Comments Posted By owwmyhead
Displaying 1 To 1 Of 1 Comments
A SLAVISH DEVOTION TO SUPERFICIALITY
"But the fascinating thing about conservatism these days is in the vigorous debate that has gone on between Constitutional absolutists and war mongers; between those who advocate the forging of a true conservative governing class and those who want conservatism to remain at arms length from government."
Ironic, that with just this one sentence, rather than discrediting the substance of glenn's argument, you prove his point entirely. As he said earlier, regarding the notion of this 'debate' between different 'types' of conservatives:
"What does it even mean to say that Bush is 'transforming the conservative movement from its small-government orientation to a more activist approach.' What is left of 'the conservative movement' if one guts from it its 'small-government orientation'? Isn’t that somewhat like transforming the peace movement away from its opposition to war or the environmental movement away from its opposition to pollution?"
http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/01/bush-followers-are-not-conservatives.html
Also, your discussion of Sullivan (again) proves glenn's point for him--yeah, obviously people are free to self-identify themselves as 'conservative'; but despite the fact that by any objective measure, sully is a conservative through and through, almost every other 'conservative' (you know, those new 'save us big daddy government, costs be dammned!' conservatives that have arisen from the oh so important 'debate' that is going on these days) that is 'free to agree or disagree' is shouting him out of the movement, simply because he actually adheres to conservative ideology rooted in something other than 'dubya told us it was for national security, what more do you need!?'.
You tell me, which is more superficial: assuming that limited government authority and fiscal responsibility are ideological souls of conservatism? Or, responding to page upon page of reasoned, nuanced analysis by ignoring the actual argumentation, instead choosing to highlight a couple of tertiary extrapolations from said analysis? Just wondering.
Comment Posted By owwmyhead On 12.02.2006 @ 18:41
