My favorite one is “I’m too smart to vote Republican.”

I guess you must be that stupid to vote demoncRAT.

Regards,
Peter H.

It actually may have been better had I said Republican rather than Libertarian because I really wonder how he’d have responded to that. I *almost* said pro-war libertarian, but as much as I enjoy discussing politics I had no desire whatsoever to get into an argument in a place that shouldn’t have to be political.

What did he think he was going to say if I answered Republican? “Oh, nevermind?”

Is it just me, or are Democrats more prone to assuming that the people around them will agree with their politics? Is it the same dynamic that guarentees that if the vehicle in front of you has more than two bumper stickers that they’re going to be lefty bumper stickers? (When there’s only two they might be NRA and pro-life.)

And at gay parties, the viciousness of the sneer in those questions is directly related to the lateness of the evening.

At least in your orbit, they ask. Right, they’re wrong to think there are only 2 legit parties… but at least they ask. Here, if you don’t carry the water for the Left, the DNC or the GayLeftBorg… you run smack dab into intolerance and bigotry… and I think, ignorance on a palatial scale.

As far as partisanship goes, my main problem with it is the labeling. Last night a friend (whom I’m now convinced never misses his daily KOS) said he was going to break his rule of never talking politics at karate and asked if I was Republican or Democrat… as though those are the only choices.

There are things about having two major parties that contribute to national stability but the two parties and the assumptions they operate under are very similar, they need to be because they have to compete for the same majority. That’s okay. Maybe it’s even a good thing. But it hardly represents the depth or breadth of political thought.

For me, Glenn Reynolds isn’t hard to label as a pro-active defense libertarian of the non-anarchic pro-choice variety. But that isn’t anywhere on the bi-polar political graph and it’s a fact.

Yet, if you think about Instapundit’s popularity it’s likely an indication that the pro-active defense libertarian non-anarchic pro-choice “legally married gay couples with assault rifles in their closets” is a stronger political segment than it might seem at first glance. Not that his readers all agree, but that his readers don’t find any of those things off-putting enough *not* to read him.

Yet he’s labeled “right-wing” right next to all the other “right-wing” bloggers.

Missing the fact that there is a great deal of political diversity to choose from out there is a sad thing. “Are you Republican or Democrat” lets us off the hook for thinking about government at all.

Regards,
Peter H.

As Glenn Reynolds said last night — “You can’t label me when I yearn for a world of legally married gay couples with assault weapons in their closets.”

Actually, I might label Reynolds–a libertarian. Unfortunately for libertarians, they have become little more than Republicans who want to smoke pot–marijuana.

Why do I say that? In 1988, Ron Paul was the Libertarian Party’s candidate for president. I voted for him–it was a protest vote, of course, since I would not vote for either of the major party candidates, Bush I or Dukakis, both of whom I loathed. Fast forward several years. We received a fund-raising letter signed by Paul, then Republican member of the House from Texas, on hehalf of Jesse Helms, homo-bigot extraordinaire.

The long and the short of it is that libertarians are BS, as is Glenn Reynolds.

What was surprising to me was that someone at NPR thought Greenhouse’s statement wasn’t just the normal way of doing business at the 4th Estate. NPR is roundly criticized annually for their ideological bias in producing stories, editing stories, choosing guest commentators, stacking their public affairs panels with Left-of-Center aliens wearing tinfoil hats, etc.

For me the telling line in the piece was

“NPR said top New York Times editors Bill Keller and Jill Abramson declined to be interviewed.”

I doubt they think there’s anything wrong with what Ms Greenhouse said… maybe they’d rather have it kept quiet though.

I still can’t believe a GOP majority in Congress can’t seem to gut appropriations for NPR, PBS, CPB or others. It is a vast cultural wasteland populated with partisan malcontents and false intellectualism.

Maybe the questions of “How partisan is too partisan” or “Is the press biased” should be asked “Is the ideal of a non-partisan press necessary to a functioning democracy”? I simply think most Americans see the press now as very biased and partisan… and we can thank Fox, Rush, Dr Laura and lots of others for unmasking a conventional wisdom.

The press has always been partisan. Politicians have used it to great advantage. Journalists shouldn’t be viewed as any more or less ethically challenged than a partisan political operative or office holder.

We really ought to be talking about “are federal and state judges too partisan”. There’s the last fallacy awaiting discovery.

On behalf of us “vast right-wing conspirators,” welcome to the block.

My only comment is that the NYT used to be the paper of record. But with the likes of Jayson Blair, Howell Raines, Thomas Friedman, Adam Clymer and Pinch Sulzberger echoing through those hallowed hallways, the NYT has now turned into the agit-prop vehicle of the DNC. And sad to say, they embrace this role without regret. Witness the most recent “leaked” security information fiasco.

I hope they can turn the public’s perception around, but I doubt it.

Regards,
Peter H.

And of course the blogosphere is one way of doing that. I remain concerned, however, that the blogosphere has too much of a tendency to boil everything down to a soundbite, much like television. Say what you will about the NYT and the Washington Post et.al. (and I qualify this by saying that I am of the liberal persuasion), those publications are perhaps a better source of in-depth reporting than our television news generally is. The same goes for the reliable conservative WSJ, which I also think is a great paper.

Just a few random thoughts on it, from the pinko left

Mike