Thursday, October 11, 2007

Fair Game

In a recent poll of major conservative bloggers (which unaccountably left this conservative blogger out perhaps because I am entirely too reasonable), Rush Limbaugh was voted the Number 1 favorite conservative and Michelle Malkin, at Number 4, was the most popular blogger on the list. The results were no surprise because Limbaugh and Malkin (along with Ann Coulter, who was Number 2) represent the heart and soul of the conservative movement. There is perhaps no better example of the style and methods of these brave conservative warriors than the way they set out to destroy and humiliate a 12-year-old boy named Graeme Frost and his family. We are at war and these patriots will stop at nothing to defeat our enemies even if those enemies are children.

When 12-year-old Graeme Frost dared to criticize the President’s veto of the SCHIP program in the Democrats’ weekly radio address, he became “fair game,” as Mark Steyn (Number 3 on the list) put it. Conservative bloggers (spurred on, apparently, by an aide in Mitch McConnell’s office) began digging for dirt, poring over the Frost family’s financial information and splashing it over the Internet. They made harassing phone calls to the Frosts and sent them nasty emails all in an effort to send a message to others who might dare to speak out and participate in the political process on the wrong side. Never have I been so proud to be a conservative.

"The nastiness caught me by surprise," said Graeme Frosts's father and many liberal bloggers seemed taken aback by the intensity of the attacks on the Frost family. Unfortunately, these naïve liberals don’t understand that we are at war and that war calls for different rules, which is something that conservatives have known for long time. Perhaps Rush Limbaugh put it best when he compared this dangerous little boy to a suicide bomber, reusing a metaphor he also used to describe phony soldiers who don’t support the War in Iraq (like all conservatives Limbaugh hates rhetorical waste as much as he hates government waste so he doesn’t spend a lot of time thinking up new metaphors when he can still squeeze something out of the old ones.) When confronted with a child suicide bomber with explosives strapped to his tiny body, a soldier doesn’t have time for sentimental thoughts about the terrorist’s youth. He just shoots on sight.

For conservatives the world is divided into us (patriotic Americans) and them (terrorists). There is no in-between. Liberal blogger Ezra Klein demonstrated how little he understood about conservatives when he comically challenged Michelle Malkin to a debate on the “issues.” Conservatives unlike liberals do not want to debate terrorists. Malkin not only refused his offer, she launched a vicious personal attack against Klein.

She accused him of being a poor reader for not understanding the nuances of her 2004 piece complaining about the bad choices she encountered for her own family’s health insurance. Macsmind, who also denounced the Frosts, pointed out similarly his difficulties with the health care system. "I have a wife who has survived cancer (twice) and has ongoing medical conditions," he wrote. "I make 40,000 a year and struggle to pay insurance but pay I do. I won’t even get into the outstanding medical bills. I don’t drive a fancy car or have a hope in prayer of buying a house such as theirs. Nevertheless, the Frosts have made crappy financial decisions and are wrong to expect the government to bail them out." What makes conservatives like Malkin and Macsmind different from liberals like Klein is that conservatives would rather struggle and be faced with terrible health care choices than to have no choice at all, which is what would happen under socialized medicine. Living in a free society means having the freedom to go into debt trying to pay for the cost of health care and having the choice to quit your job and take a job you hate because it offers health insurance or to sell your house and move into a homeless shelter to pay for medical costs. People who live in societies that have socialized medicine don’t have these kinds of choices; they have to take the health care the government gives them.

Malkin also accused Klein of libel, though I am sure that she is an opponent of the tort system, which is why she has declined to sue him. Klein had written about how Malkin published the contact information of traitorous students at UC Santa Cruz protesting the war in Iraq and of Chancellor Denise Denton, to pressure her to denounce them. The students received a host of nasty threats and the chancellor committed suicide a short time later. Not many bloggers are able to make such a real impact on the world and Malkin is very proud of what she accomplished, although she is too modest to take all of the credit for Denton's suicide. I’m not familiar with the intricacies of libel law but I think that while Klein published information that was true, it was written in bad faith and therefore is libel, whereas when Malkin or other conservative bloggers publish information that turns out not to be true (whoops!) it is with the best of intentions and therefore is not libel.

Although Malkin is not able to drive all of her enemies to suicide, she has had a number of other successes. She helped end the career and destroy the reputation of once-respected journalist Dan Rather. She got Jamil Hussein arrested and gagged. She helped silence Scott Beachamp. She rhetorically beheaded Jill Carroll when the terrorists who kidnapped her didn’t have the guts to do it. Of course, Malkin does not ruin the lives and sully the reputations of her enemies alone. Sometimes she acts as a megaphone for other conservatives who do the spade work and then others follow her cues. Even conservatives who sometimes recoil from her methods lend her support or aid and abet her if not by defending her then by remaining silent.

I would never attack Malkin because I know she is brave enough to say out loud what I am thinking and that if I ever denounced her, my reputation as a respected conservative blogger would be destroyed. And even if we are sometimes uncomfortable being on Malkin’s side, we certainly don’t want to be on the side of the terrorists. I’m sure many of my conservative friends in the blogosphere feel the same way. Ed Morrissey of Captain’s Quarters, my favorite conservative blogger and someone I am proud to call a friend even though he usually believes in debating liberals on the issues and eschews personal attacks, defended splaying the Frost’s private financial information all over the Internet at first, but now seems to be having second thoughts on what he helped unleash with his tacit approval. “The response on the Right sometimes outstripped reason,” he wrote. “Rather than just argue the facts, some in the comments section here and elsewhere went too far in speculating about finances and motives of the Frost family.” But he still agrees that the Frosts were “fair game.” Rick Moran of Rightwing Nuthouse also seems to be backing away from the attacks on the Frosts, but he also excuses the behavior of the right-wing blogosphere by calling the Frosts “fair game.”

Oddly enough, the one conservative blogger who has denounced Malkin most vociferously is perhaps her greatest disciple, Chuck Adkins. Adkins is such an extreme conservative that he is sometimes mistaken for an extreme liberal. He is a Christian who calls himself “right-leaning.” He is against abortion and thinks homosexuality is “sick and repulsive” (“If you’re queer, you don’t belong here,” he says.) He is against neoconservatives (preferring the “paleoconservatism” of Pat Buchanan) and believes the Iraq War was a mistake but is opposed to pulling out now. In short, he is no liberal although he sometimes attacks conservatives for not being conservative enough. His rhetoric (such as his claim that students killed by a police deputy in Wisconsin "had it coming" because of their lack of respect for police and then reacting to criticism of his post by claiming he is a victim of people's intolerance of free speech) is almost indistinguishable from Malkin’s and when he published information about where Malkin lives (which he later retracted), he was taking a page right out of Malkin’s playbook. Of course, it’s one thing to post the personal information of traitors, as Malkin did, and quite another to post the personal information of a fellow conservative you disagree with. I have deleted attempts to post Malkin’s personal information in my comments and will continue to do so but I will also resist attempts to post liberals' personal information because like other conservative bloggers I want to preserve my own deniability for any responsibility of the consequences of such an action even if I give tacit support to Malkin and other respectable conservative bloggers who do so. In the same way, I would never call Glenn Greenwald a “faggot” the way Dan Collins of Protein Wisdom did, but instead prefer to sit back in silence while he does use such language the way other conservative bloggers did.

Even if some conservative bloggers do tepidly criticize Malkin and her ilk and although politicians like Mitch McConnell were prepared to join in the chorus of attacks on the Frost family but then decided to just let bloggers do it, no one should believe that we conservatives are not all Malkinites and Dittoheads at heart. The fact that few conservatives are willing to strongly denounce Malkin and Limbaugh and that her blog is the most popular conservative blog in the blogosphere and his radio show is the Number 1 conservative radio show should tell you all you need to know about our true feelings about them and their methods. And we will go to great lengths to defend them no matter how tortured our reasoning may seem.

If Democrats do manage to pass an expansion of the SCHIP program, I hope that conservative bloggers will investigate the eligibility of each and every family that applies and scare the rest into not applying. Of course, I won’t do it myself because it seems like an awful lot of work and I would hate it if some crazy blogger like Chuck Adkins did the same thing to me. But I will sit back and let others do the dirty work and defend them from liberal attacks even as I wash my hands from responsibility of any consequences of their actions. And I’m sure most conservative bloggers will do the same.

Being a conservative means never saying you’re sorry for what other conservatives do. It means justifying the means if you support the ends, whether that involves ruining people’s lives and reputations, invading people’s privacy, violating people’s constitutional rights or torturing them. It means seeing anyone who is not with you 100% as an enemy and seeing every issue as black and white. It means doing whatever is necessary to defeat the enemy even if you sometimes have to violate your own principles to do it and seem like a hypocrite. Being a conservative means scoring political points by going after easy enemies and racking up victories instead of wasting a lot of time with the much harder job of persuading people with the rightness of your cause. It means doing it to them before they do it to us. It means seeing everyone opposed to us, even a 12-year-old boy, as “fair game.” Yes, I am very proud to be a conservative.

