Critisism of George Will

Once in a while I read George Will's column in Newsweek. I generally find him annoying. Aside from the fact that most conservatives often annoy me he additionally has the habit of using, in my opinion, too many big words. For example, from a recent column: heepism, (heepism is a made up word) cognitive dissonance, histrionic humility, flamboyant empathy, apocryphal, Metternichian guile, architectural determinism. Now I'm not an ignoramus and for the record I do know some of the terms, in fact I particularly like the term cognitive dissonance. And I also don't believe writers should dumb down for their audience but how many readers of Will's Newsweek column are familiar with these terms? I'm not sure why it bugs me but it does. Will is a conservative who's using some rather erudite language here. Who's he writing for? The one Republican I know happens to like Will's column so I asked him if he understood the terms. He said no. Bottom line, I think Will is trying make conservatives sound smart when they're not. He uses a lot of big words to make his readers, who really don't know what the hell he's talking about, think he must be real smart and therefore knows what he's talking about. Call me crazy.

In this week's column Will says the current economic climate isn't so bad. Oil prices are way down for example and Christmas sales are expected to be slightly higher than last year. And if housing prices are down that's okay because they were too high anyway. This all may be true but what he conveniently neglects to mention is the gigantic 700 Billion government bailout which was done so in fact there wouldn't be an economic meltdown. How can you talk about the economy without mentioning this giant bailout? Omitting this topic pretty much negates the whole of the rest of his argument in my opinion. And what's with the pot shot at FDR which I've noticed Republicans have been doing a lot lately. Are they trying to deflect attention from those saying the current economic crisis is due to the Republicans constant push for deregulation?

If any fans of George Will read this I invite them to defend him here if they think I'm wrong.

The conservative point of view?

I went looking on the web recently to try and answer the question of why there is so munch rancor among people on politics. And maybe it was because I focused more on conservative blogs rather than liberal but the conservatives seem to be the angriest. But maybe that was just a coincidence. However no one can dispute that that there is much anger and out there. Unfortunately my humble search revealed no real answers so I am left to speculate. Here are my theories.

I looked hardest at conservative articles because that is the point of view I generally disagree with most often and I would very much like to better understand the opposing position. But I am honestly at a loss as to why conservatives believe what they do. And I say that without any intention of trying to antagonize those with a different point of view. I believe one explanation for the anger is the large amount of misinformation being pumped to the public via numerous organizations whose sole purpose is to persuade the American public that the science and facts are incorrect and instead the organization's information is the only truth. For example, there are numerous websites whose sole purpose is to dispute the existence of the climate crisis, A, B, C are a few. I suppose these sites can be convincing if someone has little knowledge of the science as I'm sure is the case for most people – to be honest. One thing these anti climate crisis sites do is to supposedly quote science and scientists but unless you actually know the science yourself you would have no way of knowing that they are making this stuff up. And I chose the climate crisis issue because I know something about it but I think the same could be said for a great number of other issues.

The next question then is why would whole websites be created to refute the claims that there exists a climate crisis or any other issue? To find the answer would mean having to look no further that the corporations who stand to gain (or lose) something. That's pretty obvious. But in addition to corporations or more importantly I think are the individuals involved. Who makes the money, when and where because it's either about money or power or both. Interestingly or maybe not the anti-climate crisis websites will say the same thing. They come up with reasons why Al Gore, for example, is profiting from his crusade against global warming.

So what else is it besides misinformation? I suppose conservatives by nature do not want change they are by definition about the status quo. And the climate crisis is all about change whether we like it or not. So is that it? Does that explain the conservative position? Reluctant to change by nature and fed a steady diet of misinformation? Have I oversimplified? Probably. I never mentioned religion which I think is in fact at the heart of modern American conservative ideology. Anyone care to agree or disagree?

The overeducated?

My friend Charlie sent me a NYT article by David Brooks called, "The Class War Before Palin". In the article Brooks talks about how the Republican party has driven away conservative "intellectuals". Personally I think the article is baloney from top to bottom. I've seen Brooks many times on PBS's NewsHour and have always thought the guy was a lightweight. Never mind that he writes things like, "Palin is smart, politically skilled, courageous and likable. Her convention and debate performances were impressive". That's just the usual partisan BS but what caught my eye was this line, "The nation is divided between the wholesome Joe Sixpacks in the heartland and the oversophisticated, overeducated, oversecularized denizens of the coasts". Please please please someone show me anyone who is overeducated? Is he kidding! How can someone be overeducated? Only a conservative could celebrate ignorance and only someone who is undereducated could complain about someone being overeducated.

Conservative vs Liberal

My desire for this blog originally was to if possible open a dialog between liberal and conservative thought. It bothers me to read articles and blogs where each side pounds on the other. It seems to have no point other than the person doing the writing gets to vent their frustrations. But I seriously question whether a dialog between conservatives and liberals can take place. The conservative blogs and articles I read are just too vitriolic. It really seems all they want to do is spit poison. They don't seem to have the slightest interest in a dialog or in finding the truth. I realize making such a statement is itself inflammatory which one could argue makes me guilty of burning the bridge to the other side. But it may be that liberals and conservatives can't dialog. David Limbaugh recently wrote that the Democrats are questioning the choice of Joe Biden for VP. That sounds like the liberals, always asking questions. I don't see conservatives questioning anything, at least not in public. If that is indeed so then no dialog is possible between the two sides. Upon reflection I suppose I could describe conservatives as doggedly holding on to their opinions with no interest opening their minds to new ideas or change. I see liberals as the opposite. I hope I am wrong about this because America at this point seems to very polarized in so many issues.

The Conservative Agents of Change

So at the RNC this week the Conservative Party, um I mean the Republicans, are making themselves out to be the agents of change. Conservative agents of change = oxymoron. What are they going to change? Are they going to lower taxes for the wealthy and for big corporations? Bush has done that. Are they going to invade a country starting a war? Bush has done that one too. Are they going to roll back environmental protections, blur the separation of church and state, and reduce funding for education and the handicapped? Hmm, Bush has done those things as well. They certainly aren't going to do the opposite of all these things because that's what the Democrats want to do so it must be they want to do more of same or is it more of the same. I guess they must be intending to… invade another planet? Fully fund all Christian Churches? Have the wealthy and big corporations pay no taxes? Eliminate all environmental laws? Have no funding for education and the handicapped? Is this what they plan?

The hypocrisy of Governor Palin

By definition a conservative is someone who values tradition, the status quo. They oppose efforts to bring about fundamental change in that order. So how does a conservative explain a woman governor or a woman VP or any woman in politics or for that matter a working woman or a woman who votes? 50 years ago there were no women governors or VP candidates and few women in important jobs. 100 years ago women were not allowed to vote and 200 years or so ago they were not allowed to own property or enter into contracts; they were second class citizens in this country. But all that has changed now and who do you suppose championed their cause and changed the status quo, conservatives or liberals? The answer is obvious. So how can a woman who is a conservative and who is anything other a stay at home mother be anything but a hypocrite? American conservatism is an ideology of convenience.