48 thoughts on “Must Be Upset About The End Of Slavery”
the proggs are reverting to their dixie roots
Always reminds me of the joke, “So, other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the play?”
Or to Julius Caesar turning the Roman Empire into a dictatorship, it traditional meaning.
Well since the Governor was just elected and has only done things passed by the WI Congress; it probably isn’t a concern about WI becoming a dictatorship.
Funny how Matula is willing to call Walker’s keeping his campaign promises, entirely within the bounds of his state’s constitution, “tyranny,” while Obama’s flouting of the U.S. Constitution, and his Attorney General’s trampling of the rule of law are…?
State fair? There must not have been a nearby Special Olympics ceremony for them to interrupt.
Obama’s flouting of the U.S. Constitution, and his Attorney General’s trampling of the rule of law are…?
Ignored entirely. Single-issue troll is single-issue.
No, I am just reminding Rand that it has a context other then the Civil War, which is why it’s the motto for the State of Virginia.
Matula, which context do you think a Wisconsin union thug would intend?
The context of both was assassination. It’s a good example of the double standard of the New Civility.
I see. Its OK for Tea Party members to wear Tea Shirts with the slogan Sic Semper Tyrannis when going to anti-Obaman Tea Party rallies, but its not OK for someone to use the term to refer to a Tea Party governor…
[[[This is a Ronald Reagan Tee Shirt with the patriotic American Flag in the background of the design. Great for GOP tea party’s and republican events.]]]
Yep, gotta love the Tea Party’s double standard 🙂
Actually, here is an even better illustration of the Tea Party’s use of the term. Note the website’s name and the one on the right with a gun? And another with JFK?
Sorry, but this is a classic example of those who live in glass houses shouldn’t be throwing stones.
It also illustrates will the scary fringes of the Tea Party movement…
BTW Google “Tea Party” “semper tyrannis” and T-shirts and you will find pages and pages of similar results…
Thomas, who said it wasn’t OK? Are you irony challenged?
That was a rhetorical question.
[[[This is a Ronald Reagan Tee Shirt with the patriotic American Flag in the background of the design. Great for GOP tea party’s and republican events.]]]
I actually looked at the shirt and saw no Reagan and no flag. What I did see was the Virgibnia state seal. The context there is fairly obvious and has no bearing on Wisconsin.
I’ll grant you the StopObamaTees examples are out of line — though most appear aimed at the Larouche fringe (due to the Nazi-esque imagery) rather than Tea Party types.
Gotta agree with you here Thomas. If this admin and RINOs are only scared of the fringes the tea party is missing in action.
(ok. I’m guilty of trolling Thomas with that MIA reference… see new meme tea party numbers falling… ha! The actuality being they are now getting down to work on 2012 outside the media’s gaze.)
Should I have said, “eye of mordor?”
I googled that instead!
9,660 results. That’s like 10 posts a day since the Tea Party’s inception, which goes back to before it was really a organized grass roots effort. Single-issue troll indeed.
What do you get when you Google “Thomas Matula John Birch”?
It is good to see that TM thinks that people who live in glass houses (the left) shouldn’t throw rocks (criticize the use of this phrase).
***
I find it hard to believe that there are any Tea Partiers out there glorifying John Wilkes Booth. The target market for those t-shirts probably isn’t the one you think it is.
Leland,
I’ve tried to teach you this before: the number you receive from Google “9,660 results” is NOT what you appear to think it is.
That page on filmup.leonardo.it was returned by Google because the actor TOM Bosley played in a movie with Henry MATULA. Or perhaps Tom Bosley played a character named “Henry Matula” – I dunno, the website is in Italian and it is only relevant to me that the website isn’t about Thomas Matula.
But wait, what about “Tea” and “Party”. Well, Bosley was also in a TV show titled “”Fight for Your Invite to Party” , and that’s it. The word “Tea” isn’t even on the website, even though the website was one of the 9000+ listed in the results. This last point, that a result doesn’t even have to include the word “Tea” is quite important. Think about it.
Now, it is true that the first results listed by google were quite relevant — they mostly include comments by Thomas, or comments about Thomas, on Transterrestrial Musings, but don’t let mislead you.
And be warned, a simple search such as
“Thomas Matula” “Tea Party” site: Transterrestrial.com
will not necessarily give you an accurate count either.
I suggest googling “How Google Works”, in quotes.
