Comments on: Twilight of the Would-Be Gods http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/26/twilight-of-the-would-be-gods/ Exposing the ugly truths about the Bush Administration. Fri, 05 Dec 2008 12:21:00 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1.3 by: Twilight of the Would-Be Gods http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/26/twilight-of-the-would-be-gods/#comment-524144 Fri, 18 Jan 2008 06:51:05 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/26/twilight-of-the-would-be-gods/#comment-524144 [...] Twilight of the Would-Be Gods Calling global warming a “moral issue” mandating “a biblical duty” to prevent climate change, he has endorsed a cap-and-trade system that is anathema to the free market. Paul Krugman:. Ah yes. True conservatism means denying the … [...] […] Twilight of the Would-Be Gods Calling global warming a “moral issue” mandating “a biblical duty” to prevent climate change, he has endorsed a cap-and-trade system that is anathema to the free market. Paul Krugman:. Ah yes. True conservatism means denying the … […]

]]> by: maha http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/26/twilight-of-the-would-be-gods/#comment-480177 Thu, 13 Dec 2007 11:46:52 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/26/twilight-of-the-would-be-gods/#comment-480177 <i>Wouldn’t it be wonderful if you actually defined what the hell you meant by “rightie”?</i> I have done so in the past, but here it is just for you: <a href="http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&#38;aq=t&#38;ie=UTF-8&#38;rlz=1T4GFRC_enUS204US204&#38;q=pseudo%2dconservatives" rel="nofollow">Pseudo conservatives</a>, neocons, paleocons, Fetus People, etc., collectively. They call me a leftie, so ... Wouldn’t it be wonderful if you actually defined what the hell you meant by “rightie”?

I have done so in the past, but here it is just for you: Pseudo conservatives, neocons, paleocons, Fetus People, etc., collectively. They call me a leftie, so …

]]> by: Brad http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/26/twilight-of-the-would-be-gods/#comment-479752 Thu, 13 Dec 2007 06:05:27 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/26/twilight-of-the-would-be-gods/#comment-479752 Wouldn't it be wonderful if you actually defined what the hell you meant by "rightie"? -Brad www.clashofculture.com Wouldn’t it be wonderful if you actually defined what the hell you meant by “rightie”?

-Brad
www.clashofculture.com

]]> by: Buck http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/26/twilight-of-the-would-be-gods/#comment-446321 Tue, 27 Nov 2007 19:00:20 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/26/twilight-of-the-would-be-gods/#comment-446321 Not only one hell of a post. Some damn fine comments were made too. Not only one hell of a post. Some damn fine comments were made too.

]]> by: QrazyQat http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/26/twilight-of-the-would-be-gods/#comment-446135 Tue, 27 Nov 2007 17:52:12 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/26/twilight-of-the-would-be-gods/#comment-446135 Would that really did we have a bunch of Jimmy Carters running. Would that really did we have a bunch of Jimmy Carters running.

]]> by: grannyeagle http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/26/twilight-of-the-would-be-gods/#comment-446119 Tue, 27 Nov 2007 17:46:51 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/26/twilight-of-the-would-be-gods/#comment-446119 I recently returned from a trip to Egypt. Our tour guide was an Egyptologist and IMO a very enlightened man. He made a couple of statements that made me stop and think. 1. There are no true democracies. Sure, the people are free to say what they think and the government is free to ignore them. 2. When a country gets to the point they feel they are the master of the world, that is the beginning of their downfall. As to the 2nd comment, he said this happened to Egypt, Rome and the British Empire. He never mentioned the U.S. but I feel he was trying to tell us something. . Perhaps it started after 9/11. However, I believe it really began with the assassination of JFK. Yes, I am one who believes JFK was a threat to people who did not want the best for America. That's why he had to go. At least, that was the beginning of my disillusionment. What happened to government of the people, by the people and for the people? Who are the people anyway? Aren't they us? I recently returned from a trip to Egypt. Our tour guide was an Egyptologist and IMO a very enlightened man. He made a couple of statements that made me stop and think.
1. There are no true democracies. Sure, the people are free to say what they think and the government is free to ignore them.
2. When a country gets to the point they feel they are the master of the world, that is the beginning of their downfall.
As to the 2nd comment, he said this happened to Egypt, Rome and the British Empire. He never mentioned the U.S. but I feel he was trying to tell us something. . Perhaps it started after 9/11. However, I believe it really began with the assassination of JFK. Yes, I am one who believes JFK was a threat to people who did not want the best for America. That’s why he had to go. At least, that was the beginning of my disillusionment. What happened to government of the people, by the people and for the people? Who are the people anyway? Aren’t they us?

