See other Editorial Articles
Title: "National Review": Still unbearably smarmy and even more out of touch
Source:
Boston Libertarian Examiner
URL Source: http://www.examiner.com/x-3665-Bost ... rmy-and-even-more-out-of-touch
Published: Feb 17, 2010
Author: Christopher Dowd
Post Date: 2010-02-18 22:19:26 by F.A. Hayek Fan
Keywords: None
Views: 175
Comments: 7
I don't often visit the online pages of "National Review" much less their blog page "The Corner". But its interesting (and useful) to know what DC approved, vetted, and wholly owned "conservatives" are focusing on these days and how they see things. Someone needs to tell the gang on "The Corner" that being smarmy is not the same as being irreverent- which is indeed the tone they are going for on that blog- as young Turk "conservative" rebels- bucking the "powers that be" . . . . . . when, of course, they sit on the laps of the "powers that be" begging for biscuits. I was struck by how John Derbyshire < A HREF="http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NTBmNzBiZGNiYjRkZTliMzVhMjlmN2NmNzI0ODM0NGU=">responded to the news of teacher firings in Rhode Island. This headline brightened up my breakfast: Unionized Rhode Island Teachers Refuse To Work 25 Minutes More Per Day, So Town Fires All Of Them Yeee-HAH! "Yee-HAH!"? Really? That's the first thing a DC vetted mainstream "conservative" thinks when he reads about 100 teachers being fired in some school district? "Yee-HAH!"? Oh right. I forgot. It is a standard of right wing lore that all the unionized teachers who make whopping 70 and 78 grand salaries are to blame for about 90 percent of all that ails the school systems in this country. So that is how this event is seen by a "mainstream" conservative? He even manages to imply how the "liberal" media isn't covering this story out of the usual "bias". This is a "success" story for John Derbyshire and for "conservatives"? The community of Central Falls Rhode Island is a desperately poor city, that like thousands of other cities across this country, has been slashing services to the bone in the last several years. Almost all of its education budget comes from the state. And deep budget cuts in Rhode Island's spending are being felt by the poorest of the poor of that state. But John Derbyshire is "Yee-HAHing" that because money is so tight in such a city that all of their high school teachers are being fired over a contract with more responsibility, more work, and more hours but with no extra pay? So what is the "conservative" fantasy here? That this school system is going to now hire really good non union teachers for far less pay who will be better than the Union teachers? Is that what they imagine? Actually- they probably imagine that local "leaders" will step up and just teach the kids for free and everything will work out just fine. But the main issue here is seeing how these DC stooge "conservatives" misrepresent the budget nightmares of an impoverished city - that is forcing them to slash services and aid to the most desperately poor among them- as some sort of groundswell fight against teachers unions. Local towns and cities all over this country are gutting the most basic of services, like even street lighting at night, and the fake DC conservatives see these horrendous cuts that are made not out of choice but necessity as groundswells of support for "small government"? The feds can spend forever on Wall Street bailouts and wholly unnecessary wars of aggression as local governments all over this country slash and burn the budgets for the most basic of government services and our fake "conservatives" cheer this on? What else gripped "The Corner" yesterday? The capture of some Taliban second in command. Are they for real with this? How many times are they going to gush like naive school girls at the "capture" or killing of Taliban or "Al Qaeda" "second in commands?" And of course they refer to Taliban fighting in their own countries against foreign invaders as "terrorists"- mouthing that government/military ridiculous designation of the enemy like the little pathetic DC Stalinists they have morphed into over the last ten years. Oh yeah- they gabbed back and forth about "how important" this guy is (whom as usual none of them even knew of the name of a day before most likely). How many times have they giddily passed on military propaganda like this over the years? How many "top leaders" and "Top commanders" have their "sources" spoon fed them complete lies about over the years only for them to NEVER question anything the military says to them- EVER- ON ANYTHING? Oh right- that is another article of faith among these "conservatives" for hire- the military never lies and it should always be trusted completely- else you are a "leftist". So to sum up- local governments slash budgets in desperate times- "mainstream conservatives" cheer. Meanwhile the Feds print money out of thin air to fight sickening, useless, and wholly unnecessary criminal wars of aggression that will never end in our lifetimes and these same "conservatives" offer up their services as pathetic propaganda cheerleaders for the DC warfare state. Got it. NR is still a DC whored out propaganda rag for Beltway oligarchy.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 4.
#4. To: F.A. Hayek Fan (#0)
There are no replies to Comment # 4. End Trace Mode for Comment # 4.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestThe capture of some Taliban second in command. Are they for real with this? How many times are they going to gush like naive school girls at the "capture" or killing of Taliban or "Al Qaeda" "second in commands?"
Replies to Comment # 4.