Hippie rants against Bush

[bascule]

Whenever I think of the archetype of patchouli wearing, pot smoking, Capitalism-hating, anarchosyndicalist liberal hippies, George Will is definitely the first person that comes to mind. Oh yeah:

 

George Will in his anal retentive

conservative douche disguise.

Ingenious! It fooled me!

 

So it was no surprise to see a column where he was ranting against the Bush Administration's attempt at a power grab and the marginization of checks and balances:

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/15/AR2006021502003_pf.html

[Pangloss]

Not quite sure I was able to finesse your opinion out of the double negatives above, but I guess what you're saying is that you agree with him? (hehe)

 

I follow George Will (obviously) and find him to be one of the most interesting moderate conservative columnists presently working. Every now and then he'll be just a little bit too much of an apologist or marginalizer, but most of the time he offers very interesting perspective and insight.

 

That's why he writes for the Washington Post, after all. He's their "token conservative columnist" (an unfair label to both the paper and Will, but so it goes). More or less the Post's answer to the role William F. Buckley played at the NY Times.

[pcs]

Will has a very interesting view of the necessary and proper clause for a conservative.

 

That's why he writes for the Washington Post, after all. He's their "token conservative columnist" (an unfair label to both the paper and Will, but so it goes). More or less the Post's answer to the role William F. Buckley played at the NY Times.

 

You're thinking of Will Safire.

[gcol]

Pangloss and bascule have such diametrically opposed views on the politics and possibly probity of the guy, based presumably upon the same source information, how can I take any of their opinions and conclusions with anything but a very large pinch of salt? They both show their in-built prejudices.

[Saryctos]

screw hippies, although I did not read the actual artical at all =P

[pcs]

screw hippies, although I did not read the actual artical at all =P

 

Hippies suck.

[bascule]

Pangloss and bascule have such diametrically opposed views on the politics and possibly probity of the guy

 

Let me marinade my first post in a little more sarcasm... apparently it isn't dripping wet

[gcol]

PCS: Hippies suck.

PCS has sucked.

Therefore PCS was a hippy.

 

When was his Damascene conversion?

[Sisyphus]

Not all conservatives or Republicans feel the current leadership's massive spending, contempt for internal debate, brushing aside of civil liberties complaints, cowboy foreign policy, and various unholy alliances are particularly true to their party. There are still some who think of it as the party of Eisenhower, and of coolheadedness, restraint, liberty, classical virtue, etc.

[Severian]

I must admit I have no idea what you are trying to say in the original post. Are you complaining that only hippies should be allowed to criticise Bush?

[Sisyphus]

I believe he's making fun of those who call anyone who criticizes Bush a "patchouli wearing, pot smoking, Capitalism-hating, anarchosyndicalist liberal hippie."

[pcs]

I believe he's making fun of those who call anyone who criticizes Bush a "patchouli wearing, pot smoking, Capitalism-hating, anarchosyndicalist liberal hippie."

 

Imaginary friends, perhaps?

[JustStuit]

I thought he was making fun of Will. Not sure though.

[bascule]

I thought he was making fun of Will. Not sure though.

 

A little bit, but in this case, I certainly agree with what he has to say

[Pangloss]

You're thinking of Will Safire.

 

Thanks. Not the first time I've made THAT mistake.

[Pangloss]

It's unfortunate how much the perception of diametric opposition pervades, even in a forum where I've been personally accused of being over the top with the very same problem.

[Pangloss]

Pangloss and bascule have such diametrically opposed views on the politics and possibly probity of the guy, based presumably upon the same source information, how can I take any of their opinions and conclusions with anything but a very large pinch of salt? They both show their in-built prejudices.

 

If I have a predisposition regarding the opinions of George Will, it's from reading literally hundreds of his columns over the years. How many have you read?

 

As for an "in-built prejudice", you need to read more of my posts, not to mention Bascule's. He and I probably agree more than disagree, but more to the point I don't think it's very polite to cast aspersions on other people's mere expressions of opinion.

 

Of course you're going to take everyone's opinions here with a "large grain of salt". Why wouldn't you? Nobody brought you here to program you to think a certain way.