]]> by: WereBear http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/26/twilight-of-the-would-be-gods/#comment-445945 Tue, 27 Nov 2007 16:23:45 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/26/twilight-of-the-would-be-gods/#comment-445945 <i>they will defend to the death (and it defys logic) the rights of the filty ritch to pay NO taxes</i> Truly said, Doug. What leads them into the pit is the lies the Masters tell; "It's paying taxes that keeps you poor, little friends! That's why you work so hard and yet still do not sip champagne from a hooker's slipper! Vote to lower taxes and there will be hookers for everyone!" Like any con game, the mark can't admit they got suckered. They would rather lose everything, get sucked in deeper, wind up in Times Square giving a brown bag of their life savings to some stranger, than admit that. they will defend to the death (and it defys logic) the rights of the filty ritch to pay NO taxes

Truly said, Doug.

What leads them into the pit is the lies the Masters tell; “It’s paying taxes that keeps you poor, little friends! That’s why you work so hard and yet still do not sip champagne from a hooker’s slipper! Vote to lower taxes and there will be hookers for everyone!”

Like any con game, the mark can’t admit they got suckered. They would rather lose everything, get sucked in deeper, wind up in Times Square giving a brown bag of their life savings to some stranger, than admit that.

]]> by: k http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/26/twilight-of-the-would-be-gods/#comment-443934 Tue, 27 Nov 2007 03:29:48 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/26/twilight-of-the-would-be-gods/#comment-443934 Comments and blog very good. I hope it is fragmenting.For my entire adult life , the country has been beset by people who did not want to face reality ( Carter tried ). They thought get rich was a game evryone could win without counting the real costs. I was thinking today how for the next year we are going to have to hold our noses and choose the least stink next November. We will not get an honest candidate Comments and blog very good. I hope it is fragmenting.For my entire adult life , the country has been beset by people who did not want to face reality ( Carter tried ). They thought get rich was a game evryone could win without counting the real costs.

I was thinking today how for the next year we are going to have to hold our noses and choose the least stink next November. We will not get an honest candidate

]]> by: Doug Hughes http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/26/twilight-of-the-would-be-gods/#comment-443613 Tue, 27 Nov 2007 02:15:34 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/26/twilight-of-the-would-be-gods/#comment-443613 Well said, Moonbat. If I can add to what you said.. the core of conservatism is the opposition to the graduated income tax. That tax system says that if you are at the bottom rung of society, you pay no taxes on income and receive assistance to get up a few rungs. At the top of the ladder, you not only pay the most dollars, you pay the highest percentage, and reseive disproportionately LESS services than you pay for in taxes. If you approve of that model you are a liberal; if you oppose it, you are conservative. The rest of the stuff is buzzers and whistles, smoke and mirrors. In a debate on political ideology, I am always playing to the spectators, the undecided. That topic gets center stage whenever I can get it, because conservatives have a slave mentality and they will defend to the death (and it defys logic) the rights of the filty ritch to pay NO taxes. Well said, Moonbat. If I can add to what you said.. the core of conservatism is the opposition to the graduated income tax.

That tax system says that if you are at the bottom rung of society, you pay no taxes on income and receive assistance to get up a few rungs. At the top of the ladder, you not only pay the most dollars, you pay the highest percentage, and reseive disproportionately LESS services than you pay for in taxes.

