A Spork in the Drawer

In A Nutshell

While I don't think that Barack Obama is an elitist, America-hating negro the fact remains that Barack Obama is an elitist, America-hating negro.

.

Unable To Distinguish

Former BushCo™ speechwriter Michael Gerson:

For the most part, these accusations are a political ploy -- actually an attempt to shut down political debate. Any practical concern about the content of government sex-education curricula is labeled "anti-science." Any ethical question about the destruction of human embryos to harvest their cells is dismissed as "theological" and thus illegitimate.

From there Gerson goes on to demonstrate that he doesn't know the difference between "science" and "theology" or, for that matter, what "facts" and "evidence" are.

And, yes, Gerson brings Nazis into the mix.

Are there any honest, intelligent Conservatives left?

---

ADDED: Kevin: "The disingenuousness here is breathtaking."

Chris Mooney (who literally wrote the book on this subject): "In short, Gerson's oped is a joke. No need for debunking, just laughing."

.

Riddle Me This

Why is Loyal Bushie™ Michael "Axis of Evil" Gerson writing for the Washington Post?

Liberal media, my ass.

.

Fitting

The latest addition to the WaPo's ever expanding stable of rightwing columinists, former Bush speechwriter Michael "Axis of Evil" Gerson, writes today about Tony Blair. It's pretty much the expected puffery for a Loyal Bushie from another Loyal Bushie. But this part caught my eye:

Predicting a legacy is a tricky thing, but Blair's is clear. Thirty years ago, Harvard political theorist Harvey Mansfield mockingly asked, "Who today is called a liberal for strength and confidence in defense of liberty?" By this high standard, Tony Blair is a liberal.

Harvey Mansfield...Harvey Mansfield...Oh! Now I remember! Just two weeks ago Mansfield was writing in favor of dictatorship:

Now the rule of law has two defects, each of which suggests the need for one-man rule. The first is that law is always imperfect by being universal, thus an average solution even in the best case, that is inferior to the living intelligence of a wise man on the spot, who can judge particular circumstances. This defect is discussed by Aristotle in the well-known passage in his "Politics" where he considers "whether it is more advantageous to be ruled by the best man or the best laws."

[...]

The case for a strong executive begins from urgent necessity and extends to necessity in the sense of efficacy and even greatness. It is necessary not merely to respond to circumstances but also in a comprehensive way to seek to anticipate and form them. "Necessary to" the survival of a society expands to become "necessary for" the good life there, and indeed we look for signs in the way a government acts in emergencies for what it thinks to be good after the emergency has passed. A free government should show its respect for freedom even when it has to take it away. Yet despite the expansion inherent in necessity, the distinction between urgent crises and quiet times remains. Machiavelli called the latter tempi pacifici, and he thought that governments could not take them for granted. What works for quiet times is not appropriate in stormy times. John Locke and the American Founders showed a similar understanding to Machiavelli's when they argued for and fashioned a strong executive.

It says a lot that a Bush cultist is favorably quoting an outright advocate of dictatorship.

.