The Effect of Jimmy Mac

Well, he certainly seems to be getting people talking. Everyone always finishes up with "But I like him. He gets us talking." Yeah, never mind that he's rude and a barking moonbat, and he KNOWS his ideas don't hold up because he interrupts and shouts down those who challenge them. At least people are griping about him downstairs. *cough, cough*

Excruciating. It becomes unbearable when I think about what I am paying to go here.

Vox Blogoli 2005

I see Jonathan Rauch has modified (or clarified) his article via statements at Hugh Hewitt's blog. Good for him. My criticism of him below for being tone deaf to the differences among "religious conservatives" is therefore modified as well.

I think my second point holds, however. When those who are not merely espousing wacky ideas but advocating murder or treason are allowed "in the tent" it will have a delegitimizing effect upon the tent. And it will make defending against broad brush treatment that much harder to do effectively.

More Jimmy Mac

Well, Jimmy, if everything that goes on in court becomes state action, and the only requirements for getting something into court is some private person bringing a private claim, of their own volition, doesn’t that make everything a public action?

Man, I’m always so confused in this class, I don’t know what Jimmy is saying, I don’t know what the student commentators are saying, I don’t get any of it. I’m not stupid, but hell, speak English, people.

Oh, OK, I see, Jimmy doesn’t have a problem with everything being state action. And he just used the term “irregardless” which, as we all know, is not a word.

You know what, I'm out. He doesn't listen to the points made, and relies exclusively on "what's your point?" to shut down argument. It's like being trapped in a live Democratic Underground thread. AHHHHH!

Vox Blogoli: Jonathan Rauch

Here's the passage:"“On balance it is probably healthier if religious conservatives are inside the political system than if they operate as insurgents and provocateurs on the outside. Better they should write anti-abortion planks into the Republican platform than bomb abortion clinics. The same is true of the left. The clashes over civil rights and Vietnam turned into street warfare partly because activists were locked out of their own party establishments and had to fight, literally, to be heard. When Michael Moore receives a hero’s welcome at the Democratic National Convention, we moderates grumble; but if the parties engage fierce activists while marginalizing tame centrists, that is probably better for the social peace than the other way around.”

First thoughts: Anytime someone says "we moderates" I cringe. It reminds me of the saying that a liberal is a person who thinks their position is already a compromise with you. Second, I am confused by "religious conservatives." Does he mean conservatives who go to church at all? Conservatives who are consistent church goers? Those who use their religiousness as part of their politics? Does he mean just Christian conservatives or would religious Hindu conservatives count here too? Frankly, I'd be surprised if Rauch had put any thought into it. To a certain segment of the liberal population, we are all just one big amorphous group: religious conservatives. So, with that in mind, it is not surprising that he would tar the whole group with the "clinic bomber" brush. Where's the nuance when you need it?

Finally, I second what jim geraghty says about letting bad ideas die. Besides, what is the old expression about bad apples and spoiling the bunch? I mean, if Rauch can't discern even now between murderers who read the Bible and Christians passionate about outlawing abortion, imagine how broad his brush will be once the true crazies are "welcomed into the tent."

Do as I say, not as I Do

The ACLU’s hypocrisy is all the more troubling because of their inability to see the problem. I mean, someone mentioned Larry Summers handing his enemies a sword. Isn’t that what the ACLU is doing here?

Jimmy Mac

He’s about to offend us. He mentions Doug Wilson, who said that it’d be easier to take over Latah County than NYC. Yeah, but then he’d only be in charge of Latah County, so whoop de frickin’ doo. How much more damage could a similar crank do when all the power is just as localized, but the area of influence is much greater? See Justice Jackson’s remarks.

“Why do conservatives want to wrap themselves in the flag and not apply the Constitution to everyone? Why do they want to limit the Constitution?”
Unbelievable. This guy actually believes what he is saying. Talk about someone who needs to get out more, and experience a diversity of views. I mean, students try to inflict their views on him, but he shrugs them off like a mosquito buzzing around his head. Ah, the beauty of self-induced and maintained ignorance.

He thinks multinational corporations are not the same as citizens, in terms of privacy-type rights. But are corporations just made up of people? If I have to right to be racist in my own home, and my friend has the same right, why can’t we enter into an agreement between the two of us and be racist together? Is it just the commerce clause? If that’s the justification, that’s fine, but under 14th Amendment, it seems a little sketchy. Where am I wrong?

Nothing to Say

Hey there. How's it going? Jack's asleep, so I'll write a few words. Most of this I have typed without even looking down at the keyboard even once. Hooray!! Of course, without the backspace button, it would look like "Hpprau!@@@." So, I have resolved that I spend way too much time reading politics. I need to be reading my assignments or doing paying work. So, in an effort to help keep my self on task, I will now write here in this journal if I find I am reading politics. I will stop and immediately come to this place, write a quick post about the subject and then, when the post is done, get back to work. Here's hoping.