RE: GOP cynics, the new breed?

RE: GOP cynics, the new breed? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

BoxwineForBrunch -> RE: GOP cynics, the new breed? (11/29/2011 7:26:39 PM)
william f buckley jr referred to one political opponent, in print, on the occasion of her death, as a "frigid jewess," called gore vidal a "faggot" in a televised debate, and explained in another of his columns that if a woman makes out with a man but then does not want to have sex with him she should not be surprised when he rapes her because that's how god made the world. it is utterly surreal how quick the mainstream left is to lionize him as the epitome of urbane, thoughtful conservatism because he muttered with an aristocratic accent and enjoyed misquoting and mangling aristotle and moliere. i'm indifferent toward the rest of the article. it's cute when the gop and the dems fight with each other 1980s wwf style. kayfabe!

tazzygirl -> RE: GOP cynics, the new breed? (11/29/2011 8:23:41 PM)
quote: gore vidal a "faggot" in a televised debate Im surprised that surprises you.

Owner59 -> RE: GOP cynics, the new breed? (11/29/2011 8:23:59 PM)
Love your nick.

BoxwineForBrunch -> RE: GOP cynics, the new breed? (11/29/2011 8:27:06 PM)
that doesn't surprise me in the least. it surprises me how many americans who are paid to write columns as "liberals" have the stomach to heap praise on buckley. quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: gore vidal a "faggot" in a televised debate Im surprised that surprises you.

tazzygirl -> RE: GOP cynics, the new breed? (11/29/2011 8:28:53 PM)
And you believe that is what the writer in my link did?

BoxwineForBrunch -> RE: GOP cynics, the new breed? (11/29/2011 8:41:00 PM)
here William F. Buckley Jr., one of the fathers of modern American conservatism, "had a way of … making conservatism a holistic view of life not narrowed to the playing fields of ideology alone," as one admirer put it. and here Still, one wonders what the urbane Buckley would think of a movement that seems intent on ignoring the real-world context of its actions. Buckley launched his lifetime crusade against liberalism with God and Man at Yale, a book that took aim at the academics who'd taught him as an Ivy League undergraduate. the author namechecks buckley specifically to draw an unflattering comparison between his brand of (lol) "urbane conservatism" and the cynicism which the author apparently feels has just now taken hold in the gop. i get that it is a clever rhetorical strategy to use the venerable name of a reactionary icon against the current generation of republicans; but an honest dealer would not have the stomach to do it. i would propose a slight revision, where instead of "the urbane william buckley" a more honest, conscientious left winger would perhaps say "according to the preposterously pretentious misogynist, racially insensitive, unreconstructed plutocrat william f buckley jr...." granted it does not have quite the same ring to it....

tazzygirl -> RE: GOP cynics, the new breed? (11/29/2011 9:25:16 PM)
I thought that may be what you were referring too... Here is what you missed.... Conservatives, like liberals, have a more-or-less coherent set of ideas. They use political power to push preferred policies, whether related to health care, housing or a hundred other possible issues. William F. Buckley Jr., one of the fathers of modern American conservatism, (his words) "had a way of … making conservatism a holistic view of life not narrowed to the playing fields of ideology alone," as one admirer put it. (the admirer's words) The phrase... "one admirer" is linked to this... http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2010/07/09/william-f-buckley-jr-and-the-conservative-future/ quote: It is fortuitous, then, in the midst of all of this commotion that books focused on Buckley and the movement he inspired are appearing. One of these, published last year, is a collection of interviews with Buckley compiled by William Meehan. If you need any lessons on how to discuss in a compelling way controversial issues, you need only revisit Buckley's 1970 Playboy interview, which is reprinted in the collection and shows us Buckley at his best. Other interviews focus on his faith, his attitudes toward literature and his writing habits. Good stuff, especially when so many of our thought leaders today offer such limited experience and narrow perspectives. Buckley had a way of opening up discussion and making conservatism a holistic view of life not narrowed to the playing fields of ideology alone. Not his thoughts at all... just posting what a conservative had said about Buckley. As far as the urbane conservatism... again, not his words. http://search.yahoo.com/search?ei=UTF-8&fr=crmas&p=urbane+Buckley Seems he has been called "urbane" for a while now. Seems to be in reference to his show, "Firing Line" quote: instead of "the urbane william buckley" a more honest, conscientious left winger would perhaps say "according to the preposterously pretentious misogynist, racially insensitive, unreconstructed plutocrat william f buckley jr...." granted it does not have quite the same ring to it.... Why would you assume the writer is liberal?

