Re: [RC] [ RC ] Political Holy War -- comments / follow-up

[David R. Block]

Title: "Free speech is meant to protect unpopular speech

I really like the way you split paragraphs and ignore my questions. Or, you know, NOT.  Since I like it so much, I'll try not to do the same. :'( Where do I get the idea.... So IF: Thus, any legitimate critique of the government is interpreted by the Left as a call for Social Darwinism. Giving them a perfect excuse to defend their failed experiment in social engineering. Doesn't that pretty well make criticism of the government "out of bounds" or ineffective at the very least? Or what? Tell me. PLEASE. So you would have me spend my evenings watching MSNBC or Current TV (Al Gore's channel and current home of Keith Olbermann-sadly, it is on my cable line up)? I thought you were against torture.  :-) It's mostly web surfing and Bill O'Reilly. My wife watches Hannity, and while I used to be able to stand him on the radio, I just about cannot do the TV show. Morning wake-up is local, Drive time to work is Mark Davis of WBAP or a Metallica CD when I drive or NPR Morning Edition when I don't drive, and drive home time is Mark Levin on WBAP or Motley Crue CD when I drive and NPR All Things Considered when I don't drive. At work, it is music on the iPhone. Web surfing is usually libertarian or conservative or Christian unless I feel like being insulted, in which case I'll go to lefty sites. Rethuglicans and Repuglicans (thug and repugnant respectively; never mind the union thugs on their side-no projection here) specifically really help them win friends and influence me (usually not to come back). I don't really enjoy being told how stupid I am. Yes, I know that many on the right do the same thing in the other direction and that doesn't make it right. Some of them, Instapundit for example, try to utilize dry wit, which I'm told I have a bumper crop of. Apparently that's not in evidence here. Sorry to disappoint. David  "Free speech is meant to protect unpopular speech. Popular speech, by definition, needs no protection."—Neal Boortz   On 3/25/2012 10:57 PM, bil...@aol.com wrote: 3/25/2012 7:48:25 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, david.r.bl...@verizon.net writes: "So the government has been immunized from criticism."     Where on Earth do you get this idea  ?   The point of Radical Centrism is that BOTH government and business deserve their fair share of criticism. However, because either Ernie or myself criticize government at any given time does NOT mean that all of a sudden we have become Libertarians BECAUSE in due course we will criticize the private sector for something else.   NEITHER government nor business is immune from criticism. Both deserve it, and both should receive it.   This is really, really basic to RC.   The impression that is hard to shake is that outside of this group close to all of your "listening" is to Libertarian or Right wing views and, none at all from the Left or "other." The result is that you interpret what I say, or Ernie says, as if, when either of us criticize gvt we surely have seen the Libertarian light, which is false, or that, when  we criticize business, why, surely, we have gone over to the dark side and have made peace with the Left, which is equally false.   I have a friend who is a hard core Democrat.  Exact same problem with him except in reverse image. He just doesn't get the point of RC, that it is independent and centrist and approximately as unhappy with Democrats as with Republicans.  For him, any deviation from the Left means that you are a Right-wing zealot or worse. The result is that we never talk politics any more, just other common interests.   Sure, I am not at all favorably disposed to BHO and hope for his defeat this November.  But the GOP is anything but political salvation and there is almost as much to be negatively disposed about in the Republican Party as the Democrats.   RC is a philosophy for political Independents, essentially. It is not an alternative version of the Republican Party. just as it is not of the Democratic Party either.   Billy     --------------------------------------       By libertarians, or by the media parroting an ultra-libertarian line and crediting it to the Republicans and Libertarians? I doubt that a large number of people are out there combing through Reason Magazine or the Cato Institute publications for this to become the message from libertarian sources. I mean REALLY? The Left Stream Media is for Barack Obama, just like they were in 2008-hook, line, and sinker, and they may have even converted to boat to a submarine as they were so fat in the tank then and even more-so now if that it possible. David "Free speech is meant to protect unpopular speech. Popular speech, by definition, needs no protection."—Neal Boortz   On 3/25/2012 8:32 PM, Dr. Ernie Prabhakar wrote: Hi David, Sent from my iPhone On Mar 25, 2012, at 16:34, "David R. Block" <david.r.bl...@verizon.net> wrote: We have EPA overreach and Globull Warming fraud all around and complaining about it is the distraction??? So we let the EPA strangle the energy supply and kill jobs because government is so saintly??? I cannot believe that I'm reading this. Yes. There are LOTS of valid reasons and positions to criticize the government and excessive regulation.  The problem is that the GOP messaging around that has been hijacked by the simplistic: - market = good - government = bad mantra of libertarians Thus, any legitimate critique of the government is interpreted by the Left as a call for Social Darwinism. Giving them a perfect excuse to defend their failed experiment in social engineering. In a wiser GOP, somebody (Huntsman?) would argue coherently for a lean, smaller, modest, yet effective government that also appealed to moderate voters. But the Tea Party/Liberaltarian rhetoric appears to have scared off such candidates, and appears on track to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.  Which means we will get four more  years of exactly the stuff you complain about.  I call that a costly distraction.  E David   "Free speech is meant to protect unpopular speech. Popular speech, by definition, needs no protection."—Neal Boortz   On 3/25/2012 12:21 AM, Dr. Ernie Prabhakar wrote: Hi DRB, Sent from my iPhone On Mar 24, 2012, at 21:46, "David R. Block" <david.r.bl...@verizon.net> wrote: I thought that we were in MORE opposition to the current Presidential office holder. This seems to be a distraction. While Billy's crusade may be overblown, he has a legitimate point. The idolization of the free market and demonization of the government is largely what is making the GOP lose the masses. Yes, we can't blame all that on Rand and the libertarians, but they are the ideological core of those messages. In short: they are the distraction. E -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <RadicalCentrism@googlegroups.com> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org   -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <RadicalCentrism@googlegroups.com> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <RadicalCentrism@googlegroups.com> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org