Share This Post

blinkbits BlinkList del.icio.us Fark Furl LinkaGoGo Ma.gnolia NewsVine Reddit Shadows Simpy Spurl TailRank YahooMyWeb

, , , , , , Health Wonk Review

45 comments:

Anonymous said...

Jon Swift wrote:
"Klein had written about how Malkin published the contact information of traitorous students at UC Santa Cruz protesting the war in Iraq and of Chancellor Denise Denton, to pressure her to dnounce [sic] them. The students received a host of nasty threats and the Dean committed suicide a short time later."

Jon! What are you doing? Post hoc ergo propter hoc? What happened to your commitment to reasonableness?

Did you actually follow the Chronicle link that you included in your text and then read the article on Denton's death ?

Where is any mention of Malkin's responsibility?

Seems that if anyone other than the moonbat dean herself was responsible for her taking a 400 foot flyer off a building, it was the progressive/left students who were constantly protesting her apparent financial extravagances.

And by the way, in your own linked article, you had asked Malkin for her phone number so that you could call her. Wouldn't it be just as reasonable for you to have provided yours in the e-mail you addressed to her, so that she could then call you?

What's your phone number Jon?

Hell, what's your real name?

Come on Jon, try to be reasonable!

You are beginning to sound just like one of those loony progressives you are always deriding.

Jon Swift said...

Thank you Anonymous for your spelling correction and for pointing out that Malkin does not get all the credit for Denton's suicide. Certainly, she was helped, as the article (which does mention Malkin) states, by the unruly students and by such Malkin proteges as this patriotic blogger. As I hope I made clear in my piece, Malkin does not work in a vaccum.

As far as giving out my personal information, as I stated in my piece on Malkin I've had a few misunderstandings with creditors that precludes me from doing so.

Dick Durata said...

Like you, Jon, I try to a reasonable conservative, but sometimes it makes my head hurt. Take this Frost case, while we might cheer on Ms. Malkin and Rush, we have to realize that their power to destroy the lives of the Frosts is limited.
I'm all for small government, and believe that free enterprise made this country great, but isn't this a case, like the War on Terror, where government officials should be taking the lead and locking up these people. We pay taxes for these freeloader's health care, but skimp on preemptive action like locking them up for their own good, and ours!
What do you think? Shouldn't the Department of Homeland Security read these terrorists the riot act before they strike another blow? Do we have to put the burden on bloggers and pundits?

a said...

Some quotes I find unreasonable:

"destroy and humiliate a 12-year-old boy";

"she launched a vicious personal attack against Klein";

"Graeme Frost dared to criticize."

You should know, first off, that what Frost did was not "daring," but cowardly. Conservatives do not want to "destroy and humiliate" Frost, but to expose him as not needy and keep the public from listening to him. And nothing Michelle does can be described as vicious. I find these choices of words unfortunate, because they do not seem very reasonable or conservative of you.

I find the last paragraph pretty weak as well, not nearly as strong as your usual writing. It basically has the right point, but your way of presenting it doesn't portray conservatives in the best possible light.

In conclusion, parts of this piece could definitely use rephrasing.

Kevin said...

Jon
I think that this Frost affair may be a blessing in disguise. Many liberal moonbats and progressives seem unable to understand the concept of compassionate conservatism. I have seen no better illustration of compassionate conservatism than this from Anonymous 2:47 PM
"Seems that if anyone other than the moonbat dean herself was responsible for her taking a 400 foot flyer off a building, it was the progressive/left students who were constantly protesting her apparent financial extravagances."
Thank you Anonymous. Maybe now the liberal moonbats will understand that someone can be both compassionate and conservative .
Kevin

Buck Batard said...

As good as this post is, it's old news now.

I want to hear about how that wimpy liberal Al Gore managed to get an award from an organization created from the leftover profits of the guy who invented dynamite, Alfred Nobel.

Anonymous said...

Jon

I've been waiting all week to see if you could bring some much needed reasonable conservatism to this ongoing saga.

I must admit to being a trifle disappointed as this post seems to me a little less subtle or nuanced than your usual very high quality work.

I think that I almost detected sarcasm and even perhaps anger, although for the life of me I can't understand why people would feel anger simply because prominent conservative commentators think children are fair game. What's new or surprising about that?

However, I suppose that I am fairly unconcerned with these issues because I live in a country where everyone - even children - gets access to health care.

Living in France

OutOfContext said...