Main
If Matula
Then Tea Party
End
Bob,
Thanks but I think Leland is a lost cause.
Philw1776,
That should be:
If “Thomas Matula” then “Tea Party”
You forgetting the quotes.
But even so you will end up with a number of news sites and cross references to Rand’s blog
Bob, Google “sense of humor”. Get back with us on the results, will ya Bob. Cause right now, we are all laughing at you.
Yep, A lost cause like I said:-)
matula “tp/jbs”
7 hits, all here. Thomas, you certainly make a little go a long way.
Even with the quotes, it still reveals an Ahabian obcession with the Tea Party.
Someone on this forum defined a fanatic as someone who sees everything thru the lens of his obcession.
That pretty well defines you Tom. Seriously.
Lets start a new one Ken.
Thomas Matula/Captain Ahab
LOL!
Well at the Tea Party event I attended a while back I saw no such t-shirts. Lots of Gadsden flags, people dressed as Uncle Sam(in this new age of civility even he’s a terrorist), and some fat scraggly guy walking around with a sign that said, “Only little kids have tea parties”; oh wait that was just some counter-protestor hanging around picking his boogers — scratch that one.
Still stuck on the definition of “republic” that allows Cuba to be considered a republic, I see. Unlike Thomas, I don’t consider you to be a lost cause, so I’ll try yet again! Click here and read it slowly: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic#United_States
Bonus Questions: If the authors of the Federalist Papers were brought into the present day,what would please them more: the vastly powerful US Presidency or the significantly less powerful office of the UK prime minister? How would they feel about the role of the Monarchy in British government?
Bob, people do get stuck on words. Words are malleable. Communication requires effort at both ends. When you intentionally ignore what a person is trying to say over some nits you diminish the ability to communicate.
The governments form is what it is. If you can’t agree on its form, just call it the govt. and make your other points.
It’s the same with defining Obama. He is what he is, regardless of if he is a textbook example of anything. Whatever he is, he’s not good for America.
Ken, I couldn’t agree more with you (about words, not about Obama). Maybe you can get through to Leland.
Disapproval Rate for Congress at Record 82% After Debt Talks
By MICHAEL COOPER and MEGAN THEE-BRENAN
Published: August 4, 2011
[[[The public’s opinion of the Tea Party movement has soured in the wake of the debt-ceiling debate. The Tea Party is now viewed unfavorably by 40 percent of the public and favorably by just 20 percent, according to the poll. In mid-April 29 percent of those polled viewed the movement unfavorably, while 26 percent viewed it favorably. And 43 percent of Americans now think the Tea Party has too much influence on the Republican Party, up from 27 percent in mid-April. ]]]
And this was before the Tea Party manufactured debt ceiling crisis caused S&P to downgrade the U.S. credit rating, specifically citing the unwillingness of Congress during the debt debate to raise taxes as a major reason.
And while Rand is always quick to note a fall in President Obama’s rating it looks like its Speaker Boehner who needs to worry.
[[[The president’s overall job approval rating remained relatively stable, with 48 percent approving of the way he handles his job as president and 47 percent disapproving — down from the bump up he received in the spring after the killing of Osama bin Laden, but in line with how he has been viewed for nearly a year. By contrast, Speaker John A. Boehner, an Ohio Republican, saw his disapproval rating shoot up 16 points since April: 57 percent of those polled now disapprove of the way he is handling his job, while only 30 percent approve. ]]]
But I will let you Tea Party folks return to your upside down fantasy world 🙂
I wasn’t citing wikipedia because it is authoritative, I was citing it because I believe the particular passages I cited are correct, and it made more sense to cite them than to rewrite them. On these discussions in the comments, many people are quick to reject a source as authoritative simply because of a PhD or a Nobel Prize, but to be consistent, the same people must judge a wikipedia paragraph by its merit, not by its website.
There is an additional argument to be made about “Crowned Republics”, one that I’ve made here before: reserve powers. We simply don’t know if the Queen of the UK has any independent reserve powers anymore, as she choses to never exercise them– she always follows the advice of government (the “administration” in American parlance). The closest we’ve come to finding out was during the 1975 Australian Constitutional Crisis, but the Queen, in her role as the Queen of Australia (completely separate from her role as Queen of the United Kingdom), chose not to engage her reserve powers. I believe the Queen’s refusal to use reserve powers is one of the necessary factors preserving the Monarchy in both countries.
