For Hilliary, AS writes, "Feel the fakeness: " But, you know, this level of 'message control' and staging is precisely what is required these days, arguably, in order to stay above the "freak show" that we all allow in American politics.
AS again uses a mouthpiece to ask, "What is the truth about racial differences?". Yet, despite the protests from the Right that this is what they are on about, we know that is not the question they are purporting to ask and answer. The evidence of such is overwhelming, IMHO. Can we ask, "What is the real truth about the Holocaust?". See what I mean.
In Fleeing Universal Care, AS gives up a textbook case of letting ideology influence your polemic/research, despite being of no party or clique. I wish he'd publish also the numbers of people "fleeing" the U.S. healthcare system for treatment (and I do mean real treatment, not those forced out of the system).
Apparently Conservative Souls like anarchy or at least have an "ideal of man" that is more bold than what they decry of "liberals", that man is so beneficent that he doesn't need governors and would live without offense in anarchy: "The intervention of a government is like that of a loud telephone ringing in the middle of an engrossing dinner conversation. It is inherently offensive."
No, the starting point of Conservatism, if there is just one, is that some, if not all, men are bad or potentially bad and therefore all of us need strong, intrusive Government. In our times, absolute government. Liberals tend to weigh that equation differently.
AS asks, "Che's hair auctioned. Not making this up. Next up: Hitler's fingernail clippings?"
No, but Rasputin's Knob is fast in the fray. (No, I'm not making this up either).
AS writes, "There are, to me, three core issues in this election: the Constitution, the war and the environment. All three are urgent, and the need for deep, radical change overwhelming."
Off the top of my head, I'd say that the problem with the Constitution is a problem with the Congress, who ceded authority/authorities and the public who let them. (Heck, we even had a Democrat who cast a vote with the Republicans to defeat by one vote the measure to defund the VP's office until he complied with standing order of the Executive).
"The war" ... I'm not sure either party has articulated how to fight global terrorism in a new way in the context of a new foreign policy. So, the danger is more of the same, from whomever is elected, because "losing" is not an option.
It's going to take a long time to turn the battleship on the environment. The Japanese have been planning their energy needs for a long time to get where they are, for instance. Of course, that involved government, which "free-market Conservatives" deplore.
Healthcare (The fight for this generation) and the fiscal soundness of the public safety net just doesn't make AS's radar screen. He just doesn't "get it", I guess. What else is one to conclude? That he's for hobbling together more of the same?