I don't get all this hooha. Here we are talking about some powerless kid when the Vice President of the United States of America is fatwa-ed by a one-termer whose only contribution to America was holding the door open for the Reagan Revolution. Dick Cheney is under attack!
As for the kid, he and his family would certainly not feel so 'exposed' and 'vulnerable' if they were armed at all times. It's called peace of mind. I find a gun is also useful in obtaining health care. You'd be surprised at how quickly you can obtain triage attention when you're carrying a semi-automatic weapon. And if a dispute arises over a 'valid' insurance card, there are plenty of medics to care for the wounded. Let the second amendment be your umbrella.

Anonymous said...

Kevin said...

<<< Jon
I think that this Frost affair may be a blessing in disguise. Many liberal moonbats and progressives seem unable to understand the concept of compassionate conservatism. I have seen no better illustration of compassionate conservatism than this from Anonymous 2:47 PM

"Seems that if anyone other than the moonbat dean herself was responsible for her taking a 400 foot flyer off a building, it was the progressive/left students who were constantly protesting her apparent financial extravagances."

Thank you Anonymous. Maybe now the liberal moonbats will understand that someone can be both compassionate and conservative .
Kevin >>>



Dear Kevin,

I never claimed to be a compassionate conservative, just a reasonable one. It is Jon who claimed in another post to be a compassionate conservative as well, as we have pointed out to doubters once before.

I'll leave the touchy-feely part of reasonable conservativism to Jon ... or to you, or to whomever it is that might find mindless affect more appealing than reason.

By the way, Kevin, didn't you follow the links Jon provided? As regards the use of the term "moonbat":

" I have always thought the way you refer to people who disagree with you as moonnuts or wingbats, or whatever that word is, to be quite endearing. And "unhinged" always makes me think of a nice, old door that could use a touch of carpentry. I know these are just pet names you have for people with whom you have a friendly disagreement. " Jon Swift

http://jonswift.blogspot.com/2006/04/dear-michelle-malkin.html


You should have thanked Jon, Kevin.

Anonymous said...

Jon Swift said...

<<< Thank you Anonymous for your spelling correction>>>
[You are welcome, but I didn't actually make a correction, Jon.]

<<< and for pointing out that Malkin does not get all the credit for Denton's suicide. Certainly, she was helped, as the article (which does mention Malkin) states>>>

[Indeed it does, but it attributes no responsibility to her for Denton's suicide]

<<< , by the unruly students and by such Malkin proteges as this patriotic blogger. As I hope I made clear in my piece, Malkin does not work in a vaccum.>>>

[Would you like me to offer a correction here, Jon?]

<<< As far as giving out my personal information, as I stated in my piece on Malkin I've had a few misunderstandings with creditors that precludes me from doing so.10/11/2007 3:57 PM >>>



Jon:

I see. In referring to your link, we note that you wish Malkin's phone number so that you may post it in order that your readers may contact her directly.

" I could not find your telephone number anywhere on your site. ...I would appreciate if you could send me your number so that the next time I want to chat, I can just call you up.

I would also like to post your telephone number on my site because I know my readers would also be eager to speak with you (don't worry, I will advise some of my more rambunctious visitors that I "don't condone death threats"). "

Yet, Jon, you imply that you fear to privately e-mail her your own number because creditors may somehow obtain it from her and then contact you?

" I would send you my telephone number, but I'm afraid that there are some debt collectors with whom I've had a slight misunderstanding, and, well, I'm sure you understand."


Well, that's not very reasonable of you Jon. How would Malkin know who your creditors are?

Nor, Jon, is it reasonable of you to imply that Denton was helped to her death by the "patriotic blogger" whose article you linked.

The article was written after Denton's leap, not before. After, Jon.

Thus it is impossible that that article could have contributed to her death. Only a liberal moonbat, and you a reasonable conservative are certainly not one, could imagine otherwise.

Perhaps you are not asserting a causal link between that particular blog posting and Denton's death, but rather suggesting something else?

As for Malkin? Jon, as previously noted, there is in the Chronicle article a mention made of Malkin's name, and her opinion piece, and her reference therein to the "capitulationist chancellor". But there is no suggestion of contributory responsibility for Denton's suicide.

Such an imputation is, well ... forgive the use of the term: moonbatty.

The Chronicle:
" Michelle Malkin, a conservative blogger and pundit, expressed outrage at Santa Cruz's handling of the protest, writing on her blog a post titled "UC Santa Cruz Hates Our Troops." She encouraged readers to contact the "capitulationist chancellor" and posted Ms. Denton's office address and her assistant's phone number.

Two days after the protest, Ms. Denton apologized to the recruiters on behalf of the campus and condemned the actions of some of the demonstrators." Chronicle link.

It seems then, Jon, that the sum total of Malkin's influence was to get the Chancellor to apologize to military recruiters.

And note too, Jon, that the phone number Malkin gave out was to Denton's office assistant.

