Letters to the Editor
-
The living proof
Bill Kristol is living proof that someone can always be wrong, 100% of the time, and still profit from it, if it fits into the "what to kiss and when" paradigm.
-
Precisely
Obama basically echoed 'What's the Matter with Kansas'- the issues being 'clung to' are wedge issues manipulated by politicians.
And that's precisely what's wrong with it. That book was so wrong factually and philosophically that it's hard to know where to start.
Just ask your average Kansan.
In short, again: People don't "cling" to religious faith or belief in gun rights out of bitterness and fear. They hold to these things in good times and bad. So that's Obama's first mistake; despite all his talk of "faith," he truly misunderstands what motivates most people's beliefs. That's (a) ignorant and (b) condescending.
Next, he lumped religious belief and political opinions in with bad things such as bigotry and anti-immigrant hatred, other things that people "cling" to, according to Obama in the same sentence. So by saying so, he equates people good things (religious beliefs, political opinions) with bad things. That is (a) wrong and (b) stupid beyond belief and (c) again condescending.
And will everyone please shut up about Hillary? She's a phony-baloney opportunist; the sun also rises in the east. What's new?
Obama, with this incredibly stupid comment and his even more lame and mendacious "explanation" just caused himself to lose Pennsylvania, guaranteeing Hillary will fight this thing all the way into August (to no effect, I might add), and he has handed McCain a huge golden mallet with with to club him into submission.
Why can't you Obama worshippers take off your blinders and see the incredible damage he has done to himself? Between this, Rev. Wright, and Mrs. Obama's equally disdainful comments about America, the man is guaranteed to be savaged long before November.
-
And more on Thomas Frank and his flawed thinking
The things the Democrats say about the "working class" reflect precisely a contempt that they just seem unable to see: What's the matter with these people? Why don't they understand that we know what's good for them? Why do they worry about silly things like abortion and homosexuality and guns and God? If they must believe in all that religious mumbo-jumbo, can't they keep it to themselves?
Every time the Democrats lose an election, they make a big show of asking questions like these. Then, the next time they lose an election, they once again wonder why the "working class" has forsaken them. Maybe it's as simple as: because they were listening.
-
Bullshit
Kristol makes too much of it, but you and Sullivan are willfully misreading Obama's words. Sullivan twists "religion" into "more rigid forms of religion." Obama's identification of religion as an analgesic to worldly troubles *is* Marxist. But that doesn't make Obama a communist.
-
And bullshit walks
Here's what Obama said in the faith forum yesterday, according to the NY Times report:
“That was in no way a demeaning of a faith that I myself embrace,” Mr. Obama said. “When economic hardship hits, they have faith, they have family, they have traditions that have been passed on from generation to generation. Those are not bad things. Those are the things that are left.”
So why, then, did he include racism and xenophobia in the same list of things people "cling" to? Is he commending those? Does he, too, embrace these things. Of course not.
He's not only a condescending twit, he's a really bad liar.
-
Get Real
Let's get real, people. First, i want to say that i am a supporter of Obama and normally have very little use for Kristol. For one thing i was against the war in Iraq from the start. However, in this case, Kristol actually has a legitimate point. Of course, Obama is not a communist, but as a philosopher, i was struck by the materialistic assumpitions implied by Obama's comments. He implied that people's values are determined by their material and economic condition. Although these can surely be a factor, to think that values are completely determined by economics is reductive and simply wrong. Materialism is a very misguided ideology of the left, much like believing in a literal interpretation of the Bible is a misguided ideology of the right. The actual reality lies between these overly simplistic extremes. The reason why Obama's comments were ofensive to many people is not because he said people were bitter. There can be no doubt that many people are bitter. What Obama did was imply that people do not have free will in choosing their values, which, frankly was a big mistake.
-
Sol, umbridge-taking Fox-news-watching Republican stooge dislikes Obama, news at 11
Sol,
What's the Matter with Kansas is a book written from a Democratic perspective. You're clearly not one, so no real surprise you disagree. As that goes, by way of fyi, political generalizations apply to the slight majorities required to win elections. So all that has to be correct is that there are a substantial enough number of Kansasans who vote wedge issues and by consequence against their economic self-interest, to sway the state. Hate to be the bearer of bad news, but there's not much controversial about this no matter how many Kansasans you want to line up to testify about the sanctity of gun ownership.
As requisite of the genre, your misfiring missive conflates the politics of issues (what Obama was referring to) with the issues themselves, ignores for the most part my original post, and tosses in the word 'bigotry' for good measure. Do tell, where that can be found in Obama's quotation... Basically you're either in the business of distortion, or too dim to know the difference. Either way, you can revel in your trumped up sense of outrage on your own time.
-
Well, religion IS the opium of the people.
I don't read Kristol's columns because I am well aware that the Times counts the number of times an article is clicked to, and ascribes a columnist's popularity to that quantity. But if the quote Steve gave is full and in context, it would be the first time Kristol said something thought-provoking.
I say this as an Obama admirer and I hope he wins, though Hillary is fine by me as well.
If Marx said the sky was blue, does that make me a communist if I also say the sky is blue? Of course not. Marx correctly diagnosed that religion was used to keep the masses oppressed. As a form of pie-in-the-sky, as a wedge issue, when not directly through sermons defending the status quo and blasting anyone who asked for a little more equality here on Earth.
When religion is used to get people to vote against their own interests, you can call it what you will, opium, wedge issue, distraction. What matters is that religious feelings are exploited to get people to vote for inequality, war and/or oppression (in the case of the Bush administration, all three). Everyone knows that. Bush's whole election strategy was based on it. If Bush had separated religion from politics, he wouldn't have had a chance in hell of getting elected. As it was he could run on a platform promising more money for the rich and more debts for the poor, and still win by calling himself a Christian and by having rich television preachers browbeat their working-class followers into voting for him. Exactly the way the Catholic Church used to prop up corrupt kings and dukes at the expense of the peasantry.
I know this is a USA election cycle and so the debate is about what people say and not what they do. So a Democrat like Obama will be blasted for saying that religion is used as a wedge issue, while Republicans will get away with cynically and deliberately using religion as a wedge issue. But the real rebuttal of Kristol's statement is that Obama wants to prove Marx wrong, while Karl Rove makes a living out of proving him right.