The argument that no reserve powers + parliamentary democracy = republic can be made even more strongly in the case of Japan. Leland insists Japan is not a republic (under any definition), but In Japan we can be certain the Emperor has no reserve powers – it was baked into the American-written constitution, which leaves it unclear why Japan should not be considered a republic.
But I suspect Leland, as usual after he brings this old argument back from the dead, will not respond to this line of reasoning, and will continue to play dumb (unless he is, in fact, dumb.)
“Meanwhile, in the world beyond Rand’s blog, the public rejection of the Tea Party is increasing.”
44% of respondents in a NYT poll said that the cuts did not go far enough in the grand budget deal. Sounds like there are still a lot of people out there expressing Tea Party ideals. How many of that 44% that think the cuts didn’t go far enough also are part of the 83% who disapprove of Congress. Plus, the tea party freshman and other representatives that have adopted tea party stances don’t control Congress. Not only are there just 53 members of the Tea Party caucus within the house, but the Dem’s still control the Senate. So Thomas, not only did you show your own built in bias by quoting a NYT poll that was clearly trying to bury their own results. But you also fail to realize that disapproval of Congress in its entirety does not necessarily translate to the Tea Party itself. Would you like to have another try sir, I’ve a feeling you’ll use it anyway.
Sorry Josh, but folks are buying what you are selling. Americans are on to the Tea Party and trying to claim they aren’t responsible for the debt ceiling mess is not going to fly. They know better. They know how far to the radical right they pulled Congress. And will remember in next year’s elections.
Also a majority doesn’t mean much when you need a super majority to pass legislation without a filibuster. That is President Obama hasn’t been able to get a budget.
Another possibility Thomas is there are LOTS of people like me that are not part of any tea party group, but support American founding principles.
The only poll that counts comes in 2012.
Ken,
And I don’t??? I see, if you are not a member of the Tea Party you are not a real American. That very statement about “not supporting the founding principles” shows just how far to the fringe the core of the Tea Party is….
Ken,
Yep, 2012 is what counts and like 1964 the TP/JBS will lose. Elections are determined by independent and moderate voters and they typically reject fringe movements.
And I don’t?
No, you don’t. You’ve educated me to that fact by forcing me to lookup facts about the John Birch Society. I was lazy and just accepted the ‘wacko’ label, when lo’ and behold, I learn otherwise.
Beyond that I have to thank you for [in]directing me to the reference to “the Old Right rather than the New Right.”
You are certainly not the old right. It turns out the new right is not on the right at all. It’s all about political expediency which is exactly the position you’ve expressed in the past.
Our founders held principles far above expediency. George abhorred the idea of becoming some new American king. The were the old right.
You may self identify as on the right. Frankly I’m not sure what to make of that.
Ken, look up why William F. Buckley denounced the John Birch Society.
Ken, my last comment “look up why William F. Buckley denounced the John Birch Society” seems to have gotten caught by Rand’s spam filter, so I’ll try again. I particularly enjoyed Buckley’s account of how he and Senator Goldwater conspired to label the JBS as loony. I believe it was published just after Buckley’s death. Don’t miss the reference to Alaska! Here’s the link: http://www.commentarymagazine.com/article/goldwater-the-john-birch-society-and-me/
I’m not all that interested in political movements of the past. I do note that a common tactic to defeat a movement is to pick a target and marginalize it, thus marginalizing everyone in the movement.
What has come to light is that actual facts have been ridiculed. We did have commies in our government in the past the way we have Islamists today telling our government agencies how to deal with terrorists. This is the nature of an open society. Bad guys wearing sheeps clothing.
I will make my judgments based on the facts I know or can discover. I will also assume I’m being lied to because the evidence for that is overwhelming.
Finally, I’m going to stick to my own principle while expecting others that seem to share my principles to disappoint.
Bob,
Good article. It shows that the Republicans of Senator Goldwater’s generation has the common sense to steer clear of the TP/JBS. Its interesting how there comments on President Eisenhower are so similar to the charges being made against President Obama by the current TP/JBS generation.
the proggs are reverting to their dixie roots
Always reminds me of the joke, “So, other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the play?”
Or to Julius Caesar turning the Roman Empire into a dictatorship, it traditional meaning.
Well since the Governor was just elected and has only done things passed by the WI Congress; it probably isn’t a concern about WI becoming a dictatorship.
