Alarming News: I like Morgan Freeberg. A lot.
American Digest: And I like this from "The Blog That Nobody Reads", because it is -- mostly -- about me. What can I say? I'm on an ego trip today. It won't last.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: We were following a trackback and thinking "hmmm... this is a bloody excellent post!", and then we realized that it was just part III of, well, three...Damn. I wish I'd written those.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: ...I just remembered that I found a new blog a short while ago, House of Eratosthenes, that I really like. I like his common sense approach and his curiosity when it comes to why people believe what they believe rather than just what they believe.
Brutally Honest: Morgan Freeberg is brilliant.
Dr. Melissa Clouthier: Morgan Freeberg at House of Eratosthenes (pftthats a mouthful) honors big boned women in skimpy clothing. The picture there is priceless--keep scrolling down.
Exile in Portales: Via Gerard: Morgan Freeberg, a guy with a lot to say. And he speaks The Truth...and it's fascinating stuff. Worth a read, or three. Or six.
Just Muttering: Two nice pieces at House of Eratosthenes, one about a perhaps unintended effect of the Enron mess, and one on the Gore-y environ-movie.
Mein Blogovault: Make "the Blog that No One Reads" one of your daily reads.
The Virginian: I know this post will offend some people, but the author makes some good points.
Poetic Justice: Cletus! Ah gots a laiv one fer yew...
Our sexist voucher program, by which established pinhead misogynists like myself can retain our sexist identities while saying good things about Sarah Palin, is off to a great start. I was worried people would be confused by the concept, but it seems this is an idea whose time has come: Delegating someone else to help preserve our fine institutions of discrimination and ugly slang that degrades women, thus purchasing the “right” to further pollute the environment through ancillary inflation of the female ego. Sort of a “cap and trade” system of letting those uppity women think they might be capable of running things.
Much more civilized than those dark times of thirty years ago, when we ran around with wild abandon, singing along to “I Am Woman, Hear Me Roar,” with no thought whatsoever as to the long term consequences. **shudder** Nowadays, thanks to my voucher program, we keep it all under control. And maybe this way, through our marketplace-driven scheme to contain our emissions of female fluffery and flattery, the planet won’t burn out.
This blogger has noticed our little scheme — hey, look, someone actually reading The Blog That Nobody Reads — and commented…
…obviously some liberal bloggers with an agenda have propagated some false rumors. But at the same time, are any of her noted positive qualities valid? That question, along with the obvious “in case the old man were to die, is she ready to be president” question seems not to matter at all; these smitten flag-wavers seem ready to knock over the old man right now and put her in the top spot (for example here’s a great logo sitting right next to thoughtfully giddy praise for her).
End judgement: the “base” gets electrified any time someone with some sort of (manufactured or genuine) down-home public persona gets on the ticket. What would this look like if the Dems started playing this ballgame? Here’s to four more years of personality politics, kids…
Hmmm. I have mixed feelings about this one. On the one hand, I would not hold that particular post aloft as a statement of my reasons for supporting Sarah Palin. To me (and really, this seemed pretty obvious) the purpose of it was: How can I retain my identity as a sexist pig after all those pro-Palin arguments had been proffered elsewhere, with my name virtually etched underneath such flattery? How to resolve that vexing conundrum. Hence the title.
On the other hand, I do think I’m guilty of lavishing what might be called “giddy praise,” albeit “thoughtfully giddy praise.” Thoughtful is always good; the same cannot be said of giddy. In other words, perhaps the exuberance has outpaced the substance. I think this is the spirit of the blogger’s complaint, and I find it to be legitimate.
I don’t know what the blogger’s been watching if he thinks the Obama campaign has been anything but personality politics from the very beginning. But that’s a whole different discussion. To me, Sarah Palin is an electrifying candidate because she makes conservatism look like the essence of moderation; and she makes it look like the essence of moderation, because that is precisely what it is. She makes it look like life itself, and liberalism look like death itself, because that is precisely what they are. She does this because she can’t help it. She is virginal to the beltway art of making extreme ideas look moderate & vice-versa, and simple things look complicated & vice-versa. Let’s look back over the best and beefiest parts of her speech one more time.
