I hope everyone who sees this realizes
I read the whole thing and my opinion hasn't changed. I can't bring myself to give this person the satisfaction of treating their arguments as worth refuting. Someone else has already done it better I am sure and if I come across it I will post. That said, I think their attempt at showing liberals how to start winning arguments againts conservatives ended up giving a great example of why their first sentence is correct.
Popdex had this article
linked as number 8 today. Hmmm, Phil Agre
. An associate professor at UCLA. I know so little about him/her that I am confused by a google search that turns up saying that Phil is referred to in both the male and female pronoun. I will use the plural herewith to avoid offending (not very conservative I know, but I am a softie). I link to it to the delight of any of our leftish readers maybe, but as a conservative I find their views on the subject of what *I* am as one and what kinds of things I believe and how insane they are to be pretty...laughable. I am sure everyone else will blog this if I am not already days and days late but it's demagogish leftist sounding propaganda to me. As with most spurious polemics, I think their first sentence is correct:
"Liberals in the United States have been losing political debates to conservatives for a quarter century."
From there, though, it gets much more willing to dip into Carville sounding hysterical ad hominem. I'm not even done reading it yet but I question whether it even deserves the copious refutation it will be given by any clear thinking individual. And be forewarned, that is
how you will be judged as rational or not should we discuss it later.
I'm sick of having fringe idiots get center stage, and here I am linking him to you. I know you might cheer anytime someone tells you they are but "speaking truth to power" but reading it, it sounded so similar to the invectives and hate filled crazy talk that I was discussing among friends about Reverend Fred Phelps, who shall remain linkless (by virtue of, I assume, no argument as to whether he is correct about homosexuals being evil and hellbound and deserving of scorn), that I thought 'man this lady is an associate professor?' At a place that is supposedly intolerant of hate speech cloaked in pseudoscientific words and riddled with just...just...garbage
such that if *I* turned in a paper like this I *should* be warned and severely graded. And rightly so.
This. is. just. drivel.
I can't really even bring myself to type any more about it. But read it as much as you can stand to, consider me, and then ask yourself: Is M@ really the kind of guy to go for something like this? Are the conservative people I personally know really a part of some sinister cabal of deceptive and oppressive elitists? Is it a good thing to have this person titling things they write authoritatively as "What is Conservatism and What is Wrong With It?" ? I submit to you, the answer is: No.
posted by M@ at 4:06 AM