Funny how Matula is willing to call Walker’s keeping his campaign promises, entirely within the bounds of his state’s constitution, “tyranny,” while Obama’s flouting of the U.S. Constitution, and his Attorney General’s trampling of the rule of law are…?
State fair? There must not have been a nearby Special Olympics ceremony for them to interrupt.
Ignored entirely. Single-issue troll is single-issue.
No, I am just reminding Rand that it has a context other then the Civil War, which is why it’s the motto for the State of Virginia.
Matula, which context do you think a Wisconsin union thug would intend?
The context of both was assassination. It’s a good example of the double standard of the New Civility.
I see. Its OK for Tea Party members to wear Tea Shirts with the slogan Sic Semper Tyrannis when going to anti-Obaman Tea Party rallies, but its not OK for someone to use the term to refer to a Tea Party governor…
http://www.cafepress.com/+sic_semper_tyrannis_womens_vneck_tshirt,468706751
[[[This is a Ronald Reagan Tee Shirt with the patriotic American Flag in the background of the design. Great for GOP tea party’s and republican events.]]]
Yep, gotta love the Tea Party’s double standard 🙂
Actually, here is an even better illustration of the Tea Party’s use of the term. Note the website’s name and the one on the right with a gun? And another with JFK?
http://stopobamatees.com/search.php?keywords=sic+semper+tyrannis
Sic Semper Tyrannis T-Shirts for Sale
Sorry, but this is a classic example of those who live in glass houses shouldn’t be throwing stones.
It also illustrates will the scary fringes of the Tea Party movement…
BTW Google “Tea Party” “semper tyrannis” and T-shirts and you will find pages and pages of similar results…
Thomas, who said it wasn’t OK? Are you irony challenged?
That was a rhetorical question.
I actually looked at the shirt and saw no Reagan and no flag. What I did see was the Virgibnia state seal. The context there is fairly obvious and has no bearing on Wisconsin.
I’ll grant you the StopObamaTees examples are out of line — though most appear aimed at the Larouche fringe (due to the Nazi-esque imagery) rather than Tea Party types.
http://www.google.com/search?q=Thomas+Matula+tea+party&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7GGIT_en
Hey Tom! I googled that instead!
the scary fringes
Gotta agree with you here Thomas. If this admin and RINOs are only scared of the fringes the tea party is missing in action.
(ok. I’m guilty of trolling Thomas with that MIA reference… see new meme tea party numbers falling… ha! The actuality being they are now getting down to work on 2012 outside the media’s gaze.)
Should I have said, “eye of mordor?”
I googled that instead!
9,660 results. That’s like 10 posts a day since the Tea Party’s inception, which goes back to before it was really a organized grass roots effort. Single-issue troll indeed.
What do you get when you Google “Thomas Matula John Birch”?
It is good to see that TM thinks that people who live in glass houses (the left) shouldn’t throw rocks (criticize the use of this phrase).
***
I find it hard to believe that there are any Tea Partiers out there glorifying John Wilkes Booth. The target market for those t-shirts probably isn’t the one you think it is.
Leland,
I’ve tried to teach you this before: the number you receive from Google “9,660 results” is NOT what you appear to think it is.
First, there were no quotes around the name “Thomas Matula”, which means that one of the early results listed among the 9,000+ results you tout was this one:
http://filmup.leonardo.it/personaggi/tombosley/index.htm
That page on filmup.leonardo.it was returned by Google because the actor TOM Bosley played in a movie with Henry MATULA. Or perhaps Tom Bosley played a character named “Henry Matula” – I dunno, the website is in Italian and it is only relevant to me that the website isn’t about Thomas Matula.
But wait, what about “Tea” and “Party”. Well, Bosley was also in a TV show titled “”Fight for Your Invite to Party” , and that’s it. The word “Tea” isn’t even on the website, even though the website was one of the 9000+ listed in the results. This last point, that a result doesn’t even have to include the word “Tea” is quite important. Think about it.
Now, it is true that the first results listed by google were quite relevant — they mostly include comments by Thomas, or comments about Thomas, on Transterrestrial Musings, but don’t let mislead you.
And be warned, a simple search such as
“Thomas Matula” “Tea Party” site: Transterrestrial.com
will not necessarily give you an accurate count either.
I suggest googling “How Google Works”, in quotes.
Main
If Matula
Then Tea Party
End
Bob,
Thanks but I think Leland is a lost cause.
Philw1776,
That should be:
If “Thomas Matula” then “Tea Party”
You forgetting the quotes.
