The Pink Flamingo has been harping on the fact that, in order to be a true losertarian, one must surrender one’s morality. Their patron “saint” Ayn Rand was an atheist who did not believe in anything but her own personal pleasure and agenda. She had no milk of human kindness. There was nothing good, pure, or honorable in her libertarian agenda that is being shoved down the throat of the GOP by Tea Party “Patriots” who are getting their version of religion from Glenn Beck.
Have Beck and the talking heads so corrupted the process that they are going to destroy the GOP’s chances in November? Just look what the freaks did to Bob Inglis in SC’s 4th Congressional District.
“…It was the middle of a tough primary contest, and Rep. Bob Inglis (R-S.C.) had convened a small meeting with donors who had contributed thousands of dollars to his previous campaigns. But this year, as Inglis faced a challenge from tea party-backed Republican candidates claiming Inglis wasn’t sufficiently conservative, these donors hadn’t ponied up. Inglis’ task: Get them back on the team. “They were upset with me,” Inglis recalls. “They are all Glenn Beck watchers.” About 90 minutes into the meeting, as he remembers it, “They say, ‘Bob, what don’t you get? Barack Obama is a socialist, communist Marxist who wants to destroy the American economy so he can take over as dictator. Health care is part of that. And he wants to open up the Mexican border and turn [the US] into a Muslim nation.’” Inglis didn’t know how to respond….”
Pablo writes in the Right O Sphere:
“…The irony of the destruction of Inglis is that he literally had a 93 percent lifetime approval rating from the American Conservative Union. He is a conservative through and through. He strayed from the path on one or two issues, refused to participate in extreme rhetoric and was thus destroyed by right-wing puritans in the conservative movement. These puritans get their views by listening to a bunch of extremist hacks on radio and TV.
In short, as long as the Republican party is controlled by talk radio etc., it will never return as a long-term viable option for voters looking for solutions to modern day problems. Conservatives like Inglis could be an integral part of the current political discussion. If we conservatives want to make a difference, we have to stand up against the extreme rhetoric of talk radio….”
David Klinghoffer hit it out of the park.
“…Once, the iconic figures on the political right were urbane visionaries and builders of institutions — like William F. Buckley Jr., Irving Kristol and Father Richard John Neuhaus, all dead now. Today, far more representative is potty-mouthed Internet entrepreneur Andrew Breitbart, whose news and opinion website, Breitbart.com, is read by millions. In his most recent triumph, Breitbart got a U.S. Department of Agriculture official pushed out of her job after he released a deceptively edited video clip of her supposedly endorsing racism against white people.
What has become of conservatism? We have reached a point at which nothing could be more important than to stop and recall what brought us here, to the right, in the first place.
Buckley’s National Review, where I was the literary editor through the 1990s, remains as vital and interesting as ever. But more characteristic of conservative leadership are figures on TV, radio and the Internet who make their money by stirring fears and resentments. With its descent to baiting blacks, Mexicans and Muslims, its accommodation of conspiracy theories and an increasing nastiness and vulgarity, the conservative movement has undergone a shift toward demagoguery and hucksterism. Once the talk was of “neocons” versus “paleocons.” Now we observe the rule of the crazy-cons….”
In order to accept Ayn Rand and her version of selfish libertarianism one must completely reject William F. Buckley. The version of Conservative envisioned by Buckley and Ronald Reagan must be completely destroyed in order to embrace Rand.
“…“It must also be said, however, that the militantly atheistic Rand had an unrealistic view of human nature and little appreciation for cultural values. Most people, however mesmerized by her they may be in their youth, outgrow Rand’s philosophy, which Burke might have described as a theoretical construct rather than an application of the accumulated wisdom of mankind.”…” Morton Blackwell
Noah Kristula-Green has an excellent commentary about Ayn Rand that details why The Pink Flamingo thinks she was a vile and horrible person. There is no honor decency or morality in her work, or in the late writer.
“…Rand’s popularity tells us two things about the state of modern conservatism.
First, it suggests that Rand’s atheism and permissive social views are no longer deal-breakers among conservative thought leaders. Jennifer Burns, the author of Goddess of the Market: Ayn Rand and the American Right, has explored Rand’s influence through the years. She told FrumForum that while religion had been a crucial issue for William F. Buckley and the conservatives of the 1970s, “someone like Glenn Beck isn’t going to argue about the existence of God or the need for religion. Beck and Limbaugh can use the parts of Rand they want to use and not engage the rest.”
Second and more troubling, the conservative rediscovery of Rand signals an increasing conservative divergence from mainstream America. Conservatives falsely assume that because more copies of Rand’s books are being sold, that everyone who reads them agrees with her. Conservatives are buying into Rand’s extreme views without understanding why many people—and not only liberals—revile her.
While Whittaker Chambers’ famous 1957 condemnation of Rand may sound over-torqued half a century later: “From almost any page of Atlas Shrugged, a voice can be heard, from painful necessity, commanding: “To a gas chamber — go!” It remains true that Ayn Rand seems to revel in the death and destruction that follows by disregarding her philosophy: most famously in the ghoulish scene in Atlas Shrugged where Rand details the suffocation of the passengers on a train as it enters a tunnel….Perhaps the worst oversight in all this is not ask whether a work of fiction with intentionally unrealistic characters is a helpful guide to making public policy.