Perhaps if you had likewise asked Malkin for the address of her business office, and the phone number of an administrative assistant, she might have been more forthcoming.

In any event, she couldn't do worse than you have.


And finally, in the very article to which you linked, and prominent there among the numerous travails of the Chancellor - of which Malkin's contribution is no doubt the least and yet most clearly resolved - is this reasonable explanation for Denton's action:

"The pressure of the job apparently contributed to depression that overwhelmed Ms. Denton, who police said fell to her death on June 24 from the roof of a 400-foot-tall San Francisco apartment building. Ms. Kalonji lived in the building, and Ms. Denton's mother, Carolyn Mabee, was in the complex at the time of the chancellor's death. Ms. Mabee told the San Francisco Chronicle that her daughter had been "very depressed" about her professional and personal life.

Ms. Denton had been on medical leave since June 15 and missed the university's commencement exercises but was expected to return to work last week.

While in her 20s, Ms. Denton had her cancerous thyroid removed, according to news reports, and since arriving at Santa Cruz, she had been treated for an "acute thyroid condition" and other medical problems, including the removal of a benign ovarian cyst, said Ms. Irwin, in comments authorized by Ms. Mabee. (Medical research has linked thyroid problems to depression.)"



Now, Jon, I hate to say this because I know how you labor so to advance the cause of reasonable conservativism: But the fact is Jon, whatever your credentials are as a conservative, you seem to have presently lost your ability to reason.

Here's hoping you will take this constructive criticism in the spirit in which it is offered, and that you will soon regain full use of your reason.

I am,

Yours truly,

Anonymous, a fellow reasonable conservative

Jon Swift said...

Mr. Anonymous, thank you once again for your corrections. And of course, I meant to write vaacum not vaccum. However, I think your attempt to take credit away from the fine work that Ms. Malkin does is quite ungenerous.

Mr. Batard, I am actually on a bit of a vacation in a Third World country exploiting the natives at the moment. I took valuable time away from native exploitation to write that post and while I am certainly appalled by Al Gore's winning the Nobel Peace Prize, I am a bit busy at the moment waging peace in my own way by tossing a dollar here and a dollar there to those who were not resourceful enough to be born in the United States. I think my own peace efforts are a bit more important than denigrating Al Gore's but perhaps I will post something later when I am weary of making the natives dance for me.

Anonymous said...

Jon Swift said...
Mr. Anonymous, thank you once again for your corrections. >>>

You are entirely welcome, Jon.

Whatever we can conveniently do to assist a reasonable conservative back on to the true path, we will gladly do.

Now, about that awkwardness of yours with mood and aspect ...


<<< And of course, I meant to write vaacum not vaccum.>>>

Perhaps the solution to this ongoing problem is to be found not in a vacuum, but in a vade mecum?

Of course if you don't know that you don't know ...

<<< However, I think your attempt to take credit away from the fine work that Ms. Malkin does is quite ungenerous. >>>

Giving or withholding credit from Malkin is one of our lesser concerns, Jon.

Your speedy return to your senses and the recuperation of your power of reason, is what is dearest to our hearts.

kathleenmaher said...

Usually I can follow the tennis game without an umpire. But what kind of mixed doubles are you playing here?
A reasonable suicide, I used to think, was a sick joke. Does "fair game" refer to sports like tennis or game like antlered deer?

Kevin said...

to Anonymous (reasonable conservative) 10/12/07 7:20 am
I stand by my statement that your post:
"Seems that if anyone other than the moonbat dean herself was responsible for her taking a 400 foot flyer off a building, it was the progressive/left students who were constantly protesting her apparent financial extravagances."
is the best illustration I have seen of compassionate conservatism, whether you intended it as such or not.
Thank you for clarifying that you yourself are not compassionate.
I seem to have formed the wrong impression of you based on your sensitive and caring portrayal of the suicide of a fellow human being.
Kevin

Powder_Monkey said...

As ever Jon, I am in awe of the noble compassion and understanding you display towards the wayward Malkin and her well-meaning ilk.

In fact, I wonder if you know that you are so reasonable that you are now a liberal?

Welcome!

Anonymous said...

I think we could avoid the Godless socialization of medicine in America by putting these sick and uninsured kids either in prison, in the Army, or by electing them to Congress.

liquiddaddy said...

Mr. Swift,

Unbridled executive power? All Jews converting to Christianity? Merciless punishment of dissent? Torture? Pre-emptive strikes against foreign sovereigns? Rush Limbaugh Nobel nominee? An irrelevant Clean Air Act? It's on and on.

This is golden age of conservatism. It's all good.

Don't worry; be happy.

LD

Norman P said...

