Dissent Of The Day

A reader writes:

Andrew, I’m going to hurl if you don’t get off this Ron Paul bandwagon.  Aside from the fact he’s a whackjob on economic issues, and hopelessly naiive on foreign policy, he is surrounded by really serious hate groups. Visit David Dukes site or the Stormfront site and note the RP columns and endorsements. This isn’t some innocent eccentric Congressman riding a popular wave, it is tapping into a very sinister side of the US electorate.

Try to engage the Paulistas on any subject and within 5 minutes they are talking about international bankers, the Trilateral Commission and the CFR.  And if you encourage them just a little they’ll be talking about the Jews and their control of the US government, and before you know it they’re off to the races.  Freemasons, Illuminati, the guy on the grassy knoll…..its all there.

I fear you are letting Paul’s (ignorant and unreasoned) opposition to the war make you a cheerleader based on the "my enemy’s enemy is my friend" theory.  He is not your friend, not a friend of this country.

Goodbye To all What?

A blogger dissents from my argument about Obama:

I think that is wishful thinking, a product of a desire on Sullivan’s part to escape history, a classic Romantic, indeed "Transcendentalist" urge.

The truth about Obama is that he is a symbol of the victory of one side. Obama’s candidacy is the Iwo Jima, if you will, for the side of the Boomer war that has, after more than three decades, "overcome some day": the hippies, the war protesters, the drop-outs, the integrationists, those hairy, messy, starry-eyed kids who moved to San Francisco with flowers in their hair (well, the ones that got past the drugs).

Read the whole thing. I think my response would be that an integration of the best of the 1960s (and a rejection of the worst) is exactly the post-boomer synthesis I’m talking about. And a former president of the Harvard Law Review, Senator and foreign policy realist does not strike me as a hairy, messy starry-eyed kid. Not that there’s anything wrong with hairy, messy starry-eyed kids, of course.

Kevin Drum’s BMI

TMI from Althouse:

Actually, [Drum] isn’t such a "little" guy: I learned that he has a BMI of 28. I know, maybe he’s very muscular, but I’m guessing doughy. I think if you know 2 facts, BMI of 28 + blogger, you can assume doughy. For the sake of argument. And I’m here for an argument.

Ah, the blogosphere. So much better when it’s really bitchy.

Incrementalism and Gay Rights

An interesting post from Feministe on the tranny-free ENDA:

I think history also teaches us that it’s important to push for the big goals and to promote inclusive movements. The same-sex marriage issue is a pretty good example. Twenty (even ten) years ago, same-sex marriage was pretty much unheard of, and civil unions were a radical idea. The incrementalist approach would have marriage equality activists pushing for civil unions, and dealing with marriage later. And they did, in states like Vermont and Hawaii, with mixed success. But where the movement actually got it legs was when activists pushed for marriage ‹ they succeeded in putting the big goal on the table and in shifting the conversation leftwards so that civil unions, which were previously pretty out there, were suddenly the moderate position. Had marriage equality activists gone the incrementalist route, I don’t think we’d be seeing the kind of debate we’re having now (a debate that I do think will come down on the side of justice). I think it would have taken another decade to get to where we are today. If Bush isn’t going to support the rights of LGBT people, he isn’t going to support the rights of LGBT people. Taking the "T" out isn’t going to help. But it will further marginalize the transgender community, and remind us all that certain groups are disposable.

Agreed. But we nonetheless accepted civil unions in Hawaii and Vermont, while using the debates to advance arguments about civil marriage. And it took a huge amount of educational work to get the critical case for marriage equality out there. We haven’t done enough work on transgender rights yet. We should do more, I think. But holding everyone else hostage in the meantime makes no sense to me.

A Clinton Bimbo Eruption?

Now the other one. Silverstein:

If Hillary is having an affair with Abedin it would not be evidence of her lesbianism as much as of her common sense and sound judgment.

The idea that Mrs Clinton is having a lesbian affair is about as credible as the idea that Obama is a closet-Muslim. But this is South Carolina, remember? But if she wants to scotch the lesbian rumors, she really should tip better. Or more transparently anyway.

Freedom On The March Watch

Bush may be surprised at Russia’s creep back toward tyranny, but Burke would understand. From an excellent new essay in the New York Review of Books by Sergei Kovalev:

Is the 71 percent of the vote he received in 2004 convincing evidence of his popularity? I have never met anyone who likes Putin as a person. One answer to the riddle of his electoral success is quite simple and quite sad. For virtually the first time in history, Russian citizens were given the primary instrument of political democracy: direct and competitive elections. But they do not know why they need this instrument or how to make use of it. Eleven hundred years of history have taught us only two possible relationships to authority, submission and revolt. The idea of peacefully replacing our ruler through a legal process is still a wild, alien thought for us. The powers-that-be are above the law and they’re unchangeable by law. Overthrowing them is something we understand. But at the moment, we don’t want to. We’ve had quite enough revolution."