But even so you will end up with a number of news sites and cross references to Rand’s blog
Bob, Google “sense of humor”. Get back with us on the results, will ya Bob. Cause right now, we are all laughing at you.
Yep, A lost cause like I said:-)
matula “tp/jbs”
7 hits, all here. Thomas, you certainly make a little go a long way.
Even with the quotes, it still reveals an Ahabian obcession with the Tea Party.
Someone on this forum defined a fanatic as someone who sees everything thru the lens of his obcession.
That pretty well defines you Tom. Seriously.
Lets start a new one Ken.
Thomas Matula/Captain Ahab
LOL!
Well at the Tea Party event I attended a while back I saw no such t-shirts. Lots of Gadsden flags, people dressed as Uncle Sam(in this new age of civility even he’s a terrorist), and some fat scraggly guy walking around with a sign that said, “Only little kids have tea parties”; oh wait that was just some counter-protestor hanging around picking his boogers — scratch that one.
Hey, I’m getting the hang of this Google.
Still stuck on the definition of “republic” that allows Cuba to be considered a republic, I see. Unlike Thomas, I don’t consider you to be a lost cause, so I’ll try yet again! Click here and read it slowly: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic#United_States
Bonus Questions: If the authors of the Federalist Papers were brought into the present day,what would please them more: the vastly powerful US Presidency or the significantly less powerful office of the UK prime minister? How would they feel about the role of the Monarchy in British government?
Bob, people do get stuck on words. Words are malleable. Communication requires effort at both ends. When you intentionally ignore what a person is trying to say over some nits you diminish the ability to communicate.
The governments form is what it is. If you can’t agree on its form, just call it the govt. and make your other points.
It’s the same with defining Obama. He is what he is, regardless of if he is a textbook example of anything. Whatever he is, he’s not good for America.
Ken, I couldn’t agree more with you (about words, not about Obama). Maybe you can get through to Leland.
Leland, Ken’s comment makes me realize that I should have pointed you to another part of the wikipedia article . Read this part: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic#Ambiguities
Yea Leland! Wikipedia will set you free :-p
Josh, you think Matula will come back to lecture Bob on wikipedia’s lack of credibility? 🙂
Leland,
No, because I assume Bob is picking sources that you (Leland) view as creditable. But as I noted, you are a lost cause.
Meanwhile, in the world beyond Rand’s blog, the public rejection of the Tea Party is increasing.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/05/us/politics/05poll.html?_r=1&ref=us
Disapproval Rate for Congress at Record 82% After Debt Talks
By MICHAEL COOPER and MEGAN THEE-BRENAN
Published: August 4, 2011
[[[The public’s opinion of the Tea Party movement has soured in the wake of the debt-ceiling debate. The Tea Party is now viewed unfavorably by 40 percent of the public and favorably by just 20 percent, according to the poll. In mid-April 29 percent of those polled viewed the movement unfavorably, while 26 percent viewed it favorably. And 43 percent of Americans now think the Tea Party has too much influence on the Republican Party, up from 27 percent in mid-April. ]]]
And this was before the Tea Party manufactured debt ceiling crisis caused S&P to downgrade the U.S. credit rating, specifically citing the unwillingness of Congress during the debt debate to raise taxes as a major reason.
And while Rand is always quick to note a fall in President Obama’s rating it looks like its Speaker Boehner who needs to worry.
[[[The president’s overall job approval rating remained relatively stable, with 48 percent approving of the way he handles his job as president and 47 percent disapproving — down from the bump up he received in the spring after the killing of Osama bin Laden, but in line with how he has been viewed for nearly a year. By contrast, Speaker John A. Boehner, an Ohio Republican, saw his disapproval rating shoot up 16 points since April: 57 percent of those polled now disapprove of the way he is handling his job, while only 30 percent approve. ]]]
But I will let you Tea Party folks return to your upside down fantasy world 🙂
I wasn’t citing wikipedia because it is authoritative, I was citing it because I believe the particular passages I cited are correct, and it made more sense to cite them than to rewrite them. On these discussions in the comments, many people are quick to reject a source as authoritative simply because of a PhD or a Nobel Prize, but to be consistent, the same people must judge a wikipedia paragraph by its merit, not by its website.