I am a bit perplexed about this whole discussion because it seems to leave out a most important consideration.

While some of the people who are attacking the Swifts are wealthy (like Michelle Malkin) most of them seem to be people making about as much or just a little more than the Swifts. The theme seems to be that although they are not making very much money, they are able, presumably through good money management and strong wills, to buy their own commercial insurance. I find a rather disturbing tone of self congratulation in all of this.

Because in fact this is the United States, where if one really works hard, manages their money well and show willpower, they should easily make six figures. With a good six figure income, one doesn't need to worry about how to pay for health insurance. In fact, one does not even need to worry about Mexicans. While the American Right seems to honor these lazy slackers as the salt of the earth, I think that people who are just north of the border of poverty and who then brag about how tough and resourceful they are are really just engaged in a bunch of weak limp-wristed self congratulation. I suppose they play a role on the modern Right as some sort of political cannon fodder, but how is it that so many of these lazy people seem to have time to write blogs?

I think that the American Right would be far better off jettisoning these nationalistic proles. Reading their blogs only encourages them to sit on their fat asses in front of the computer engaging in non-productive labor. A bit of discipline (and perhaps more than a bit) is wanted here.

To paraphrase a sign I once saw hanging in a large diner out West, "If you have time to be mean, you have time to clean."

Anonymous said...

Kevin said...

<<< to Anonymous (reasonable conservative)

I stand by my statement that your post:
"Seems that if anyone other than the moonbat dean herself was responsible for her taking a 400 foot flyer off a building, it was the progressive/left students who were constantly protesting her apparent financial extravagances."
is the best illustration I have seen of compassionate conservatism, whether you intended it as such or not. >>>

So, you determinedly insist on illustrating the nature of announcedly compassionate conservativism (I cite Jon's claim to be compassionate), by quoting a passage from a reasonable conservative who is announcedly not a compassionate conservative.

The clear inference to be drawn Kevin, is that you are blithely unconcerned with being, or even appearing, reasonable yourself.

Does your insistent irrationality trouble you at all?



<<< Thank you for clarifying that you yourself are not compassionate.>>>

You are welcome, Kevin. Thank you for confirming that you are unreasoning.


<<< I seem to have formed the wrong impression of you based on your sensitive and caring portrayal >>>


My portrayal of the cause of Denton's death has been that she was reportedly clinically depressed and unable to deal with the many justified criticisms leveled at her; mostly by the left.

It seems that my use of the term moonbat is what you are really objecting to.

Jon approves of the use of the term. Why don't you?


<<< of the suicide of a fellow human being.
Kevin 10/12/2007 10:28 AM >>>

"fellow" ... is that a figurative use of the term? Something more?

Affiliation without affinity then?

See Kevin, part of what is entailed in being an practicing reasonable conservative, is found in granting, within reason and provisionally, the conditional validity some of the fundamental moral propositions of the left; at least insofar, if no further, than to apply these axioms of moral interpretation to the product of their own lives.

Can't we in the spirit of reasonableness at least acknowledge that we have arrived at a social place wherein we can all agree that the modern left rejects any kind of "essentialism", and that general class concepts such as "man" or "fellow", as applied to butchers and bakers and candlestick makers and even chancellors, are at best socially conditioned taxonomic conventions with no a priori reality ?

If so, then why your wounded duck pose?

Get with the program, Kevin: " De gustibus non est disputandum "

purvis ames said...

What is with all this brouhaha about someone jumping out of a building. The real issue here is the whiny brat trying get everybody to go boo-hoo-hoo and support Godless, socialized medicine. Next thing you know the kid will want to stand in line for free treatment at Walter Reed, right behind the entire Senate and House, the Supreme Court justices, and, of course, George W. Bush.

B said...

The behavior of your kind in this arena, Jon, reminds of nothing so much as Scientology, whose adherents label their critics "fair game". They go after dissenters with exactly the same tactics that Malkin and her ilk have used against the Frosts.

Chuck Butcher said...

As a great admirer of the Swiftian style of commentary I had to go through this article three times searching for what it was I found lacking. I could not quite find a concrete example to bring to your attention, so I tried some speculative reasoning.

This led me to wonder if you had been afflicted with a bit of what bit me, when I commented on your 'Torture Race' piece. I am probably exceeding my literary credentials with this minor critique.

Marius Key said...

Dear Mr. Swift,

I am a big fan of your work, but I have to agree with a previous commenter that this post was not in your usual eminently reasonable style. I don't know how you could characterize Malkin's actions as "harassing" or "attacking" when she herself explained that she was only reporting the facts. She even corrected the misstatements of other conservative bloggers, which means that overall, her statements were less false than others'. And even if they weren't completely true either, at least being less false should count as something positive.

