gdp's Comments

Commentary Magazine : Dems Respect Voting Rights? Not Yesterday

Thu, 6 Sep 2012 21:07:21 +0000

There's two sides to the problem. On the one hand, making every contradiction and dare I say lie that the two parties engage in morally equivalent, thus resulting in a political cynicism that either opts out of the process, or deviates over to third parties. On the other hand, the reflexive response that "the other party is (always) worse" (however true that may be) often precludes any examination of where our own party is wrong. "And why do you look at the splinter in your brother's eye, but do not consider the plank in your own eye? " Or is the idea of the GOP applying such a principle that offensive? I am not talking about doing this in prominent public events, but surely such publications as only read primarily by Republicans can afford to be more comprehensively critical than they often are?

Commentary Magazine : Dems Respect Voting Rights? Not Yesterday

Thu, 6 Sep 2012 20:51:43 +0000

Yes, because condescension constitutes a reply...

Commentary Magazine : Dems Respect Voting Rights? Not Yesterday

Thu, 6 Sep 2012 18:06:24 +0000

No comment on the RNC rigging their own vote, though, huh?

Frontpage Magazine : The Ryan 'Bounce' Is Real

Sat, 25 Aug 2012 17:38:02 +0000

I was among the first to pounce upon the contradictions - apparent, real, or imagined - that were presented by the Ryan record, but despite the spin from both the Left and the paleocons, I would have to agree that my original *intituitive* assessment was correct : that Ryan was a good choice, perhaps the best choice, and that his presence will prove to be an asset to the defeat of Mr. Obama. If the author is going to make that case, though, he needs to give it more space than three paragraphs.

Frontpage Magazine : Will Hollywood Riot for Pussy Riot?

Tue, 21 Aug 2012 14:36:48 +0000

I submitted two comments a little while ago, which may have been of unacceptable length, as they were excerpts from first by two Orthodox priests, and then Yekaterina Samutsevich herself. So I will try to summarize: While the interruption of the religious services was deeply offensive and immoral to all Orthodox believers, (regardless of whether their intention was to offend or not) their real crime was to protest Putin, who is USING the Church, as many Russian rulers have before him, to consolidate and and aggrandize his political power. And, furthermore, Shapiro's main point (which doesn't actually need a whole essay, just like many points don't actually need a whole essay here on Front Page) is a simple question which can be tweeted, and which I retweeted for Shapiro: Would #Hollywood defend #PussyRiot if it had been a #Palestinian women’s band taking over a mosque? bit.ly/SfFYOd We all already know the answer to that question.

Frontpage Magazine : Will Hollywood Riot for Pussy Riot?

Tue, 21 Aug 2012 14:13:25 +0000

"The fact that Christ the Savior Cathedral had become a significant symbol in the political strategy of our powers that be was already clear to many thinking people when Vladimir Putin’s former [KGB] colleague Kirill Gundyaev took over as head of the Russian Orthodox Church. After this happened, Christ the Savior Cathedral began to be used openly as a flashy setting for the politics of the security services, which are the main source of power [in Russia]. Why did Putin feel the need to exploit the Orthodox religion and its aesthetics? After all, he could have employed his own, far more secular tools of power—for example, national corporations, or his menacing police system, or his own obedient judiciary system. It may be that the tough, failed policies of Putin’s government, the incident with the submarine Kursk, the bombings of civilians in broad daylight, and other unpleasant moments in his political career forced him to ponder the fact that it was high time to resign; otherwise, the citizens of Russia would help him do this. Apparently, it was then that he felt the need for more convincing, transcendental guarantees of his long tenure at the helm. It was here that the need arose to make use of the aesthetics of the Orthodox religion, historically associated with the heyday of Imperial Russia, where power came not from earthly manifestations such as democratic elections and civil society, but from God Himself. How did he succeed in doing this? After all, we still have a secular state, and shouldn’t any intersection of the religious and political spheres be dealt with severely by our vigilant and critically minded society? Here, apparently, the authorities took advantage of a certain deficit of Orthodox aesthetics in Soviet times, when the Orthodox religion had the aura of a lost history, of something crushed and damaged by the Soviet totalitarian regime, and was thus an opposition culture. The authorities decided to appropriate this historical effect of loss and present their new political project to restore Russia’s lost spiritual values, a project which has little to do with a genuine concern for preservation of Russian Orthodoxy’s history and culture. It was also fairly logical that the Russian Orthodox Church, which has long had a mystical connection with power, emerged as this project’s principal executor in the media. Moreover, it was also agreed that the Russian Orthodox Church, unlike the Soviet era, when the church opposed, above all, the crudeness of the authorities towards history itself, should also confront all baleful manifestations of contemporary mass culture, with its concept of diversity and tolerance. Implementing this thoroughly interesting political project has required considerable quantities of professional lighting and video equipment, air time on national TV channels for hours-long live broadcasts, and numerous background shoots for morally and ethically edifying news stories, where in fact the Patriarch’s well-constructed speeches would be pronounced, helping the faithful make the right political choice during the election campaign, a difficult time for Putin. Moreover, all shooting has to take place continuously; the necessary images must sink into the memory and be constantly updated, to create the impression of something natural, constant and compulsory. Our sudden musical appearance in the Cathedral of Christ the Savior with the song “Mother of God, Drive Putin Out” violated the integrity of this media image, generated and maintained by the authorities for so long, and revealed its falsity. In our performance we dared, without the Patriarch’s blessing, to combine the visual image of Orthodox culture and protest culture, suggesting to smart people that Orthodox culture belongs not only to the Russian Orthodox Church, the Patriarch and Putin, that it might also take the side of civic rebellion and protest in Russia." http://olenskae.tumblr.com/post/29137327674/yekat...