There is an additional argument to be made about “Crowned Republics”, one that I’ve made here before: reserve powers. We simply don’t know if the Queen of the UK has any independent reserve powers anymore, as she choses to never exercise them– she always follows the advice of government (the “administration” in American parlance). The closest we’ve come to finding out was during the 1975 Australian Constitutional Crisis, but the Queen, in her role as the Queen of Australia (completely separate from her role as Queen of the United Kingdom), chose not to engage her reserve powers. I believe the Queen’s refusal to use reserve powers is one of the necessary factors preserving the Monarchy in both countries.
The argument that no reserve powers + parliamentary democracy = republic can be made even more strongly in the case of Japan. Leland insists Japan is not a republic (under any definition), but In Japan we can be certain the Emperor has no reserve powers – it was baked into the American-written constitution, which leaves it unclear why Japan should not be considered a republic.
But I suspect Leland, as usual after he brings this old argument back from the dead, will not respond to this line of reasoning, and will continue to play dumb (unless he is, in fact, dumb.)
“Meanwhile, in the world beyond Rand’s blog, the public rejection of the Tea Party is increasing.”
44% of respondents in a NYT poll said that the cuts did not go far enough in the grand budget deal. Sounds like there are still a lot of people out there expressing Tea Party ideals. How many of that 44% that think the cuts didn’t go far enough also are part of the 83% who disapprove of Congress. Plus, the tea party freshman and other representatives that have adopted tea party stances don’t control Congress. Not only are there just 53 members of the Tea Party caucus within the house, but the Dem’s still control the Senate. So Thomas, not only did you show your own built in bias by quoting a NYT poll that was clearly trying to bury their own results. But you also fail to realize that disapproval of Congress in its entirety does not necessarily translate to the Tea Party itself. Would you like to have another try sir, I’ve a feeling you’ll use it anyway.
Sorry Josh, but folks are buying what you are selling. Americans are on to the Tea Party and trying to claim they aren’t responsible for the debt ceiling mess is not going to fly. They know better. They know how far to the radical right they pulled Congress. And will remember in next year’s elections.
Also a majority doesn’t mean much when you need a super majority to pass legislation without a filibuster. That is President Obama hasn’t been able to get a budget.
Another possibility Thomas is there are LOTS of people like me that are not part of any tea party group, but support American founding principles.
The only poll that counts comes in 2012.
Ken,
And I don’t??? I see, if you are not a member of the Tea Party you are not a real American. That very statement about “not supporting the founding principles” shows just how far to the fringe the core of the Tea Party is….
Ken,
Yep, 2012 is what counts and like 1964 the TP/JBS will lose. Elections are determined by independent and moderate voters and they typically reject fringe movements.
And I don’t?
No, you don’t. You’ve educated me to that fact by forcing me to lookup facts about the John Birch Society. I was lazy and just accepted the ‘wacko’ label, when lo’ and behold, I learn otherwise.
Beyond that I have to thank you for [in]directing me to the reference to “the Old Right rather than the New Right.”
You are certainly not the old right. It turns out the new right is not on the right at all. It’s all about political expediency which is exactly the position you’ve expressed in the past.
Our founders held principles far above expediency. George abhorred the idea of becoming some new American king. The were the old right.
You may self identify as on the right. Frankly I’m not sure what to make of that.
Ken, look up why William F. Buckley denounced the John Birch Society.
Ken, my last comment “look up why William F. Buckley denounced the John Birch Society” seems to have gotten caught by Rand’s spam filter, so I’ll try again. I particularly enjoyed Buckley’s account of how he and Senator Goldwater conspired to label the JBS as loony. I believe it was published just after Buckley’s death. Don’t miss the reference to Alaska! Here’s the link:
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/article/goldwater-the-john-birch-society-and-me/
I’m not all that interested in political movements of the past. I do note that a common tactic to defeat a movement is to pick a target and marginalize it, thus marginalizing everyone in the movement.
What has come to light is that actual facts have been ridiculed. We did have commies in our government in the past the way we have Islamists today telling our government agencies how to deal with terrorists. This is the nature of an open society. Bad guys wearing sheeps clothing.
I will make my judgments based on the facts I know or can discover. I will also assume I’m being lied to because the evidence for that is overwhelming.
Finally, I’m going to stick to my own principle while expecting others that seem to share my principles to disappoint.
Bob,
Good article. It shows that the Republicans of Senator Goldwater’s generation has the common sense to steer clear of the TP/JBS. Its interesting how there comments on President Eisenhower are so similar to the charges being made against President Obama by the current TP/JBS generation.