Also, you reported that Malkin refused to debate Ezra Klein, but you didn't report the reason for her refusal, which is that she was afraid that she would be so distracted by the debate that Klein and his fellow liberals would pass universal health care while she wasn't looking. I think we can all agree that that's a very good reason not to debate someone.

I understand that you are very passionate about winning the war on terrorists and liberals, but please don't let your passion distract you from pointing out the quality of your fellow conservatives' arguments.

Kevin Hayden said...

I've always been a bit leery about Michelle's bona fides. She has an unusually small shoe collection for someone of Filipino-Authoritarian extraction.

And for people professing to be conservative megaphones and meatpuppets, both she and her husband possess suspiciously diminutive tits.

PoliShifter said...

Coulter, Malkin, and Limbaugh, the Head, Heart, and Soul of the Conservative movement. LMFAO

Coulter - Scarecrow
Malkin - Tin man
Limbaugh - Cowardly Lion

James Killus said...

Mr. Swift,

I have not read all the posts on this essay, as they are getting uncomfortably close to book length and I have learned (from a very wise man) that it is never a good idea to read a book that one wishes to review. Still, I notice that one commenter seems to have confused the Frosts with the Swifts, and I wonder if perhaps the (very slightly) unreasonable tone of this particular post is because it is so easy to confuse the names. We have already learned from the No-Fly lists that it is far better to be safe than sorry and to deny air travel to those whose names are even slightly similar to those of known terrorists, so I am bound to wonder if the potential for name confusion is (again, ever so slightly) undermining your usual calm and reasoned tone.

I understand that Jon Swift is probably a pseudonym, although I cannot remember if you have ever said this directly, and if it is your real name, I apologize. However, it is my understanding that people who use pseudonyms often use names that are similar to their real name, so if your real name is Frost, please feel free to delete this message, although doing so would alert everyone to what your real name is, so on second thought forget I said anything.

DiscordianStooge said...

I think the most interesting part of this post was the poll. You should make sure that Michael Medved and Glenn Beck don't find out that they're not considered influential.

They may harm themselves.

The Sailor said...

Hmmph! As a true conservative I denounce Mr Swift, is that is really your name, and call on him to uphold the true message of us conservatives!

You must have a wide stance on the tissues while having a narrow view, as thru a stall gleamed darkly.

You must uphold, and have a firm grasp, on the staff of upreichetenus.

You must wear not one, not two, but THREE garmants of the Wetsuits of Lesions before you can abscond the the Rapture!

NO ONE EVER SAID ATTAINING GODHEAD WAS EASY!

Anonymous said...

The Sailor said...

" Hmmph! As a true conservative I denounce Mr Swift, is that is really your name, and call on him to uphold the true message of us conservatives!

You must have a wide stance on the tissues while having a narrow view, as thru a stall gleamed darkly.

You must uphold, and have a firm grasp, on the staff of upreichetenus.

You must wear not one, not two, but THREE garmants of the Wetsuits of Lesions before you can abscond the the Rapture!

NO ONE EVER SAID ATTAINING GODHEAD WAS EASY!"



Nor, is the writing of satire, to judge from the sorry quality of your posting.

new day said...

Yes, Mr. Sailor, take a tip from anonymous. Repeatedly cut and paste the entire lengthy comments of others; and mix them in with mindless drivel. That way, everyone knows to just skip over your comments, and you will escape derision.

The Sailor said...

Dear New Day,

It could have been worse. He could have corrected my typos and grammar.

I stand behind my comments and urges all conservatives should stick together on the tissues.

p.s. Dear Anonymous, if that truly is your name, if I could right like Jon I'd have my own blog.

Anonymous said...

The Sailor said...
Dear New Day,

It could have been worse. >>>

Your post? No, it couldn't have.


<<< p.s. Dear Anonymous, if that truly is your name,>>>

Dear the sailor, if that is really your name:

This is the second time you have deployed that bit of "cleverness". The first time was when you directed it at Swift.


<<< if I could right like Jon I'd have my own blog.>>>


You already write like Jon.

Edwin said...

I say f$%k the kids. They should be tossed in the gutter at birth. Let them fend for themsleves. It’s America: NO FREE RIDES!!! Any questions?

TheInfallibleDemocrat said...

The Republicans have demostrated yet again that they cannot be trusted with the minority role in government.

Evelyn said...

