Comments on: Update II: What Conservative Chicks ‘Care’ About (Not Individualism)

By: M. B. Moon

M. B. Moon — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 02:07:11 +0000

"This cultural pathology has afflicted nearly everyone, including conservatives, “objectivists”, “Austrian anarchists” and everyone on the Left." Mark Humphrey Well, you are being a little unkind to the anarchists to lump them with such losers. The only problem I have with anarchy is that it might be unstable and lead to tyranny. However, note that the Hebrews in the time of the Judges and 1st Samuel had no central government till they got stupid and demanded one. Anarchy is not really disorder. It is a dynamic form of order that rapidly adapts as needed. I suggest we all follow Ron Paul back to the Constitution and fight for our differing visions via Constitutional Amendments from there. 50 states allow for a lot of experimenting.

By: Robert Glisson

Robert Glisson — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 17:36:12 +0000

On your reference to Vox Day, one of his readers referenced a article written on Bad Eagle.com “http://www.badeagle.com/2009/11/19/the-palin-plethora/”
David mentions that the reason for the “Conservative Chicks” is the lack of male leadership. Something I have no disagreement with.

By: Mark Humphrey

Mark Humphrey — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 16:36:06 +0000

I am continually impressed by the characteristic refusal by conservatives to see what they do not like. Point out disturbing facts about war history, and they’ll hurl insults and irrelevant accusations. Attempt to frame a discussion of “just war” in terms of individual rights, and they’ll charge anti-Americanism. Conservatives exhibit what I can only interpret as stupidity.

Western culture is in the advanced stages of disintegration. This cultural pathology has afflicted nearly everyone, including conservatives,
“objectivists”, “Austrian anarchists” and everyone on the Left. [Astute observation about the all-encompassing nature of the disintegration.]

People are losing the ability to think. I notice this frightening intellectual disintegration in every field of inquiry about which I am even a little conversant.

By: John Danforth

John Danforth — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 12:16:12 +0000

And I’d like to add an “Amen” to what George Pal said, above.

When the method for deciding truth can be chosen from a smorgasbord, who will decide which is correct? The group with the biggest guns usually gets to pick the true truth.

By: Haym

Haym — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 11:08:07 +0000

I don't know why everyone is getting down on the Conservative Chicks, or the Fox Babes. So what if they are not geniuses - many are pretty smart. And even if they can't discuss conservative/libertarian ideas from first principles, they mostly have the right instincts: less government, free market, individual dominance. [This amounts to giving a pass to Bush statist babes, b/c you prefer their form of state worship. My archives are replete with examples of the lethality of neocon groupies.]

By: Barbara Grant

Barbara Grant — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 01:03:04 +0000

I have to add a huge “Amen,” to Myron’s comment, above. I also believe that the Founders knew what they were doing. Additionally, I see nothing in the Bible that leads me to believe that Jesus was interested in forcing a state-sponsored moral code on anybody.

By: Myron Pauli

Myron Pauli — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 20:11:06 +0000

Re M.B.’s comments. The Founders knew what they were doing in the First Amendment. They would most likely be appalled at both the Right and Left in their insistence of dragging the government into Kultur-wars whether it is “coerced tolerance” or “coerced morality”.

By: M. B. Moon

M. B. Moon — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 15:17:47 +0000

However, the “conservatives” seem extremely discomforted by homosexuality in others as if they believe in some sort of
“Gay Van-der-Walls Force” Myron Pauli

I am personally conservative but radically libertarian. I have no political problems with sodomites EXCEPT when they attempt to use the government schools, for instance, to recruit among children. But that would apply to any group.

In a truly free country, the normal checks and balances of society would tend to make all of us lead sober, respectable lives. Private discrimination is an altogether good thing.

By: Roy Bleckert

Roy Bleckert — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 08:55:11 +0000

Call me crazy but i love it when SP says to Ms. Wawa when making her points ” By forcing health care reform down there throats”, ‘Backassward’ Gotta love that spunk ( i guess it takes one yahoo to understand another yahoo lol )BTW big fan of the two Michelle’s here also

http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=9114243

By: Barbara Grant

Barbara Grant — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 20:12:30 +0000

It’s unclear to me why Palin is shouting “sexism” about the Newsweek cover, given that she earlier provided the photograph to another magazine for its use. Yes, I could understand the charge if this was just a picture privately e-mailed to a friend who subsequently sold it to Newsweek for profit; but that is not the case here. Does Palin not realize that as a public individual, every photo she publicly offers is fair game? Further, might it be possible that one reason Palin has received wide publicity is because of her good looks and trim figure? I’d wonder whether former Arizona governor and current Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano would receive similar attention if she published a picture in running gear.

In the current media climate, looks count, and those who play that card shouldn’t be surprised when it is subsequently played by others, perhaps for a different purpose.