October 24, 2005
Dean Dismemberment
Jeff Goldstein takes a whack at DNC Chair Howard Dean today.
I post for sport, sure, but also because he makes a great point about the left. They call those on the right Ayatollahs and Fascists while they offer more laws, more regulation and fewer freedoms. It's just a reflex. Goldstein catches Dean saying: "To deal with the 'culture of corruption,' there needs to be an ethics code in Congress and stronger campaign finance laws. . . I’m tired of the ayatollahs of the right wing...We’re fighting for freedom in Iraq. We’re going to fight for freedom in America.”
Goldstein is not impressed.
An itemized rule book for Congress? Additional checks on free speech via more campaign finance reform? Wow! Can’t you just smell your liberties being loosed from the iron-fisted grip of the fascist Rethuglicans?Dean’s presentation would be absolutely laughable if it weren’t so otherwise chilling—an unselfconscious conflation of “freedom” with an increase in governmental regulation and a legal check on that most dangerous of all “rights,” free speech.
In fact, Dean—without giving it a second thought—is engaging in a quintessential Orwellian moment: redefining freedom to mean control of thought and speech through governmental regulation.
Dean claims to worry about the ayatollahs of the right wing; but whereas the right wing occasional gets it virtue glands pumping over video game violence and potty-mouthed rap music, it is the “progressive” base of the left that has given us “free speech zones” and tolerance codes on college campuses, a culture of political correctness constantly on guard against giving offense—even as it has managed to divide society into warring, self-interested grievance groups who by virtue of their individual authenticities can dismiss criticism and assume a uniqueness worthy of special dispensation.
Got to correct a friendly misquote that recently appeared on this blog of the jk political axiom: "Republicans promise more liberty and frequently fail; Democrats promise less liberty and frequently succeed."
Howard Dean and John Bolton -- I'm feeling pretty good as a GOPer even in these dark days...
I gotta agree with you here again and even with your corrected quote, my apologies for misquoting. Where we might not agree is that I would lump most of the Patriot Act in the same barrel. The original owner of my blog name once said "The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either." This goes for security from terrorists, drug side effects, and the freedom to make any choice that carries a risk. Our freedoms see assault from all quarters, certainly the liberals and the trend of political correctness, but also the conservatives who would regulate who you may fall in love with and what your children will learn. There is now a "religious correctness" afoot where it seems soon no teacher will dare utter the "E-word" (Evolution).
Posted by: Silence Dogood at October 25, 2005 2:31 PMDon't say e*******n on the blog Silence! You'll get me kicked out of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy!!!!
There are *some* conservatives afoot who would limit the liberties you mentioned but I am not one of them. I had a nice argument with Andrew Sullivan once on this topic (maybe it was me who drove him absolutely mad). My claim to both of you is that those people are not in power in my party; they're there but haven’t been represented in any significant legislation.
Conversely, Gov. Dean is the head of the DNC. Democratic leaders talk the same way. My argument with Sullivan literally started the day he compared something Senator Tom Daschle said to a Republican County Clerk from Bernalillo County, NM and came up with your line: "see, they’re both bad..." In short, I claim the GOP has their kooks under much better control than do the Ds. We try to keep them quiet, they elect them to leadership.
Your specific example of The Patriot Act is well taken. Many libertarians on the right are afraid of the Patriot Act as well; it happens that I am not. If you can quote Franklin, I can quote Goldwater "Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Tolerance in the face of tyranny is no virtue." The purveyors of the Patriot Act are defending the fundamental liberties of this nation against those who would subvert it to religious rule. Governor Dean's goals are far less ambitious.
The larger points of the Patriot Act are to allow information sharing between government agencies and to update early regulations to modern technology (attaching wiretaps to a person and not a phone number makes sense in a cell-phone world). It's the beta noir the left and far right but I just haven't seen anything in it that I find that oppressive.
Posted by: jk at October 25, 2005 3:06 PMYou mean they are defending our liberties against those who would subvert it to Islamic religious rule, lots of folks on the right who would be very comfortable with Christian religious rule.
Yeah we did elevate our kook to head kook position, can't really defend that. He is mostly a mouth though, I don't see Harry Reid consulting him on policy issues. All lot of the hard right kooks are outside the party mainstream, but can claim hefty veiwership and book sales so someone is listening. The religious charities legislation and the President's recent remarks about intelligent design do show that that group has some political clout on the national level and I don't think you can ignore their power locally, there is a strong grass roots movement there. I do credit President Bush with keeping them mostly under control though.
The main provisions of the Patriot Act that I don't like are those that limit due process. Actually the domestic material witness rules are equally bothersome. Indeterminate imprisonment without charge just seems fundamentally against our founding principals. I find the enemy combatant designation even more disturbing as it shows just how easily the Bill of Rights can be sidestepped. All of this really plays into a larger issue of the increase in executive branch power, mostly under the guise of war powers. The war on terror is a replacement for the Cold War and has the same capability to keep us in a constant state of war and thus is a constant trump card for claiming increased power and jurisdiction by the federal executive branch.
Posted by: Silence Dogood at October 26, 2005 10:44 AMI still accuse you of conflating a guy who writes a book with a legislative leader. There are book sales and web hits a-plenty on the fringes, but actual *legislation* proposed or passed bolsters my original point that the Democrats are actively pursuing less liberty. The GOP has a sector that would like to legislate Christianity, but these proposal do not make it out of committee.
Bush's remarks on I.D. were a set up. A reporter tried to bushwhack the (Evangelical Christian) President. W didn't bring it up -- because he failed to convulse and vomit bile at the mention of I.D., he is portrayed as a knuckle-draggin' creationist.
I agree that the Executive branch has tried to go too far, categorizing American Citizens as enemy combatants. I know the ACLU will offer a vigorous defense (unless they're Republican enemy combatants...) I'll hope justice is served and remember that Lincoln suspended habeas corpus to prosecute the Civil War.
Bastiat says that law must be avoidable to be fair and I find it very easy to avoid being found on the field of battle firing at American troops. McCain-Feingold, conversely, is being used to shut down blogs. A speech code hits where I live.
Posted by: jk at October 26, 2005 3:55 PM | What do you think? [4]