BoxwineForBrunch -> RE: GOP cynics, the new breed? (11/30/2011 12:21:53 AM)
quote: Here is what you missed.... Conservatives, like liberals, have a more-or-less coherent set of ideas. They use political power to push preferred policies, whether related to health care, housing or a hundred other possible issues. William F. Buckley Jr., one of the fathers of modern American conservatism, (his words) "had a way of … making conservatism a holistic view of life not narrowed to the playing fields of ideology alone," as one admirer put it. (the admirer's words) The phrase... "one admirer" is linked to this... http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2010/07/09/william-f-buckley-jr-and-the-conservative-future/ i didn't miss that, though. the author of your article makes a claim that can accurately be restated "conservatives have a set of principles. william buckley was a conservative who had a set of principles. here are some flattering things conservatives say/said about buckley. the new republicans are cynical opportunists. they are nothing like principled conservatives like buckley." my reply is that buckley was a bigot, a cynic, and an opportunist. the author is using an effective but dishonest rhetorical strategy of comparing the current republicans to a perceived era in which conservatives put principles over political opportunism. there was no such era. buckley was not such a person. quote: As far as the urbane conservatism... again, not his words. http://search.yahoo.com/search?ei=UTF-8&fr=crmas&p=urbane+Buckley actually, those are his words. he typed the words. he typed the words, "Still, one wonders what the urbane Buckley would think of a movement that seems intent on ignoring the real-world context of its actions." he was not quoting anybody else, he was himself calling buckley urbane. your yahoo search shows he was not the first person to call buckley urbane, but he definitely was making that claim himself. quote: Why would you assume the writer is liberal? fair. either way, william buckley was a giant asshole.

MrRodgers -> RE: GOP cynics, the new breed? (11/30/2011 4:03:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: toxic66 quote: My impression is that all the GOP is concerned about is making Obama a one term president. And that is different from the DNC's concern about any given Republican president in what way?? Yes, quite obviously a lot of different. The DNC is a non-profit political org. not legislators actually out to defeat law and initiative.

tazzygirl -> RE: GOP cynics, the new breed? (11/30/2011 4:16:48 AM)
quote: actually, those are his words. he typed the words. he typed the words, "Still, one wonders what the urbane Buckley would think of a movement that seems intent on ignoring the real-world context of its actions." he was not quoting anybody else, he was himself calling buckley urbane. your yahoo search shows he was not the first person to call buckley urbane, but he definitely was making that claim himself. quote: quote: Why would you assume the writer is liberal? fair. either way, william buckley was a giant asshole. In your opinion. In the opinion of others, maybe not. And while you may like being an asshole, not all people do. He could have called the man many things, instead, he went with what the party thinks of him. Its very possible the writer is a Republican, its possible he is not. You dont like Buckley... we get it. This wasnt a critique of Buckley.

ArizonaBossMan -> RE: GOP cynics, the new breed? (11/30/2011 4:17:35 AM)
William Buckley would be totally excited, not as excited as one of your boys with a tingle up his leg, but still quite excited!

