Tom Coburn Channels Albert Camus
In one of the great works of the last century, the French Nobel laureate defined “un homme révolté” (translated into English as a “rebel”) simply as a man who who says “no.” In saying “no” to one thing, he says “yes” to something else:
Apparently negative since it creates nothing, this revolt is profoundly positive because it reveals what is always to be defending in each man.
And so today, in rising on the Senate floor to defend the Party of “No,” the junior Senator from Oklahoma channeled the Algerian-born writer/philosopher from France. For, in saying “No” to Obamacare, he affirmed the values for which America’s founders fought over two centuries ago:
We’re accused of being the party of no. . . . no is a wonderful word. When your child is misbehaving, you say no. When someone’s stealing liberty, you say no…Saying no at the right time saves lives. Saying no at the right time saves money…Saying no at the right time saves liberty.
Let the Democrats call us the Party of “No.” And we’ll tell them, as Tom Coburn has, what that “No” affirms.
5 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Even a cursory glance at the wikipedia entry for Camus articulates that his politics were are considered within the context of revolutionary syndicalism. That is a very different context to a conservative or republican vision that embraces the notion of capitalist supremacy. This comparison sounds a little disengeuous. Albert’s existential noodlings about the notion of the ‘rebel’ in society have very little to do with the nature of the political environment in Washington right now. Money talks more than poetry does.
Comment by rumpy — December 18, 2009 @ 4:27 pm - December 18, 2009
Can we make a straight up trade of our Senator Nelson to Oklahoma for your Senator Coburn. Ok, so we obviously get the good end of this trade but come on, just for a couple days???
Comment by NebraskaPatriot — December 18, 2009 @ 4:29 pm - December 18, 2009
rumpy, read Camus’ The Rebel as well as some of his later (and increasingly anti-Communist) writings, study Sartre’s lambasting of his former friend, then you’ll see why I call him the first neo-conservative.
Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — December 18, 2009 @ 4:43 pm - December 18, 2009
The childish nature of Democrats is more evident now than ever.
They want what they want, and screw the American people.
They want to silence all dissent, like a schoolyard bully.
Well, the American people want the GROWNUPS back in charge.
The Party of “No” is going to rip them a new one.
And don’t think people will forget as quickly as they did after Carter and Clinton. Obama and Pelosi’s FASCISM is indelible. The Democrat Party will never fully recover.
2010: BOOM!
2012: DOOM!
Comment by democratsarefascists — December 18, 2009 @ 6:06 pm - December 18, 2009
“rumpy, read Camus’ The Rebel as well as some of his later (and increasingly anti-Communist) writings, study Sartre’s lambasting of his former friend, then you’ll see why I call him the first neo-conservative.”
Camus’ later writings were certainly critical of Sarte as well as the French communist party. However to his death he clearly saw himself as man on the left even if he was critical of some aspects of the left at the same time. To associate him with today’s neocons is a grave insult to Camus.
I will agree he is a remarkable (and perhaps underrated) writer. In addition to a few great novels, he was a wonderful essay writer. Though it is very difficult to read his essays and to characterize as anything other than a somewhat skeptical leftist.
Comment by Brendan — December 18, 2009 @ 8:06 pm - December 18, 2009