America needs more energy; our opponent is against producing it. Victory in Iraq is finally in sight; he wants to forfeit. Terrorist states are seeking nuclear weapons without delay; he wants to meet them without preconditions. Al Qaeda terrorists still plot to inflict catastrophic harm on America; he’s worried that someone won’t read them their rights? Government is too big; he wants to grow it. Congress spends too much; he promises more. Taxes are too high; he wants to raise them.
What is powerful about this style of speech is that it is unanswerable. Oh sure, that isn’t entirely true, you could answer it. You have two options. You can change the subject subtly through the use of emotionally charged rhetoric, and engaging in what’s called “spin”; or you can appeal to the ignorance of someone completely unacquainted with these situations.
And our liberals, or anyone who wants to disagree with Gov. Palin about the right thing to do here, would have to spin. They’d have no choice. Think about it — how far would you get by saying “No! America does NOT need more energy! Victory in Iraq is NOT in sight! Terrorist states are NOT seeking nuclear weapons and Al Qaeda does NOT seek to harm America! Taxes are NOT TOO HIGH!”
Those would all be very silly things to say.
Palin’s argument is unanswerable. It is unanswerable because it is life itself. Life, from time to time, requires defense; defense requires that danger be named. It requires — read that as, “is synonymous with” — motion; motion requires fuel.
If you’re reading this as yet another anti-beltway argument, well, you’re reading pretty accurately. As to why our beltway crowd doesn’t talk like this — I really don’t know. President Bush used to speak this way all the time…specifically, with regard to this bit about Al Qaeda seeking to harm America. He still does. But only rarely now. The beltway just doesn’t talk like this. The beltway functions, not by sustaining life, but by building larger coalitions out of mini-coalitions, each of which seek to conquer each other as rival factions. It does not seek to sustain life — it is up to We, The People to do that, by means of wise selection of those tasked with steering this apparatus.
Now, I’m told John McCain is the very picture of the kind of man who can do this. I dunno ’bout that; explain the Gang-of-14 to me, if that’s the case.
So that’s why I’m “giddy” about Sarah Palin. And I think that’s a good reason all by itself, but of course in my case there’s more. I’m one of those hold-outs who was snubbing McCain all summer long, while the old man tossed and turned over whether he needed people like me to win. Palin, therefore, is vindication for the folks like me. If McCain could get away with choosing someone else, Mister Gang-of-Fourteen would’ve chosen someone else. We gave you Sarah Palin. Those other guys, who declared allegiance to the McCain ticket from the very first day, unquestionable and unshakable, don’t like talking about this. But it’s true. And Gov. Palin, in turn, gave McCain tens of millions of dollars in campaign donations he otherwise would never have seen.
But why am I giddy about Sarah Palin?
Because when she talks about why her party should run things — she doesn’t go running headlong into the weed patch that is “marriage is between a man and a woman.” She makes it look like the other folks are the control freaks; and she makes it look that way because that is exactly what’s going on. We aren’t debating what marriage is or what it isn’t. We are debating whether food should be grown and used to feed people, and fuel should be pulled out of the ground and burned; or whether food should be burned up to make our cars go, and fuel left in the ground. We are debating whether evil is to be confronted, or invited over to Camp David for “talks” over some mint julip. And in this country, most people think people should eat food, fuel should be burned to make our cars go, and evil should be confronted.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
My answer to the “The geezer might die, is she ready” question remains the same.
She’s one heartbeat away from the presidency. Obama would be zero heartbeats away from the presidency. I don’t think Obama really wants to get into a discussion concerning who is better qualified here. She’s more qualified than their top man, and they don’t seem to have a problem with Mr. “Look at me, I’ve got two memoirs and 130 ‘present’ votes” who has never run a city or a state. Or anything other than a campaign. And — is he actually running that? I dunno.
- philmon | 09/05/2008 @ 14:48That’s a question worth a post of its own.
I was watching He Whose Middle Name Must Not Be Uttered make that argument, that his campaign is so much bigger than “Wasilly” city hall operations, and what stuck out for me was his use of the pronoun “we.” He didn’t actually say, as far as I know, that he ever did much of anything.
- mkfreeberg | 09/05/2008 @ 14:54