Political quotes of the moment

[Cain]

To stop me from clogging up the Apple Talk thread with my spaggotry

Probably the weirdest thing about the Glenn Beck / Tea Party nexus to me is that it tends to rely so heavily on libertarian rhetoric and fear of incipient authoritarianism. These kind of sentiments would be a lot easier to take seriously if not for the fact that we didn’t see these people marching out in the streets when George W. Bush used the threat of terrorism to justify secret, illegal warrantless surveillance, detention without trial, torture, etc. Indeed, the very same people who spend Monday, Wednesday, and Friday complaining that Barack Obama’s “czars” are a threat to liberty not only weren’t worried about czars in the Bush years, they spend Tuesday and Thursday worrying that Obama’s not doing enough to ensure that intelligence operatives can break the law with impunity.

Jonah Goldberg, it seems to me, was the real pioneer in this brand of hypocrisy-driven hysteria—holding captives in secret where they’re hung by shackles from the ceiling and occasionally beaten to death is fine by him, but efforts to curb smoking are “liberal fascism.” And now this line of thinking seems to have completely taken over the right.

http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2009/09/the-new-libertarians.php

[Sir Squid Diddimus]

Wow.

Also- this thread is a good idea

[Elder Iptuous]

Goddamn, ain't that the fuckin' truth?!
and it equally surprises me how many libertarian minded folks who did bitch and moan about the trampling of civil liberties under the GWB years are suckered by this clown (Beck) into thinking that he is really on 'our side' now, rather than just catering to sentiment for market share....

[Cain]

Its actually really easy to categorise Republican rhetoric, with the use of a flow chart.

Is the President a Democrat:

-> Yes -> Steal Libertarian rhetoric, ignore all contradictions arising from previous policy
-> No -> Use National Security State rhetoric, ignore all contradictions arising from previous rhetoric

I think its a victimhood thing.  The need to be a victim runs strong in the GOP, probably due to the religious influence (Christians shrieking endlessly about how the other 20% are oppressing them), so when out of power, they have to present themselves as mavericky little rebels, fighting against The Man.

Also

I've been thinking this through, and I've come to the the amazing realisation that Al-Qaeda are working on the Father Ted model - one schemer, one blubbery drunk and one ignoramus. Obviously, the schemer does the plotting, the drunk builds the bombs that don't go off and the idiot is in charge of fucking everything up beyond belief so that the lot of them spend the next two decades fantasising about virgins in a prison cell.

I can just see scheming one explaining to the idiot how these painted harlots are small, but the ones at Tiger Tiger are far away, while the drunk sits in the corner shouting Arse! Vorgins! Cretinous plans for mass morder! at the television.

That would leave obliterated Pakistan-dweller Rashid Rauf as some kind of beardy Bishop Brennan, forever sweeping into the room roaring and demanding to know why everybody is watching Hollyoaks instead of martyring themselves. Come on, schemer Ted will say, I know we're supposed to love death more than life, but while Rauf shoots them a blazing, disapproving eye**.

Anybody got a number for MI5? I think I'm onto something here...

http://flyingrodent.blogspot.com/2009/09/this-weeks-faces-of-evil.html

[Halfbaked1]

I hated Bush, I don't trust Obama.  I feel that both sides play the victim card when they are on the down side of things so that they get the pity points needed for people to listen to them about how wrong the other side is.  Please note, neither side wants to talk about where they could be wrong, just the other guys.  This is the Machine boys and squirrels, they hold up a piece of kibble for the sheep to cluster to while they bugger their fluffy asses from behind.

[Golden Applesauce]

Its actually really easy to categorise Republican rhetoric, with the use of a flow chart.

Is the President a Democrat:

-> Yes -> Steal Libertarian rhetoric, ignore all contradictions arising from previous policy
-> No -> Use National Security State rhetoric, ignore all contradictions arising from previous rhetoric

I think you can generalize this to most political group's relationship with governmental power.  If government is doing something they don't like, expect lots of "Don't tread on me!" and similar comments - by the same people who championed broader powers as long as they were for some other cause.  Mainstream Democrats here have mostly shut up about domestic spying and secret prisons now that their guy is running them.  The same people who want states to be able to decide abortion and drug issues on their own would gladly insist that the federal government should handle that matter if only the Feds agreed with them.  "States Rights" has nothing to do with the relationship between federal and state governments and everything to do wanting your state to agree with you on a matter you can't convince the rest of the country.

