Friday, October 10, 2008

The Scandal of the Conservative Mind

Brooks, the voice of reason, on both the loss of conservative intellectualism and the class warfare being stoked by Palin.

And Noonan, the weekly touchpoint of sanity: 'Winning campaigns are built on love. This is the time for "McCain is the answer," not "The other guy is questionable."'

It is asking a lot to ask a political animal to be thoughtful, because they find meaning in action. They are propelled through life by the force of their hunger. But now and then you want to see them think. You want to see them speak the truth. This is one of those times.


Brought to you by theYreport at y-report.com

1 comment:

YBS said...

I agree that a spirit of anti-intellectualism has pervaded the Republican ranks in recent years. I have a big problem with that. However, does that mean that the Democrats are any more thoughtful? C'mon, look at party leadership. Nancy Pelosi? Harry Reid? Chris Dodd, Barney Frank, Charlie Rangel? I would put forth that very few of today's political leaders are among America's best. Let's say for argument's sake that the Democrats, and particularly Obama/Biden, are in fact thoughtful and intellectual (again, I think this is a big leap). Should I vote for a candidate who has plenty of intellectual "idea people" surrounding him, even though I viscerally disagree with their ideas? I don't think so. I can only hope that a loss this November will rejuevenate the idea people on the conservative side of the spectrum and spur them on to rekindle a thinking-man's conservatism like that of Russell Kirk and William F. Buckley, who Brooks mentioned in his column.

It is tragic to have alienated the intellectuals. I think Brooks was a little off in his portrayal of what Republicans have done to pick up the votes of middle America, though. Maybe not off, but he missed the left-wing counterpunch. For every time a Republican announces that he's for the "average Joe six-pack" (or whatever silly sounding way it is phrased), a Democrat proclaims that, if elected, cash will make it's way into the hands of the little guy. To me, it's the same thing. One says "Don't be intimidated, I'm stupid like you...I don't trust those pointy headed intellectuals either" and the other says "Elect me, and cash you didn't earn will be yours...don't trust the rich (and pay no attention to my designer suit)." Both pander.