To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 26477
26476  |  26478
Subject: 
Re: From the New Republic: A Argument for a New Liberalism
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Fri, 17 Dec 2004 21:46:56 GMT
Viewed: 
3226 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> Being against the war in Iraq does NOT mean being for Totalitarian Islam.
> 
> Or, why Kerry lost and why Michael Moore is still a weenie...
> 
> From The New Republic, specifically here:
> "A Fighting Faith (AN ARGUMENT FOR A NEW LIBERALISM.) by Peter Beinart (editor
> of TNR since 1999)
> 
> http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?pt=whKP5U%2BbbaxbirV9FQhQuh%3D%3D
> 
> "Moore views totalitarian Islam the way Wallace viewed communism: As a phantom,
> a ruse employed by the only enemies that matter, those on the right. Saudi
> extremists may have brought down the Twin Towers, but the real menace is the
> Carlyle Group. Today, most liberals naïvely consider Moore a useful ally, a
> bomb-thrower against a right-wing that deserves to be torched. What they do not
> understand is that his real casualties are on the decent left. When Moore
> opposes the war against the Taliban, he casts doubt upon the sincerity of
> liberals who say they opposed the Iraq war because they wanted to win in
> Afghanistan first. When Moore says terrorism should be no greater a national
> concern than car accidents or pneumonia, he makes it harder for liberals to
> claim that their belief in civil liberties does not imply a diminished vigilance
> against Al Qaeda."
> 
> Moveon.org responded to this but it's only available to subscribers which I am
> not.

If the argument is that all liberals have no validity because of Michael Moore,
and therefore Kerry lost, why then hasn't every conservative lost because of the
Big Fat Lying Drug-Addict?  :-)

-->Bruce<--

League of Green-Eyed Devil's Advocates



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: From the New Republic: A Argument for a New Liberalism
 
(...) I can't speak to that question. It's not the argument I've made and I do not think that it's the argument that Peter (the New Republic editor) made either. I think rather he's making the argument to his own brethren that they are missing the (...) (22 years ago, 18-Dec-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  From the New Republic: A Argument for a New Liberalism
 
Being against the war in Iraq does NOT mean being for Totalitarian Islam. Or, why Kerry lost and why Michael Moore is still a weenie... From The New Republic, specifically here: "A Fighting Faith (AN ARGUMENT FOR A NEW LIBERALISM.) by Peter Beinart (...) (22 years ago, 17-Dec-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)  

4 Messages in This Thread:


Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR