[moki]

A very interesting snippet of an Interview with Camille Paglia -- she's spunky, and tells it how she sees it. I like that. She also makes some excellent points in this snippet of the interview, as well as the interview as a whole.

from: http://www.salon.com/ent/feature/200...ia/index3.html

.....

What energized the [Republican] base?

The real turnaround may have been the Michael Moore movie, "Fahrenheit 9/11" -- which opened in the U.S. with a French imprimatur (the Palme d'Or at the Cannes Film Festival). People keep carrying on about how wonderful that alleged documentary is, how it will bring young people in droves to the polling booth. Well, we'll see. If that movie, with all its fictions and distortions, really does put Kerry over, then we Democrats will all owe Michael Moore a debt, and I'll revise my low opinion of him.

But for Moore to turn a sitting president of the United States into a joke, and to use his position abroad to foment anti-Americanism, has had a huge backlash: the massive, indulgent publicity about the Moore film was when the Republican passion for Bush really began -- the passion to defend him, fed by a longstanding scorn for the liberal major media and for Hollywood. That's when everything seemed to gel for Bush, who had alienated conservatives with his big spending and slack immigration policy.

On talk-show call-ins, I started to hear real love for Bush, a protective desire to defend him against the smug liberal hyenas. It was a pivotal moment in the campaign. And the righteous fury of the Bush crusaders started to sway the undecideds. For months on Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity or other conservative radio shows, I really didn't hear such great enthusiasm for Bush. But then all of a sudden, there was a turning point. I remember sitting in my car in April listening to Hannity -- who has become a major force in American politics and whose talents as a broadcaster just keep getting better and better (though I'm always wishing he had more respect for other cultures and a broader understanding of our place in the world). He was talking slowly and thoughtfully after hanging up with a like-minded caller, and I got really alarmed. I said to myself, wow, here it is. It was a whole, comprehensive geopolitical picture: the only way we can win the war against terror is to take the fight to the terrorists abroad, America must be a beacon to the world. America has a divine mission to bring liberty to the world. It was a view of destiny that had a staggering clarity and simplicity.

Now if the Democratic consultants had any brains, they would have viewed all this as an important system of ideas that needed to be logically addressed, instead of just sneering at it. This is a war of ideas! But too many Democrats rely on a juvenile Al Franken level of discourse -- sneer, sneer, sneer at the benighted ones. We are all so superior in our little elite enclaves. So even if Kerry wins the election, the Democrats have lost this war of ideas.

It's as if we have no eloquent speechwriters any longer. The Democratic Party has become a p.c. wallow over the past 20 years -- a sinkhole of unctuous, bleeding-heart liberalism and emotional manipulation, always using seniors or "disenfranchised" African-Americans as convenient straw men. We're supposed to be in a constant state of empathy, on high alert to a cosmos of injustice. And always there are the aggrieved -- and those nasty people in high places who are doing awful things to them! It's become a tedious soap opera removed from reality.

The Democratic operatives, chummily clustered in their Northeastern drinking holes, are missing the fact that most Republicans are not the top execs of Halliburton but hardworking small-business people who lead orderly lives and try to be good citizens. There's been a slow shift: What used to be the Democratic base -- plain, unpretentious people going about their business and just trying to do the right thing -- is shifting toward the Republican Party. Republicanism is becoming populist. Republicans believe that tax cuts to large and small businesses help growth, encourage spending and investment, and create jobs. The Democrats have no answer to that except hysterical rhetoric. Rush Limbaugh rightly calls it the tired old "Democratic playbook" -- more than 25 years old.

But we're living in a new era -- it's post-9/11. The world will never be the same again. The Democrats have got to get out of their preoccupation with grandstanding, divisive, self-interested domestic issues and come up with idealistic rhetoric that could inspire and draw people. Why aren't they saying: This isn't America -- to keep people under lock and key in Guanténamo Bay without legal representation. Nor are the staged humiliations of Abu Ghraib or the police sweeps of Muslim citizens and their detention without indictment, contrary to our Bill of Rights. America should not endorse unilateral warfare -- since that will simply empower every thug and brigand to wage war on his neighbors. America must embrace international law -- which embodies the highest ideals of humanity. The U.N. may be imperfect, but it's the best forum we have for international dialogue. The Democrats have lost the ability to appeal and to inspire.

[shmerek]

Hannity is an obnoxious prick. Bush doesn't need M. Moore to make him look like a joke he does well enough on his own.

staged humiliations of Abu Ghraib

? Somebody is talking out their ass.

grandstanding, divisive, self-interested domestic issues

Kettle. Pot.

America should not endorse unilateral warfare -- since that will simply empower every thug and brigand to wage war on his neighbors. America must embrace international law -- which embodies the highest ideals of humanity. The U.N. may be imperfect, but it's the best forum we have for international dialogue

I agree with this statement but Bush sure doesn't.

[ebuddy]

Well, we'll see. If that movie, with all its fictions and distortions, really does put Kerry over, then we Democrats will all owe Michael Moore a debt, and I'll revise my low opinion of him.

Anything to win an election right? I mean, the fictions and distortions are bad and all, but if your man gets elected then your opinion of Moore will somehow improve? This pretty much sums up the liberal mindset right here. Thanks for the glimpse.

[icruise]

Originally posted by ebuddy:
Anything to win an election right? I mean, the fictions and distortions are bad and all, but if your man gets elected then your opinion of Moore will somehow improve? This pretty much sums up the liberal mindset right here. Thanks for the glimpse.

No, that sums up the partisan mindset. My god, can you guys really be so blind as to ascribe all of these attributes to the "enemy" and see none of it in yourselves?

[ebuddy]

that sums up the liberally blinded-partisan mindset. My god, can you guys really be so blind as to ascribe all of these attributes only to Moore, and not to CBS News, MoveOn.org, the New York Times, most terrorists, and other various media outlets here and abroad and see none of it in yourselves?

Good points all iCruise.

[icruise]

Originally posted by ebuddy:
Good points all iCruise.

My point apparently escaped you. I'm saying that the partisan mindset, of which most of us are a part (at least to a degree) makes us overlook the faults of the people we support and exaggerate those of our opponents. The fact that you turned my comment into a partisan attack seems to support my point.

[ebuddy]

Conversely icruise; I pointed out the mindset of a reportedly "open-minded" analyst saying succinctly that in spite of misrepresentations, fictions, and distortions that if all these lies serve to get her man elected then she will owe the author of the bs a debt of gratitude and her opinion of him will improve. We're now no longer judged on our actions, but whether or not our actions were successful. My point was the "whatever it takes" tactic of getting a man elected to public office is a dangerous precedent. The fact that you don't see this proves to me you fall under the label I've given you.

[Spliffdaddy]

Thanks for posting that, moki.

It hit the nail on the head.

[icruise]

Originally posted by ebuddy:
Conversely icruise; I pointed out the mindset of a reportedly "open-minded" analyst saying succinctly that in spite of misrepresentations, fictions, and distortions that if all these lies serve to get her man elected then she will owe the author of the bs a debt of gratitude and her opinion of him will improve. We're now no longer judged on our actions, but whether or not our actions were successful. My point was the "whatever it takes" tactic of getting a man elected to public office is a dangerous precedent. The fact that you don't see this proves to me you fall under the label I've given you.

And I'm saying that this tactic can be seen on both sides!