Category: The Dish

It was fine for bishops to publicly condemn Kerry for dissent, but a quiet sit-down is more appropriate for Sean Hannity. Hmmm.

Brad DeLong, a writer consumed with hatred of conservatism in any form, argues that even Burke just made it all up as he went along, supporting tradition when it agreed with his principles and junking it when it didn’t. Money quote:

What are good institutions? Burke sounds like Madison: checks-and-balances, separation of powers, rights of the subject, limitations on the state. Burke’s views on what good institutions are are Enlightenment views – that branch of the Enlightenment that took people as they are and politics as a science, that is, rather than the branch that took people as Rousseau hoped they might someday be and politics as the striking of an oppositional pose.

Because he finds that the English past is usable as a support for his Enlightenment-driven views, Burke makes conservative arguments in Reflections. But whenever conservative arguments lead where Burke doesn’t want to go – to Richelieu or Louis XIV or the plunder of Ireland or the Star Chamber or Warren Hastings or imperial centralization – Burke doesn’t make them. England’s inheritance of institutions and practices is to be respected wherever it supports Burke’s conception of properly-ordered liberty, and ignored wherever it does not.

Well, yes and no. Burke’s fundamental point is that everything in society is contingent and that change must always begin with what came before and is most successful when it works inferentially from that tradition rather than being imposed from outside according to abstract theories or texts. Tradition is also a very expansive term. An American can reach back deeply into the American past and resurrect an ancient tradition and make it fresh again – thus appearing to be quite radical, while still fitting into the definition of a Burkean conservative. It is always up to the statesman at any period of time to make a prudential judgment about what change is good and what isn’t.

Hence, to a liberal who wants a clear and timeless theory about what makes something just or unjust, right or wrong, Burke looks unprincipled. To a conservative, however, he seems, well, prudent. Conservatives in the Anglo-American tradition have many strains to draw on – Schmittian and Burkean, among many others. Increasingly, it seems to me, there is a divide between conservatives who look to Madison and Burke, and those who look to more authoritarian impulses. The crisis in American conservatism came to a head when the South took over. The South has never been fertile soil for Madisonian or Burkean conservatism. And I doubt whether any party based in the South will ever be conservative in the manner I admire.

The Terminator meets Jesus.

A reader writes:

You’re the guy who’s supposed to be an independent thinker, just wrote a book, but can’t quite voice what he doesn’t like about Hillary, so he falls back on linking no-substance 1984 propaganda ads or praises Maureen Dowd for her usual smears and character assassination (labelled "insightful"? Just like any other 13-year-old at the mall?).

How about taking a day off blogging and instead of playing with your dogs, try to at least come up with some sensible written explanation for your stand?

In my defense, I have defended her reasonable positions on the Iraq war, and don’t regard her policy proposals as uniquely half-baked or far too liberal for my taste. I come back to character, which I’ve learned matters a lot. I simply see her opportunism and focus-group politics to be disconcerting. This isn’t about gender. My long passion for Margaret Thatcher should lay that to rest. But I see in Clinton the antithesis of Thatcher: an instinct always to say what she thinks we want to hear. At this point in time, America needs better.

A reader writes on why we went to war:

The fact is: we relied so heavily on the weapons of mass destruction argument because it was the easiest rung on which to hang our hat. Everyone knew that Iraq had stockpiles of at least chemical weapons. And once we got in there, who knows what we’d find on the biological weapon or nuclear weapon front?It wasn’t even a question in anyone’s minds, us or other foreign intelligence services. So we relied on that rationale, because it’s hard to make an argument that "we need to go in there and knock heads." Even if that is what needs to be done.

Obviously, the strategy of relying on that justification was a horrible mistake. We’ve now lost total control of the narrative.

It doesn’t make D’Souza’s point any less relevant though. The problem is not that the United States went into the bar to rough up some thugs and show that there was a new sheriff in town. The problem is that if you are the sheriff, you can’t go into the bar and get your ass kicked.

Walking into that bar is about demonstrating your power and credibility. If you get beat up, you’ve only demonstrated how weak you are, even if you are eventually victorious. If the sheriff manages to beat the local thugs into submission, but suffers a broken nose and cracked ribs and has to take the next few days off recuperating, then he’s lost all credibility both with both the thugs and the townsfolk.

This is basically the situation we are in now and why, instead of victory, we’re fighting for a narrow loss.

And it’s why the architect of this strategy is now sounding more and more hysterical. When Dick Cheney looks weak, when he has made the U.S. look weak, we are in trouble. Weakness invites attack. If and when the next attack comes, Cheney’s failed strategy will be partly responsible. He hasn’t just undermined the soft power of the U.S. He has deeply undermined American hard power.

Money quote:

I think that the most important quality for a president is character. All the decisions that the president has to decide, the most important ones are very close decisions. And I have great confidence that John will help us solve the toughest problem for any administration and for our country – to take us from where we are to where we haven’t been, and I think John is the man to do this."

More interesting to me is the following:

McCain said he would stop rendition and immediately close the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba if he were elected president. McCain said he would make those moves to help improve the country’s image abroad.

Why wasn’t McCain’s pledge to shut down Gitmo a news story?

Not everything in the media is Anna Nicole Smith. As cable shows continue to slide in ratings, quality journalism is enjoying a bit of a resurgence. But online audiences may be tapering off.

A reader warns:

Be careful when HRC answers you on their membership. They cannot claim as members people who give them tax deductible contributions. When a person gives a charitable (501 c3) contribution, they cannot receive anything of value in return (like a membership). If HRC admits these people are getting membership for a tax deductible contribution, they are in big trouble with the IRS.

Hmmm. Then this:

A year or so ago I purchased a card at the HRC store in Washington DC. They asked for some information, I asked them if this was going to put me on a mailing list, they said no, that they were just keeping a record of who came to the store from certain areas.

Well, I’ll spare you the number of mailing lists I was put on, but I will tell you that I started getting letters from them with instructions on "RENEWING MY MEMBERSHIP". I had never joined, paid dues, etc… but because I purchased something in their store, they had added me to their membership rolls.

Update: a reader clarifies:

I don’t think your reader is 100 percent correct. 501c3 givers can indeed be called members, but anything of value they receive as a member must be deducted from their tax-deductible donation amount. At any rate, most people give to the Human Rights Campaign, which is not a 501c3. The Human Rights Campaign Foundation IS a 501c3, and the home of HRC’s nonpolitical work.

Still waiting for the HRC email …

His self-defense against conservative critics can be read here.

He was a fan, apparently. So is this blogger.