8, 2013 9:28 AM

"A mediocre plan put into action is better than a perfect plan still sitting on the couch"

Not when all the mediocre plans have been written by your enemies, and they have been. These are the wages of universal suffrage. First many things are removed from political discussion. Then men lose the ability to think about the things they would not talk about. In no case will there be a return to health without a denial of the vote to the user classes. And that is not going to happen.

The left understands, instinctively or intellectually, that a democratic people is a stupid people, despise them, and take joy in manipulating them. The conservative doesn't know whether to shit or go blind, so he does both.

Universal suffrage, it's as simple as that.

Posted by: james wilson at September 8, 2013 12:20 PM

We are following the plans Alinksky and Cloward-Piven have set out for us. And a lot of us, we smell the smoke, maybe hear the thunder of hooves just over the horizon, and we're like

"Uh? what's that noise?"
"Aw, it's nothin'. While yer up grab me a beer."

This's my motto and I'm stickin' to it: Conservative values. Class Warfare is for dope-smoking commies. Stand on your own. No leeching. No whining. Fuck the hippies.

Posted by: chasmatic at September 8, 2013 1:31 PM

We are pushing back for the simple fact that our enemy Assad, funded and armed by our enemies Russia and Iran, is fighting against our enemies all over the range of radical Islam, who are funded by our enemies inside Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Yemen, etc.

I dont care about the Presidents red line, credibility, or golf score. I care about American lives, and those of our true allies. Let our enemies kill each other while we seek to contain this regional war between the Med, Red Sea, and Indian Ocean rather than attracting the splodeydopes attention back towards us.

Posted by: C.H. Parker at September 8, 2013 5:07 PM

It's because of the influence of the Muslim Brotherhood, which has infiltrated us at the top, as well as the covert financial and political influence of the Saudis, who have had their hooks into us for a while already. They're trying to use us as their military force against Iran.

Read Patrick Poole's recent report:

http://www.gloria-center.org/2013/06/the-u-s-governments-disastrous-muslim-outreach-efforts-and-the-impact-on-u-s-middle-east-policy-blind-to-terror1/

Posted by: ahem at September 8, 2013 5:37 PM

james wilson writes above:

"Mark my words, the frontrunner in the GOP nominating process will be the most feckless, status-quo defending weenie in the field."

AAARRGH!!! That is so true!!

These jamokes just don't understand that if they took a hard line, and trumpeted an American Do-Or-Die conservative point of view, that the country would solidly unite behind them, and be putty in their hands.

Real Americans HUNGER for conservative leadership! By a 2:1 margin, Americans self-identify as Conservatives over Liberals. But the sycophantic vote-whores in Congress mistakenly believe that all the latest talking points are what wins elections.

To a limited degree, they may be correct. But give us a real Reagan, and watch the waters part! Have some balls! Huevos! Cojones! Take the lead, and apologize to NO ONE for your pro-American point of view.

Word up, folks. Word up.

Posted by: Arthur September at September 8, 2013 8:16 PM

Arthur, these jamokes DO understand that a hardline conservative point of view would probably bring another landslide victory, that is why they try and smother that baby in the crib.

Reagan won 2 epic landslides. He had to fight the Bush/Rockefeller wing of the GOP every step of the way. It's not possible the people that fought Reagan forgot Reagan won in landslides while their candidates are indistinguishable and routinely lose even during an economic depression to a candidate that rammed through the most unpopular piece of legislation in a generation.

They fight conservatism because it does win. If it wins they are asked to do less and less. The less they do the less influence they can sell. The less money they have the closer they have to live to us hoi poloi. By remaining liberal-lite they are guaranteed a silver or gold medal in every contest. The biggest defeat is getting the second most luxurious suite of offices rather than the most luxurious suite.

The only time you see the RNC and Boehner spring into action is when they fight conservatives, not liberals. The DNC and GOP's hatred of the rest of us unites them in DC. It's like a staged boxing match. Whoever wins the same consultants split the receipts and laugh at the rest of us.

Posted by: Scott M at September 9, 2013 12:51 AM

Scott,

Reagan won, and after winning grew government, manipulated states rights and spent like crazy. He talked about the evils of big government but implemented big government while governor of California and as president of the United States.

There have been candidates that have talked about limited government, more freedom and reducing spending, however they are laughed at, considered wacko and fringe by republican voters. If republican voters actually believed in limited government they would nominate those type of candidates, but republican voters vote for big government candidates. EVERY SINGLE TIME.

Posted by: Potsie at September 9, 2013 8:03 AM

Either way, the GOP is going to lose, and their candidate will be portrayed as jenjis khan in the press, so the may as well run the hard right small government type. Who cares what the press says, they always lie and distort anyway? Who cares what the entertainment media says, they're scumbags who just ape what the left tells them to.

And Potsie: Ron Paul was a big government guy too, when he was in office. Always pushing big spending for his district and tacking on riders that pushed cash to his constituency, then voting against it in a token effort to seem pure knowing all the while it would pass.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at September 9, 2013 8:38 AM

Right, instead of showing integrity and honor, instead of standing for what he believed was right, he did exactly what everyone else did and pushed for the money to be spent unconstitutionally in his district. He was a lying hypocrite, a politician who did what he could to retain power while saying whatever his followers wanted to hear.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at September 10, 2013 10:25 PM

Post a comment




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)