Atlas Shrugged: The Mocking

Wednesday, December 21, 2011

Somebody--Anybody--Save Me

So Andrew Sullivan is endorsing Ron Paul as the voice of reason who will save the Republican party, thereby once again establishing himself as someone who is incapable of thinking in more than one dimension.

I regard this primary campaign as the beginning of a process to save conservatism from itself. In this difficult endeavor, Paul has kept his cool, his good will, his charm, his honesty and his passion. His scorn is for ideas, not people, but he knows how to play legitimate political hardball. Look at his ads - the best of the season so far. His worldview is too extreme for my tastes, but it is more honestly achieved than most of his competitors, and joined to a temperament that has worn well as time has gone by.

I feel the same way about him on the right in 2012 as I did about Obama in 2008. Both were regarded as having zero chance of being elected. And around now, people decided: Why not? And a movement was born. He is the "Change You Can Believe In" on the right. If you are an Independent and can vote in a GOP primary, vote Paul. If you are a Republican concerned about the degeneracy of the GOP, vote Paul. If you are a citizen who wants more decency and honesty in our politics, vote Paul. If you want someone in the White House who has spent decades in Washington and never been corrupted, vote Paul.

Ah, the never-ending search for an authority worthy of the great Andrew Sullivan. Naturally Paul's racism and sexism do not bother Sullivan in the least. After going over all the reasons why Paul is a nut, Sullivan says:

Paul's libertarianism may be the next best thing available in the GOP. It would ensure real pressure to make real cuts in entitlements and defense; it would extricate America from the religious wars of the Middle East, where we do not belong. It would challenge the statist, liberal and progressive delusion that for every problem there is a solution, let alone a solution devised by government. As part of offering the world a decent, tolerant conservatism, these instincts are welcome. As an antidote - and a very strong one - to the fiscal recklessness and lawless belligerence of Bush-Cheney, it is hard to beat. The Tea Party, for all their flaws, are right about spending and the crony capitalism it foments. So is Paul.

Sullivan just isn't very bright, is he? We have ample proof in the corpus of Megan McArdle that it is possible to be highly educated and even intelligent in certain areas, but a fundamental lack of intellectual honesty invariably leads Sullivan into making poorly reasoned decisions. He will always make the decision that flatters his ego and always turn his back on those he considers beneath him. You can never trust an authoritarian leader, even (or especially) when you agree with him.


ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said...

Hey, at least Ron Paul would make the trains run on time!

Ahem. I meant put in place the kind of environment where free market forces would compel the trains to run on time.

Waingro said...

You're right- Sullivan is just not very bright. A perfect example of a highly educated dumbass.

Example A:
"it would extricate America from the religious wars of the Middle East, where we do not belong."

I remember the Andrew Sullivan of 2001-2006 and this was... uh, not a sentiment I heard from him. Like McCardle, this fucker's only talent is knowing where the wind is blowing.

satch said...

So, it's liberals who have the delusion that "every problem has a solution, let alone a solution devised by government"? For Sullivan and Paul, there are two solutions that work for EVERY problem... free markets and the gold standard.

fish said...

It makes me sad that the only candidate that has a rational foreign policy is so crazy domestically and that there is no challenge from the left for Obama. Even with all of Paul's craziness, I am inclined to believe that (if he really could shut down our military) the net positive for the world might be greater than the net negatives for the US. And that is a shitty thought.

Mr.Wonderful said...

As part of offering the world a decent, tolerant conservatism, these instincts are welcome.

Not any more, bunky. Decent, tolerant conservatism was strangled by a laughing Lee Atwater. If Sullivan really thinks the people that would surround Paul and work in his administration would be anything other than libertarian nerds-out-for-revenge-against-the-world, self-seeking slicksters, and the usual corporatist scum, he's kidding himself.

Mr.Wonderful said...

Oh, and: dig this crazy direct mail exhortation from Paul about "the coming race war" and "the Federal-homosexual" conspiracy to cover up AIDS.

Wrong again, Sully.

Anonymous said...

wow. the comments on the McMama post are very telling: is it possible that there is not a single anti-authoritarian in that group of so-called libertarians? I mean, I knew McMegan was just an opportunistic conservative (e.g., her position on abortion), but her commenters are explicitly discussing whether spanking is the best way to control your child or not. Nobody has questioned whether controlling a child is a worthy goal.

where are the anti-authoritarian parents? the ones who avoid both punishment and rewards as a way to control their children? in the anarchist blogs?

Mr.Wonderful said...

Uh-oh. From MM's bio at the top of her blog:

Megan McArdle is a senior editor for The Atlantic who writes about business and economics.

A senior editor. It's the equivalent of giving a British agent a double-0 prefix. She now has the license to write about anything that enters her intellectually-intimidating mind.

I know--as if being Biz Editor ever stopped her before. But it's sanctioned now. Next up: living room makeover tips--on a budget! (Not your budget. Alas.)

bulbul said...

For all their talk of personhood, conservatives (which includes McArdle) do not see children as persons
Having read this and Fred Clark's latest post on bullies and libertarianism, I finally understood something: to a libertarian, the only person that matters is the libertarian himself. In effect, they see everybody else as a potential enemy or, at best, someone to be kept at an arm's length (hence their emphasis on contracts).
What a bunch of lonely scared fuckers...

this fucker's only talent is knowing where the wind is blowing
And the English accent, don't forget the accent. See also Hitchens, Christopher.