If you approve of that model you are a liberal; if you oppose it, you are conservative. The rest of the stuff is buzzers and whistles, smoke and mirrors. In a debate on political ideology, I am always playing to the spectators, the undecided. That topic gets center stage whenever I can get it, because conservatives have a slave mentality and they will defend to the death (and it defys logic) the rights of the filty ritch to pay NO taxes.

]]> by: moonbat http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/26/twilight-of-the-would-be-gods/#comment-443011 Mon, 26 Nov 2007 23:30:01 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/26/twilight-of-the-would-be-gods/#comment-443011 Conservativism is fragmenting, analogous to the way liberalism fragmented into single-issue groups, after the gains of the New Deal were realized. Buckley's ideal of maintaining universally perceived and recognized truths, is from an earlier age, when conservativism was a simpler, and more unified force. The liberal analogy would be FDR's focus on improving the lot of the many in the Great Depression, contrasted with a future time of prosperity, civil rights, environmental activism, and feminism, causes unknown in the 30s. And while Buckley doesn't say it explicitly, his ideals enshrine FDR's hated "economic royalists" to maintain the kind of order Buckley desires. A taxonomy of liberalism's breakup can be fairly easily constructed, because it doesn't involve quite the amount of dishonesty and make-believe that conservativism requires. With the fragmentation of conservativism comes a considerable amount of muddying and confusing of Buckley's core ideals. This is natural because it is built on top of the magical thinking and obsfucation that was necessary to sell this rich-get-richer-at-your-expense philosophy to the non-royalist masses, those who got shafted by it in the first place. So many are calling themselves conservatives because of this confusion, and because they simply don't know any better. They have no memory before St Ronnie - except to cast Nobel Prize winning Jimmy Carter as the Devil who was Dour. They desperately hold on to the fading sugar high dreams of glory projected by Saint Reagan, and have trouble conceiving of a world without their notion of a strong, benevolent daddy, who will make everything alright. The Fantasy World of the Conservative is a vast, contradictory, sugar jagged, hallucinatory, childish, and only partially charted space. They're like children lost in a department store, with daddy nowhere to be found. The world has seen this before, this aching for a strong daddy figure, and it has never ended well. I wish they <i>were</i> irrelevant. Conservativism is fragmenting, analogous to the way liberalism fragmented into single-issue groups, after the gains of the New Deal were realized.

Buckley’s ideal of maintaining universally perceived and recognized truths, is from an earlier age, when conservativism was a simpler, and more unified force. The liberal analogy would be FDR’s focus on improving the lot of the many in the Great Depression, contrasted with a future time of prosperity, civil rights, environmental activism, and feminism, causes unknown in the 30s. And while Buckley doesn’t say it explicitly, his ideals enshrine FDR’s hated “economic royalists” to maintain the kind of order Buckley desires.

A taxonomy of liberalism’s breakup can be fairly easily constructed, because it doesn’t involve quite the amount of dishonesty and make-believe that conservativism requires. With the fragmentation of conservativism comes a considerable amount of muddying and confusing of Buckley’s core ideals. This is natural because it is built on top of the magical thinking and obsfucation that was necessary to sell this rich-get-richer-at-your-expense philosophy to the non-royalist masses, those who got shafted by it in the first place.

So many are calling themselves conservatives because of this confusion, and because they simply don’t know any better. They have no memory before St Ronnie - except to cast Nobel Prize winning Jimmy Carter as the Devil who was Dour. They desperately hold on to the fading sugar high dreams of glory projected by Saint Reagan, and have trouble conceiving of a world without their notion of a strong, benevolent daddy, who will make everything alright.

The Fantasy World of the Conservative is a vast, contradictory, sugar jagged, hallucinatory, childish, and only partially charted space. They’re like children lost in a department store, with daddy nowhere to be found. The world has seen this before, this aching for a strong daddy figure, and it has never ended well. I wish they were irrelevant.

]]>