If I remember my history correctly, one of the things which stymied the advance of the John Birch Society was its inability to keep its wild conspiracy-mongering contained merely to leftward targets. When Dwight D. Eisenhower became the subject of the JBS' ravings, it proved the last straw for respectable conservatives, and the power of the organization was broken once and for all.
Over the past few weeks, there's been a bit of a crack-up regarding the participation of gay Republican groups in CPAC (the Conservative Political Action Conference). CPAC's refusal to ban gay organization has led to a boycott movement by several members of the social right, such as the Family Research Council.
But that apparently isn't enough. Now, CPAC opponents are saying that -- you guessed it -- the hosting organization is a front for efforts to bring Sha'riah law to America. No, really.
The wild-eyed conspiracies that the Muslims are taking over American law and life have became staples of Republican discourse (Sharron Angle famously alleged that Shariah had taken hold in Dearborn, Michigan, and Frankford, Texas). But it's the sort of allegation that can very easily stop promoting esprit de corps and start being fratricidal, and that's where I think we're heading. Which is a good thing. Watching this vile nonsense rip apart its progenitors would be a rare example of political karma.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
One of the greatest misjudgments of bloggers and pundits is that society operates by the judgments of themselves and those they deem within a "respectable" range of discourse.
Maybe heightened whining about Sha'riah will make Ross Douthat or whoever sad, but if Ross Douthat was in any way capable of mobilizing people he'd be richer. Instead the money is pouring Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck.
To the extent "beyond the pale" ideas really hurt the holder, it's Sharron Angle being seen as against Social Security, not culture war utterances.
But I must say I am gratified to see from the labels that it appears David has implictly come around to the idea that Islamophobia is a form of racism.
Blogged on this earlier today. I'll say one thing... The nutter crowd at World Net Daily does not disappoint. Not quite as good as the Weekly World News was...
You know, come to think of it, I think this Islamist infiltration is just the sort of thing that Bat Boy could snuff out lickety-split!
One difference between Bachmann and Palin is that the former actually has a more "elite" pedigree than the latter. Bachmann has a tax LLM from William & Mary and was a Treasury Department attorney at a federal tax court. However, she's also much more of a crazed culture warrior than Palin.
I haven't followed Bachmann much, and only know she on Hannity a lot (already a strike against her). For liberals, what exactly is the beef against her?
sonic, take your pick. Here's one I picked at random...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michele_Bachmann#2010_Census
Joe... that doesn't read like much of anything. There has to be more, something better, than that.
I do love how she overcame her Demcratic upbringing:
She told the (Minneapolis) Star Tribune that she was reading Gore Vidal's 1973 novel, Burr: "He was kind of mocking the Founding Fathers and I just thought, 'I just remember reading the book, putting it in my lap, looking out the window and thinking, 'You know what? I don't think I am a Democrat. I must be a Republican.'"
WOW... It took her till her senior year in college to figure this out???
I've been blogging since 2005. Hey, you know what? I think I'm a blogger!
A friend who lived in Bachmann's district for a while was particularly annoyed by Bachmann's claim that because CO2 is natural, it is incapable of being harmful. I think Bachmann hit the national radar in 2008, though, when she said that Obama and other members of Congress should be investigated by the news media to determine whether they had anti-American views. More recently, she's referred to AmeriCorps as running "re-education camps for young people"; claimed that Obama's Asia trip cost $200million; and stated that the U.S. shouldn't be part of the global economy.
Aside from the obvious problem with using your sympathy with Gore Vidal to determine whether you're a Democrat (I don't assume everyone in the GOP adores the collected works of the Buckleys), I doubt that Bachmann grasped how writing a novel with Aaron Burr as your protagonist creates a dramatic necessity that Burr's various antagonists (Jefferson, Hamilton, et al) come off rather poorly.
Speaking of.. PG, have you read Chernow's biography of Hamilton? It's long, but one of the most enlightening of any of the founding fathers bio's I've read. Hamilton was a freaking genius, and unappreciated, thanks in large part to Jefferson's successful attempt to diminish his stature among the founding fathers.
I haven't read it, but I'll add it to the Kindle. From what I understand, Hamilton was probably the most important advocate for an expansive commerce clause and a strong independent federal judiciary, so he ought to be getting more attention and study from liberals.
Well, that's kinda supposing liberals have a interest in being originalists...
Some do, joe. Also, regardless of one's personal interpretive preference, it's always wise to be capable of using your opponent's tools against him. I read that on a conservative blog quoting Saul Alinsky or Karl Marx or someone like that.
Fair enough.
Post a Comment