[Jenne]

MOST Dems...except Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert and Bill Maher.  Bill Maher laid into the Democrats something awful (as in:  brilliantly!) this past Friday night.  It was a treasure trove of "here's your lail, you rat bastards!" and he's been on that kick since Obama was elected and came to office.

[Cain]

Yeah, I have to agree more with Jenne here.  Maybe its because the people I read who are mostly on the progressive wing of the Democrats, but they're not happy at all with Obama over the wiretapping business, bailouts or war in Afghanistan, for example. 

That said, the Blue Dog democrats and their press supporters do cheer these things on, but they also cheered them on when they were out of power.  The New Republic and Joe Klein being prime offenders, though there are others.  Jay Rockerfeller was on board with the wiretapping, Zell Miller was getting a hardon over militarization and Hillary Clinton was all up for bombing the shit out of Iran.

So the way I see it, the progressives are mostly still where they were in 2000-2008, and so are the centrist Democrats.

Anyway, a quote for you:

“The United States is also a one-party state,” Julius Nyerere, the first president of Tanzania, once observed in defending his own  one-party system. “But with typical American extravagance, they have two of them.”

[Jenne]

I totally agree, Cain.

Also:

The Web site StopSunstein.com catalogues statements by Obama's "radical anti-hunting, anti-gun, animal rights law professor." Many attendees at Saturday's 9/12 protest in Washington echoed Beck's concerns. "He thinks rats should have the right to an attorney, to sue humans," said Davy Reeves of Kalamzaoo, Mich. "Rats have no right to live in my house."

From here.

[Requia ☣]

I cannot imagine a less intimidating figure than Cass Sunstein.  How paranoid do you need to be to want the man stopped?

[Misery's Fried Dough]

There was some idiot on Hannity's radio show, a few days ago, that actually suggested Cass Sustein would eventually make it a crime to eat meat.  Even if he philosophically thought it was a crime, does anyone in their right mind think he is stupid enough to try to push such a policy through?  OR, that anyone in the Obama administration would be stupid enough to agree to push such a policy through. 

[Cain]

The idea that Cass Sustein is any sort of radical is deeply misguided.

His most well known idea is, IIRC, "paternal libertarianism".  Oh gee, I wish I could've thought of an idea like "provide financial incentives for people to do good stuff."  Oh wait, we already do that, its called a "tax system".  FFS.

[Iason Ouabache]

There was some idiot on Hannity's radio show, a few days ago, that actually suggested Cass Sustein would eventually make it a crime to eat meat.  Even if he philosophically thought it was a crime, does anyone in their right mind think he is stupid enough to try to push such a policy through?  OR, that anyone in the Obama administration would be stupid enough to agree to push such a policy through. 

WTF? He's the head of Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. He couldn't do that even if he wanted to.

[Halfbaked1]

There was some idiot on Hannity's radio show, a few days ago, that actually suggested Cass Sustein would eventually make it a crime to eat meat.  Even if he philosophically thought it was a crime, does anyone in their right mind think he is stupid enough to try to push such a policy through?  OR, that anyone in the Obama administration would be stupid enough to agree to push such a policy through. 

WTF? He's the head of Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. He couldn't do that even if he wanted to.

Truth is irrelevant to the telling of the story man.  The monkeys applaud and that makes it all okay...NOT.

[Misery's Fried Dough]

There was some idiot on Hannity's radio show, a few days ago, that actually suggested Cass Sustein would eventually make it a crime to eat meat.  Even if he philosophically thought it was a crime, does anyone in their right mind think he is stupid enough to try to push such a policy through?  OR, that anyone in the Obama administration would be stupid enough to agree to push such a policy through. 

WTF? He's the head of Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. He couldn't do that even if he wanted to.

Yeah, but somehow he has super secret executive powers to influence the FDA.  I did say it was Hannity's show, right?