BoxwineForBrunch -> RE: GOP cynics, the new breed? (11/30/2011 4:23:10 AM)
he used buckley as a frame of reference to critique the "newly cynical" republican leadership. as such, buckley's character became part of his case,which makes it fair game for meta-commentary. in fact he held buckley up as the paragon of what it used to mean to be a "principled conservative." buckley was, in fact, a callow, bigoted opportunist. i don't see the difference between buckley's era of conservatives and the current republican leadership whose behavior the author is decrying. since we are still discussing the little article, it's also worth nothing he takes wilde's pithy quip about what a "cynic" is and treats it as a definition. why does he do this? because if he used a more literal definition of cynicism the uncomfortable truth that a strong case can be made american politics has been characterized by cynicism and opportunism since the articles of confederation were drafted becomes difficult to avoid. quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: actually, those are his words. he typed the words. he typed the words, "Still, one wonders what the urbane Buckley would think of a movement that seems intent on ignoring the real-world context of its actions." he was not quoting anybody else, he was himself calling buckley urbane. your yahoo search shows he was not the first person to call buckley urbane, but he definitely was making that claim himself. quote: quote: Why would you assume the writer is liberal? fair. either way, william buckley was a giant asshole. In your opinion. In the opinion of others, maybe not. And while you may like being an asshole, not all people do. He could have called the man many things, instead, he went with what the party thinks of him. Its very possible the writer is a Republican, its possible he is not. You dont like Buckley... we get it. This wasnt a critique of Buckley.

tazzygirl -> RE: GOP cynics, the new breed? (11/30/2011 4:27:27 AM)
quote: since we are still discussing the little article, it's also worth nothing he takes wilde's pithy quip about what a "cynic" is and treats it as a definition. why does he do this? Its a "definition " I have heard all my life. Why? You would have to ask him. But how would you view that quote as being different from the definition?

BoxwineForBrunch -> RE: GOP cynics, the new breed? (11/30/2011 4:38:53 AM)
wilde said a cynic "knows the cost of everything," which is clever and insightful, but a little narrower and more specific than the dictionary definition of cynicism. it works wonderfully as a pithy pull quote but then the author chooses to take it literally in order to make his case look stronger. "wilde said cynics worry about the cost of everything. look at the current gop leadership, worrying about the cost of everything and ignoring its real value. this is a change from the old days, when conservatives had strong ideological beliefs and acted according to those beliefs." a dictionary definition of a "cynic" is broader, though. merriam webster says a cynic, is "a faultfinding captious critic; especially : one who believes that human conduct is motivated wholly by self-interest." how does this differ from the author's definition? well the way the author defines a cynic, by using wilde's clever quip, "cynicism" comes into the political landscape with the fixation on counting costs and controlling budgets at the expense of long-term value to americans. but if we define a cynic by a dictionary definition, "one who believes human conduct is motivated wholly by self-interest" then there is nothing remotely new about cynics running the government. we can literally go back to madison in the federalist papers who wrote that "ambition must be made to counteract ambition." all of the founders were cynics to some degree or another. the entire american republic is set up to keep any one branch/region/person from arrogating too much power too quickly. a certain measure of greed, ruthlessness, and ambition is taken as a given. cynics are the perennial rule in politics, not a recent exception. the article is just sloppy. if he had wanted to argue that there was a time when politicians were more likely to put aside their own agendas and work together, that might be a plausible case. but he tried to build a very strong claim (that republicans have recently become "cynics") from weak evidence and arguments. that kind of thinking is dangerous because it makes people get teary-eyed and nostalgic for some golden age that never existed. quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: since we are still discussing the little article, it's also worth nothing he takes wilde's pithy quip about what a "cynic" is and treats it as a definition. why does he do this? Its a "definition " I have heard all my life. Why? You would have to ask him. But how would you view that quote as being different from the definition?

tazzygirl -> RE: GOP cynics, the new breed? (11/30/2011 5:00:40 AM)
There have always been, and always will be, cynics in every profession/group/ect ect ect. But, in this case, I happen to agree with the writer. When it comes to the topic of the article, the writer is correct. quote: (that republicans have recently become "cynics") That isnt what he said.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875