A Brief Trip Into The Bizarro World

I think that in general, a lot of comments on blogs are from extremists. I've posted on liberal blogs and clashed with liberals and on other sites got into big fights with conservatives.

I am left with the feeling that perhaps these people are just totally irrelevant; just a bunch of extremists who do not represent their side of the aisle. Do we honestly think that your average Republican voter cares about or believes what those idiots say about 'Democratic infiltrators' and whatnot?

Maybe we really shouldn't care too much what idiots say on blogs.

I'm not too worried about it unless there's evidence that this view is common. And to be honest, I do see a fair amount of liberals lording it over conservatives. True-believer drivebys seem to be up on the part of liberals.

Conservatives are certainly feeling mighty sorry for themselves, and this counts as self-pity. In addition, I feel strongly that the conservative stage has been left WAY more than usual to the fringes. That's because right after such a big clock-cleaning loss, the initial emotional stages are denial and anger. And that's best left to the fringes for obvious reasons.

The wise, the shrewd, the grown-up, the balanced folks among conservatives? These folks are waiting in the weeds. They will emerge when they think it's time to declare that Obama's honeymoon is over. That won't be until it's close enough to being over that saying it's so can hasten its arrival.

The honeymoon is most decidedly not close to over, not if today's poll is any sort of an indicator of public sentiment. The main party tack of the GOP has been to try to hang current circumstances all round Obama's neck, and so far, they have few buyers for that supposition.

Apparently, the scope of the economic collapse means that more Americans than usual have ben paying attention, and they seem to understand that the genesis of the current sh!tstorm substantially predates the advent of the Obama admin. Of course, as time passes, fewer and fewer folks will care whose fault it was and more will care about who they think can make things better.

I'd be interested to see some decent conservative arguments made by real people on the internet sometime. I really have not seen anyone who could do more than the "Obama-ACORN!" kind of arguments for a long time.

I don't know what sites people post on, but I think that the opinion areas of a lot of the mainstream political sites (i.e. Politico, NYT, CNN, etc) are just a no-man's land of inane partisan warfare.

In 2004, there was a Republican sweep - for which we were certainly happy. In 2008, there was a Dem sweep, which somehow meant that, according to the Left, that conservatism is dead or dying. That's a ridiculous supposition: we had an unpopular President, a nominee whom very few conservatives liked, about $500 million less to spend on the campaign, a media against us, and, oh, only 25% of American voters knew who had been running Congress for the past two years. Nevertheless, while Obama pulled off a solid margin of popular vote victory, it was the first time (IIRC) that a Dem cracked the 50% mark in my lifetime, and the victory was nothing like Reagan's in 1984.

So pardon me if I'm a bit skeptical of anyone who says that conservatism is dead, or needs to do this-and-that in order to stay relevant.

I've been organising a local Tea Party protest, and the people with whom I interact on this conservative/libertarian/centre-right issue are fired up, articulating their ideas for a better America, and ready to take action. They aren't bitter, uneducated evangelicals or wingnuts, but are stay-at-home moms who are finding themselves wanting to run for office because they hate what's happening on Beacon Hill and in DC.

I mention the Tea Party because, lost in your discussion, Rafique, as a mention of some info that is relevant to the issue in this post. Over the weekend, a tea party website (that is part blog, with info for people in each state, but not even a planning tool) was firebombed by the Left and was down for three days. That's not "dissent from dissent;" that's mayhem. And we have every right to be mad about it.

Edwards (disgraced), Dodd (worthy of contempt), Richardson (not ready to be Secretary of Commerce) conspired with Obama to screw Michigan and defeat Hillary. Pelosi and others also saw Obama as a more pliable and ideologically friendly candidate. Caroline (not Senator) and Daschle (not ready for Healthcare czar) also played their part.

The Press filtered for Obama even when the surge appeared to be working, when facts did not fit the political fiction, when at the end, economy represented even greater fear mongering influence than terrorism.

No, Obama should thank Bush and McCain, the Press and the outstanding Democratic field that mugged the more centrist candidate, for any real margin of victory. Don't kid yourself however, about the decisive effect of years and years of hysterical attacks by the “new Democrats”. The real race was against Hillary. Sure, Obama has his personal virtues and charms, but it was an extremely lucky campaign, smart, but very lucky. Like a perfect storm. Or is that one coming up?

The conservatives are divided. I am shocked by the comment threads over at American Thinker. Sometimes the very opposite of thought. Smarter conservatives must be frustrated as the stream of predictable, yet not mortal stumbles continue on the Obama side unexploited. Now Sebelius has tax problems -which is beginning to speak to competence. Lots of small things are starting to resonate in a way that speaks to administration credibility. As Bush saw, that is a hard thing to recover. And the Left is divided too. In this time of uncertainty, the megaphone of bombastic and fringe media stand out and rally. Common Dreams thinks the Carter Doctrine should be buried ASAP and the Jewish Lobby put into a cage. They want far more spending and leaving Afghanistan ASAP. Real splits are forming over promises made. Meshud's idea of talking is targeting the White House.

As things heat up it here and abroad we will digress into Rush v Oberman, New Republic v Kos and Huff. I don't believe these poles are going away and the Left is far more effective on the internet.. The vocal and feet on the ground base of Obama was an effective destroyer of conservative internet popularity. They were able to drive many distorted views into mainstream. I don't doubt a wing of the GOP is going to focus the rage and get nasty. It is as inane as what I read on the Left. Koh however should give Simon a chuckle, and Hillary too.

The real issue is how GOP leadership is going to assemble a message and the attacks on moderate Republicans is stupid. On the other hand Krugman has been beating up Obama in the NYT who Obama snubbed at the Press conference. Kos and Huff are bitter about Afghanistan and Iraq. They want Bush tried as a war criminal and AIG heads locked up in jail. Some papers in Europe are taking Obama apart.

It is quite messy on both sides and will get far uglier.

If Meshud has his way, it will move again beyond surreal.

Never mind the blatant slandering and name-calling in his own article, a cursory review of the righty blogosphere will reveal the far-right as being just as susceptible to poisonous rhetoric, name-calling, and angry paranoia as the far-Left. Many on the Left have said mean things, just as the right has. The point is, both sides have their fringe elements, and both sides have taken things too far at times.

Since you are not going to the effort of proving your charges, why would you care about the "blatant slandering"?

The difference between the Loyal Opposition and obstructionalism is proof. If you cannot prove something, then it becomes liable to certain charges of untruth, such as slander/libel.

[Editor's note: Comment was clarified by placing material quoted from Rafique's post in blockquote tags]