..were enlightenment princes. Many of the delegates from the South, to the conventions that formed the Constitution and the country, would be clearly recognizable as ancestors of the current GOP. They're the ones who insisted that small states have inordinate representation. They're the ones who made sure slaves were counted as 3/5 of a person so that the South itself would have more representation than it should have.

In short, this strain of know-nothing, racist, religious fundamentalism has been with us from the beginning, and at the highest levels of our leadership. Only the Northern delegates were enlightenment acolytes... the South enshrined racism in our Constitution, then fought like hell for nearly two centuries to keep it there. They're still fighting their antebellum fight. The "family values" thing has always been code for racist superiority.

Corporate America has, over many years, found them a handy tool to get politicians in power who make Corporate America's agenda the most important agenda.

These dumb mofos came over with us from England. They never give up. They never give in. We're gonna have to fight them forever. Forever.

Jim wrote:

The Enlightenment and the South

Far be it from me to defend the modern Repubilcan South--I'm a firm believer in Schaller's look away from Dixie theories--but I do seem to recall that Jefferson and Madison, who were pretty familiar with Montesquieu and Locke and Hume, were from Virginia.

********

I did say "many" delegates. Not all. That was deliberate. Not all Southern delegates to the conventions were troglodytes...but enough were. And Jefferson and Madison may have been technically southern...but only barely. Just like many people who live in northern virginia near DC are southern in name only.

I really don't mean to sound xenophobic..but this damned antebellum bullshit has caused us more grief in this country. It's the fairy-tale that never dies. More's the pity.

Jeez, Glenn. You really know how to brighten up a Monday.

For some reason I can't quite fathom, this is one of the most sheerly depressing things I've read in a long time. Because it suggests one, or more, of three things, about our national press corps:

1) They haven't actually heard/seen people like Brit Hume spew his ignorant bile.

2) They've heard it, but they can't comprehend it, like the monkey who neither hears, speaks, or sees, evil.

3) They're idiots in total denial.

Probably some of all three. But what does that say about these men and women? That they're stupid--and/or ferociously cynical--sluts who don't deserve their positions and their rich pay-checks?

Yeah, pretty much.

If you are ever in a position to confront Kurtz directly, why don't you hit him with some of Hume's biased rants, and ask if Hume really is a "journalist" instead of a partisan hack.. I'd love to hear what happens. These dickwads are so seldom backed right into a corner. Be nice to see one squirm, for once.

"No it doesn't. As revolting as I find the current state of the "news" to be, there is no cure that would not be worse by seriously impairing freedom, as Mr. Dirks noted. People do not always use their liberty in ways I like, but letting them do so beats paternalism and totalitarianism every time."

--quoth Mona..

-------------

Intelligent but somewhat deranged people like yourself, Mona, are the toughest nuts to crack. I dunno why I'm bothering..

but, markets, ANY markets, work properly ONLY in the presence of accurate information. Take away accurate information, distributed to all equally, and explained to all equally, and all you have is an elaborate con-game. Surely you can see that?

This is why our health-care system is broken. This is why our stock market is occasionally broken. This is why any number of human-made systems don't work as you might wish, in your libertarian fog. Because, a lot of the time, most of the people participating in said market are being lied to with malice aforethought.

Government regulation, done right, levels the playing field in markets. Done wrong, it just compounds the crime of advantage to one side, to the detriment of the other.

I won't argue that government regulation is always a good thing. But, very often, such regulation fails its purpose because it's corrupted by the very factions that are trying to tilt the market their way in the absence of such regulation. In other words, them what has the power and money in any market transaction fully intend to screw the other side of the transaction by witholding vital information. If corrupting government regulation is required to do that, then that's what happens.

Libertarians like yourself, far from living in a world of truth, live in a world of wishful thinking. You seem too smart for that. But then, you're not the first smart/stupid libertarian I've run into. It seems to be a requirement of that world-view.