Ayn Rand’s closest followers, the Objectivists, have noticed the new openness to their guru. The Ayn Rand Center’s page for Tea Party Activists makes no reference to her atheism, or the Objectivist position in favor of open immigration. Esoteric topics such as Rand’s belief that Immanuel Kant was “the most evil man in mankind’s history” get short shrift. The recently opened Ayn Rand Center in Washington DC now trains Objectivists to appear in the media. The Center’s President, Yaron Brook, has become a common guest on Glenn Beck’s program. The Center has also worked with the FreedomWorks and the Competitive Enterprise Institute on Tea Party themed panels and seminars….”
The Pink Flamingo has been telling you that it’s a-comin’. Libertarians ARE NOT conservative, contrary to the bull that is being promoted by the tea party types. Anyone who thinks they are conservative, check with Ron Paul. His base is NOT conservative – far from it.
“…”If Republicans do well in this election — and they will do well — the tea party people are going to be right out front claiming credit for everything good that happened,” Teixeira says. “That means they’re going to define Republicans even more than they’re defining them today, and that will make it very hard for Republicans to do what they have to do as they move into the 2012 cycle, which is move to the center. How do the Republicans do that when they’ve unleashed all these furies? It’s very difficult.”…”
There are those who see it as a battle between the left and the right, but it’s not that at all. It is Ron Paul Bot, losertarian take-over of the GOP by people who claim to be conservative, but are not.
The National Journal’s charts are excellent and truly show the damage being done to the GOP by losertarians.
Then there are those who think the whole thing is a problem for the Dems.
“…Shifts among Independents are especially notable. A Pew survey in June 2005 found that Independents considered the Republican Party to be twice as distant from them ideologically as the Democratic Party. Today, Independents see the Democratic Party as three times farther away than the Republican Party. In 2005, 51 percent of Independents thought that the Republican Party was more conservative than they themselves were, versus only 36 percent who thought that the Democratic Party was more liberal. Today, 56 percent of Independents see the Democratic Party as more liberal than they themselves are, compared to only 39 percent who see the Republican Party as more conservative. …”
David Frum wrote the following:
“...The headline news in the poll is the horserace standings: Romney leads the way with 31% to 14% for Newt Gingrich, 13% for Paul, 12% for Huckabee, 9% for Palin, 3% for Tim Pawlenty, and 1% for Mitch Daniels.
For those interested in the shape of this important state party, however, the most fascinating news is found below the headline.
Among those who are broadly happy with the current direction of the GOP, Romney leads Gingrich 42-12.
Among those who think the party is currently “too liberal,” Gingrich draws even with Romney, 22-22.
But among those who think the party is “too conservative,” Ron Paul leads Romney 24-22.
Among those who identify with the “tea party,” Paul ranks 5th, at 9%. Among those who say they would be favorably impressed by a candidate endorsed by Sarah Palin, Paul runs weakest. He runs strongest among those least likely to be favorably impressed by a Palin endorsement….”
When one looks at this information – Lindsey is very right about the whole tea party movement. It is unsustainable.
“…When most people think of Moderates, they picture Centrists sympathetic to the notion of government as a positive force in society but wary of overreach, which can come in many forms – massive and persistent deficit spending, open-ended wars, and oppressive intrustion into people’s private lives, to name a few examples.
However, as David Boaz and others at the Cato Institute have examined, another type of “Moderate” often goes unnoticed by the media: libertarians and libertarian-leaners. These individuals usually identify themselves as fiscally conservative and socially liberal and, consequently, refer to themselves as Moderate when describing their overall political orientation.
It would make sense, then, that the “Centrist” type of Moderate (or, more likely, your so-called “Establishment” Republican) mostly led to Gingrich’s increase, while the more libertarian type largely accounted for the shift toward Rep. Paul in the PPP poll. New Hampshire, with its “Live Free or Die” state motto, absence of a sales or personal income tax, and Free State Project, has a rather libertarian-leaning electorate, especially on the Republican or Republican-leaning side. Perhaps the “Moderates” who aligned with Romney and Palin in past PPP polls but switched this time around did so because they previously based their decision on name recognition or, in Romney’s case, proximity to the state. Perhaps Romney and Palin did something to discourage these individuals since April 18th, when PPP conducted the last Granite State survey….”
From the Next Right:
“…I’ve been blogging as often as possible about this ideological spat because a) as a political scientist, it’s a generally interesting phenomenon to observe, particularly when set against the backdrop of the rise of the Tea Party movement, and b) the extent to which this (hopefully temporary) rift gets smoothed over will have, I believe, a significant effect on the 2012 presidential election, if not this year’s midterm elections. Of course, I don’t have a wealth of empirical data on hand at this point to evidence my thesis – so we’ll just have to call it a hunch….”
Mark Ambinder wrote:
“…Economic libertarianism is the message du jour, and Pawlenty’s budget-cutting in Minnesota may get some attention. But really, neither he nor the other sober wing candidates have figured out exactly what the non-Palin wing of the party wants. There’s no way to court social conservatives with Palin or Mike Huckabee in the race. So who’s left to help you win primaries and caucuses?
To the Republican Party, they are — they could be — what the anti-war left was to Democrats in 2003: the out-of-the-establishment power center that can drive the narrative of the race. How do you get the attention of libertarians without losing conservatives? You could shift positions on the war in Afghanistan, or try to fashion a more realist foreign policy. That seems to be a non-starter; the consultants for these candidates are fairly covnentional and risk-averse. Endorse medical marijuana? Legalize gambling? Something else? …”
Is it the far right, losertarians, ron paul bots, the tea party crew, or is talk radio making the real problem?