Saturday, April 15, 2006

another

From DC:
When principled conservatives whose first allegiance is to truth, honor and the Consitution finally accept that the war was a mishandled mistake, then there is no way back for this administration. ...Bush's approval ratings have a floor of about 35 percent -- Americans who, rather predictably, will support the President regardless of circumstances. So when Bush collects 38 percent approval, I figure that the 3 points above that base includes conservative Americans like my friends -- not people who see me as the enemy, but countrymen with different opinions.

And that 3 percent is far more important to the president's agenda than are his 35-percent base of Bush-cult believers. Because reasonable, credible citizens are persuasive...

13 comments:

  1. Yes, of course, "Strategy Page" the place to get your facts, "for the thinking person".

    Unbelievable.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Bruce (or Russ), what's the background behind "Strategy Page"? (what are your reasons for your evaluation of its credibility, and could you back these reasons up with links or other references?)

    I'd never heard of the site before this.

    ReplyDelete
  3. (And Russ, am I correct in inferring that your comment above answers a previous question I asked you? (namely "Do you think that principled conservatives should be standing up and repudiating this administration? (which as David Brin points out is not conservative by any stretch of the imagination)", which I asked in response to your comment to my "men behind the curtain" curtain post)
    i.e. that your answer is "No"?

    (fyi in case you don't revisit after commenting here, I'll alert you to this q. via email)

    ReplyDelete
  4. I believe 'Strategy Page' is largely an outgrowth of work and writings by James Dunnagin. If you don't know who he is, the main thrust of his work has been to quantify military analysis as a sort of giant spread sheet problem, ie. an attempt to merge operations research to conflict I suppose. A lot of people have heard the name in reference to war gaming (both civilian and military) in the 1970s.

    There's really not much in the way of political overtone here, or what passes for politics these days (Bush vs. antiBush).

    If anything, any morale issue you might have with this kind of thing might stem from the Herman Kahn-esque approach. Human lives are viewed as currency to be spent to achieve a given aim.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Oops.

    'Moral'.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Russ, in short, do you think that principled conservatives should be standing up and repudiating this administration?

    yes/no [because...]

    Please don't make me infer your answer from your comments, since I've been known to infer wrongly.

    ReplyDelete
  7. > "What the hell is a principled conservative? For that mater what is an unprincipled conservative? "

    You're right Russ, I wasn't being specific enough.

    Let's go back to Daniel's
    "principled conservatives whose first allegiance is to truth, honor and the Constitution..."

    I'll say that a principled person is someone who values, and acts based on, principles other than just self-interest. Some principles are "truth, honor and [adherence to] the Constitution". Another principle is loyalty - to family, to tribe, to party, to rulers, to religion, to country, to culture, to species.

    Someone whose overriding principle is loyalty (to the Bush administration, for example) is principled, which my wording (in "do you think that principled conservatives should be standing up...") overlooks.

    So, I should rephrase:
    Do you think that conservatives whose first allegiance is to truth, honor and the Constitution (i.e., those not ruled by self-interest and for whom loyalty is not the overriding principle) should be standing up and repudiating this administration?

    ReplyDelete
  8. ""principled conservatives whose first allegiance is to truth, honor and the Constitution...""


    Oh, here's a good one.

    A question for the blogger. What is the Constitutional right to the following?

    . Privacy
    . Abortion
    . Paper money
    . Interstate sales taxes

    ReplyDelete
  9. Russ, I don't have what it takes to engage on this one tonight. However I've got a trio of nice links, that I'll put up shortly.

    And if a commenter with a pseudonym (or real name) were to ask a question, I'd likely respond.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I believe 4th for the first, 9th for the first and second; consult your local reference librarian or attorney for the others.

    (or wiser yet, for all of them)

    ReplyDelete
  11. > Could you elaborate please?

    no.

    "consult your local reference librarian or attorney for the others.

    (or wiser yet, for all of them)"

    One question for you though, P.:
    What are you for?
    as in, "in favor of"?

    no need to answer if you don't want to.

    ReplyDelete
  12. P, did you see the preview for the film "Thank you for smoking"?

    There was a line in it that reminded me very much of you.

    (To others, if any - we've had this same basic discussion many times offline. It's worth expanding into a post of its own, which I'll do shortly.)

    ReplyDelete
  13. Apropos - TomDispatch's A Cult of Presidential Power - The Unrestrained President and Jay Rosen's latest on Bush's moves to decertify the press.
    From the former:

    "if you can establish a presidential right to order torture (no matter how you manage to redefine it) as well as to hold captives under a category of warfare dredged up from the legal dustbin of history in prisons especially established to be beyond the reach of the law or the oversight of anyone but those under your command, you've established a presidential right to do just about anything imaginable.
    ...
    ...perhaps, the true genius of the American system as imagined by its founders [was] the understanding that any form of state power left unchecked in the hands of a single person or group of people was likely to degenerate into despotism (or worse), whatever the initial desires of the individuals involved."

    Someone I know (who's since morphed into a different political beast entirely) once agreed - with sincerity - that "eternal vigilance is the price of liberty".

    I don't know how to wake him up.

    ReplyDelete

Welcome, and thanks for caring enough to donate your time and thoughts toward greater collective wisdom...

Terms of engagement:
* Please be civil.
* * * * Please do not post anonymously * * * (I'd remove this choice if I could, and I may remove your comment if you do) - instead, do this:
Click on the 'Name/URL' radiobutton, then enter your real name (if you're brave) or a pseudonym (if you're not). (You can leave the "URL" field blank.)
Or go ahead and click "Anonymous", but put your name in your comment.

* The Management reserves the right to delete comments (Moderation Certificate can be found here). You can always post it on a blog of your own.

If you run into technical difficulties, please a) accept my apologies, then b) email your comment to aherror2011 at gmail.com with "Comment for [name of this blog]" in the Subject line.

New policy re climate contrarianism comments as of 11/11/2009:
Comments questioning the climate science community's understanding of climate change (97% of active climatologists now believe that the earth is currently warming and that it's human-caused - link) will be deleted unless the commenter:
a) is local
b) uses his real name
c) provides link(s) to substantiate his claim(s)/inference(s)
d) is willing to collaborate on constructing an argument tree, to get us past the usual sterile point-counterpoint-countercounterpoint.
(For people who can't read the above, a summary:
1) Be civil;
2) Don't post w/o giving at least a pseudonym;
3) Don't espouse climate-denial crankery unless you're local and willing to stand behind it.)

Caveats:
1. Comments could be delayed: they are being moderated, and I'm sometimes away from the computer for a day or more.
2. : Perfectly legitimate comments are sometimes miscategorized (by the blogging platform) as spam, & not published. If this happens to yours, please notify me, else I might not notice for a day or two.