Comments Posted By Mike Farmer
Displaying 11 To 20 Of 69 Comments
CAN GINGRICH RIDE AN ANTI-ESTABLISHMENT WAVE TO THE OVAL OFFICE?
Yes, Manning, I agree that the public is not ready for an atheist or an agnostic.
Comment Posted By Mike Farmer On 25.05.2009 @ 08:38
If Obama can slide past his associations with Rev. Wright and Ayers, and Clinton can still be popular after Lewinsky and his impresive list of dalliances, I don't know why Gingrich can't overcome his past -- except that the media will make hay with Gingrich, whereas with the other two they looked the other way -- but the MSM will be completely obsolete by 2012. Don't get me wrong, Gingrich is too much the politician for me to be an avid supporter, but the Republicans could do much worse. Sanford is about the only Republican I'd support, if he leaves his religion at home and church. There's a good possibility a Democrat will arise who is anti-statist and surprise everyone by capturing the independent vote.
Comment Posted By Mike Farmer On 24.05.2009 @ 14:14
Manning,
I believe it's a modern hierarchical structure, which is a remant pre-Locke, that's the problem, not a group of indivduals plotting and scheming. See my blog for my take.
Comment Posted By Mike Farmer On 24.05.2009 @ 10:53
than a club
Comment Posted By Mike Farmer On 24.05.2009 @ 05:58
In the Republican Party, I'd say the attitude of "elite" applies to people like Bush Sr, Baker, Podhoretz, Wills, Krauthammer, Kristol, Buckley before he died -- I'm sure the list is long, but it's an attitude more a club.
Comment Posted By Mike Farmer On 23.05.2009 @ 23:04
I think Obama has political skills, but that's not important to me, and it's not that I assign evil to him -- it's just I think his ideology leads to statism and a stagnant economy, not to mention loss of freedom, Plus, it's not just Obama, but the Democrat Party and Republican Party going to a more interventionist government. Yes, I think the salvation of the Republican Party is in a push for limited government and privatization -- allowing the private sector to innovatively develop solutions to some of our most pressing problems -- especially education.
Manning,
It depends on what realm you are talking about -- the media elites are the Walters, Brokaws, etc -- the political/economic/philosophy realm has people like Podhoretz, Krugman, Wills -- politicians like Kennedy and Kerry
Some are accomplished -- some are connected pretenders.
Comment Posted By Mike Farmer On 23.05.2009 @ 21:06
I meant JUST because someone has a Harvard degree -- a Harvard degree is a great achievement but it doesn't garauntee the person will use it productively or that they are superior in any way. I don't dismiss people because they went to Harvard -- it actually makes little difference to me where anyone gained their knowledge, it's what they learn and what they do with the knowledge.
As for the Republicans, they may be unsalvageable -- what bothers me is what the democrats are doing.
Comment Posted By Mike Farmer On 23.05.2009 @ 17:59
yes, I also abhor false populism that deifies the common person just for being common and denigrates someone who's achieved an education and done the hard work of learning at a high level, and I think this sort of populism is a political ploy by some politicians, both on the left and right, Biden as an example, trying to get votes by manipulating ignorance and envy -- but I don't think Gingrich is trying to cultivate the common vote, he's talking about an "elitism", which as an intellectual himself, he sees as also abhorable because it's mostly used by the politically connected to create a self-serving distinction and superiority and reveals prejudice and a bias against anyone from the wrong schools (or autodidacts), the wrong religion or the wrong part of the country.
There are different kinds of intelligence, and those who truly admire the common achievement of many to produce and build things, or to simply raise a family conducive to human flourishing, aren't saying that intellectuals are useless, they are merely saying some attitudes of superiority are undeserved. Going to Harvard and being politically connected doesn't automatically equate to being qualified as elite -- however, achievement of excellence in any productive endeavor does.
Comment Posted By Mike Farmer On 23.05.2009 @ 14:35
"Whats with the pudgyness of gop speakers? Newt, Rush, Bill Benett, Dick Moriss. Just seems like overpaid, overfed guys that wouldn’t know what an honest days work would look like.Why should I listen to guys that can’t keep their own bodies in check?Appearances tell a lot about people’s motivation and their drive. Newt needs to show me he can push himself away from the dinner table before I take his words seriously."
Yes, unlike the svelte and atheletic Kennedy, Nadler, Krugman, pudgy boy Clinton and Rosy O'Donnel. Geez, this is getting silly.
Comment Posted By Mike Farmer On 23.05.2009 @ 09:31
No, you just make disparaging comments toward a whole region and create stereotypes out of ignorance. The "elites" described by Gingrich, the "corrupt elites", are those who aren't actually intellectually superior, merely politically connected and self-designated. "Elite" is something earned and usually designated by others to honor excellence, and excellence is not geographically limited.
Comment Posted By Mike Farmer On 22.05.2009 @ 23:30