I actually followed the link to see what SCHIP was. I've been watching local and financial news and missed this whole thing. I just wanted to say that I has been moaning and groaning for years about how we have wussified (new word?) our youth. We've taken fairy tales and ruined them. Hansel and Gretel didn't get lost... they were left on purpose, and Grandma made a fine meal for the wolf! Listen to your parents, dammit! Learn! Be afraid! Fear is a wonderful teacher. So, you're right, we don't need to coddle them anymore than we already have. While I don't like Bush (never have), I agree with him on this. We need strength of body, mind and character, not pansies.

PaminBB said...

I believe that an opportunity for true conservatism has been missed here. Obviously, we should abolish health care entirely, negating the requirement for insurance. Substitute prayer, a very compassionate response.

Certainly all true conservatives would bow to God's will and die quietly in the face of dread disease or disabling injury.

Micgar said...

As a proud Christian Conservative, I am so proud of how Malkin, Rush et al are going after this little twit! You see, he's a lying little punk for the left, trying to make us go wah! wah! when we hear his oh so sad story! I hope he gets spanked for this-(literally and figuratively!)Now, if you'll excuse me, I have our nightly Save the Children Christian meeting to go to.

Sen. Peter Higham Paul said...

Oddly enough, the one conservative blogger who has denounced Malkin most vociferously is perhaps her greatest disciple, Chuck Adkins.

How would you then place Vox Day on the spectrum, Jon? He coined the terms "Lizard Queen" and "Me So Michelle".

Miss Cellania said...

Of course, if your parents made some lousy financial decisiioins years ago, you deserve to go without health care.

But why haven't you posted in 11 days? Have you been ill?

mw said...

"But why haven't you posted in 11 days? Have you been ill?" - miss c

I am sorry to say that I can answer your question Miss Cellania. Mister Swift has, as we like to say in the business, "gone to ground." He states his reason right in this thread:

"I've had a few misunderstandings with creditors that precludes me from doing so." J. Swift

You see, I am the creditor that Mr. Swift references. The source of his indebtitude was a financial settlement we agreed after my family and I were damaged by a "April Fools Joke" perpetrated by Mr. Swift on this very blog. While the offending post has been pulled, the follow-up financial arrangement was documented in my comments to the retraction post here.

After months of excuses and failing to collect, I have been carefully cultivating my relationship with him, in the hope of unmasking the mysterious Mr. Swift and collecting on the agreed settlement. The plan was working to perfection, and I was even selected for 2 of the 3 Swift Reactions posts - only missing the 3rd because of his unreasonable requirement that one actually comment during the week of selection.

But I digress.

The problem is that Anonymous has flushed my quarry with his ham fisted commentary in this thread.

"Yet, Jon, you imply that you fear to privately e-mail her your own number because creditors may somehow obtain it from her and then contact you... Well, that's not very reasonable of you Jon. How would Malkin know who your creditors are?" - anon

She would know, because I told her Mr. A. I fear we may never see Mr. Swift again and I may never collect my settlement now. Thank you very much Anon. Months of work have gone for naught. Some people just don't get it.

Kevin Hayden said...

OT: You are too quiet, Messr. Swift. Feasting on the young rapscallions, still?

kamakula said...

Like any reasonable conservative, Jon is aflush with the young nubile flesh of pubescent boys whose enjoyment he has so long been denied by the liberal bias of our laws in the USA.

At this very moment (well, not really since this occurred a while ago but likely this still happened), Jon is currently sucking on the succulent toes of one strapping young lad (A respected friend of mine, Mark Foley, tells me that these are among the top 10 earthly delights permitted by our holy Father).

Jon is living the dream and as Ann Althouse would probably say, pounding those boy's onion rings with his baby carrot!

Anonymous said...

Trick out home videos with a fun, featureful card arrangement that admirers can cross from a approved MISSION IMPOSSIBLE
player, MISSION IMPOSSIBLE DVD
assembly has been an big-ticket affair, such as MISSION IMPOSSIBLE DVD COLLECTION
.

Anonymous said...

http://tuan.pcpop.com/7732550
http://phlog.net/onlyuggc
http://onlyuggc.busythumbs.com/
http://onlyuggc.insanejournal.com/
http://onlyuggc.webs.com/apps/blog/
http://onlyuggc.21classes.com
http://onlyuggc.blogge.no/
http://glowindia.com/onlyuggc
http://onlyuggc.blog.bokee.net/
http://profile.typepad.com/onlyuggc

Anonymous said...

The wives and lovers of men with ED breathed a aggregate blow of abatement if Generic Viagra became available. But there had been alone one problem: a lot of them were not in fact missing sex all that abundant anyhow. They'd been apperception on getting admiring to their affronted hubbies but now the men were able already again, the ladies capital to alpha authoritative excuses.

Google