Commentary Magazine : "Where There Is No Vision, the People Perish"

Tue, 1 May 2012 05:08:55 +0000

You mean the lack of the "vision thing" that Romney also suffers from, despite the fact that y'all at Commentary have been carrying water for him? Physician, heal thyself. (Another good Scripture quote, though it might be coming from the wrong Testament for Commentary magazine).

Commentary Magazine : Gingrich, Santorum Now Mostly a Sideshow

Thu, 5 Apr 2012 19:50:18 +0000

Yeah, because getting a plurality in most contests is "soundly" defeating your opponents... "The Party" is behind him, that is exactly the problem...

Commentary Magazine : Emma Thompson Illustrates Beinart’s Slippery Slope on Boycotts

Mon, 2 Apr 2012 14:30:58 +0000

Considering the unwillingness of the British to defend their own nation from Islamist correctness, why should it be surprising that they will not defend another?

Commentary Magazine : Can the GOP Gain Ground With Hispanics?

Fri, 30 Mar 2012 23:23:52 +0000

The GOP is largely under the delusion they need Hispanic votes, also known as "Hispandering". I have no issue with appealing to Hispanic voters on the basis of the shared values they may have with other GOP subsets, but that would fall under statesmanship (the striving to represent ALL the people) not a campaign necessity. http://www.vdare.com/articles/the-sailer-strategy...

Commentary Magazine : Newt Gingrich Needs an Intervention

Wed, 28 Mar 2012 21:05:50 +0000

Newt's most recent tweet: "I am @georgetown where there is standing room only for my speech on values, innovation and a personal social security savings account" Well, some people still want to hear what he has to say, at least. I hope he keeps going on...just to be contrary, not to Romney, but rather to the right-wing news media who have proven themselves to be just as contemptibly prejudiced as their "MSM" counterparts...

Commentary Magazine : What Can Santorum Offer Gingrich?

Wed, 14 Mar 2012 22:45:24 +0000

Yeah, I'm a Newt supporter, and I can attest to this. Although I rather vociferously disliked Romney during his mudslinging throughout January, I have come to loathe Santorum more. It's not his position on social issues (or morality, which I more or less agree with) but the whole attitude, and it being accompanied with an absence of fiscal conservatism and a chicken hawk bellicosity in foreign policy. Are we really trying to re-elect GWB again? So at this point, if Newt can't win it, then if staying in helps Romney, I'm ok with that too. Santorum is GWB, Romney is GHWB, Newt is Reagan, and Paul is Goldwater, relatively speaking.

Commentary Magazine : Santorum Momentum Poses a Challenge to Romney’s Math

Wed, 14 Mar 2012 22:32:34 +0000

The whole process is driven by mass psychology and media perception! What happened last night in Alabama and Mississippi was a three-way tie. And two things about it need to be kept in mind: 1. Please, in the future, someone needs to CLOSE "open" primaries. http://gulagbound.com/27470/did-santorum-beat-gin... "Santorum’s final edge over Gingrich was approximately two percent in Mississippi and six percent in Alabama. Theoretically, both of these tallies could be within the margin of pranking." 2. ‎"Mitt Romney has won almost 1.2 million more votes than Rick Santorum overall. How much did Rick Santorum gain on him last night? 39,119 votes." http://www.businessinsider.com/enough-already-can... "If you were running a race and at some point while you were leading by a long distance the second place runner got 1.35 percent closer to you, absolutely no one would notice."

Commentary Magazine : Seven Reasons Why Newt Won't Quit

Sat, 10 Mar 2012 14:20:03 +0000

I'm not blind to Newt's "enormous self-regard", but how is that exactly unique to him? Have you watched Chris Christie lately? I mean, come on, I know it's popular to talk about serving your country by running for office, but if you think you're an appropriate choice to be the head of state (not just head of government), a representative of the nation and the people, you're already coming in the race with a considerable amount of self-regard... Gingrich, to my recollection, never polled well in either Michigan or Ohio, which would be an argument for his weakness as a candidate. However, Santorum, while it seems likely he would have won both states with the margin some of Gingrich's voters, what does it say about his strength as a candidate in going from a double digit lead in the polls to within a few percentage points victory in two weeks? Well, he was outspent, you might say. And so he was. Gingrich was also outspent in Florida after winning in S.C. What was Santorum doing at the time? Defending Romney about Bain Capital, and setting himself above the fray, instead of defending Gingrich from Romney's mud-slinging. There was an opportunity to present a united conservative front at that point, which did not even require Santorum to drop out, but, from my point of view, Santorum chose his own self-interest. So Gingrich does not owe Santorum anything in the name of conservatism. Or we could say that Gingrich ought to, in the name of conservatism, be the bigger man anyway and drop out. But for me, there is not enough of a fundamental difference between Santorum and Romney (as evidenced by the Arizona debate); as Newt says, it's a choice between a "team player" and someone who will "manage the decay", and in both cases each will pursue the failed policies of the Bush administration.

Commentary Magazine : Obama, Limbaugh and the Law Student

Mon, 5 Mar 2012 19:53:47 +0000

Limbaugh did not owe her a personal apology - I find that people have very conveniently self-serving and shifting definitions of what constitutes sexual promiscuous behavior. Maybe she IS a slut. But that is besides the point. It's outrageous that she expects other people to pay for her contraception. All Limbaugh needed to say was that he was addressed the issue in the the wrong way, with the wrong words, and with the wrong attitude.

Commentary Magazine : Santorum Isn’t Wrong on Gambling

Sun, 19 Feb 2012 15:47:47 +0000

On the other hand: http://www.jpost.com/Features/FrontLines/Article.... "Lawmakers and activists believe bill criminalizing prostitution signifies a breakthrough in recognizing sex industry’s abuse of basic human rights."

Commentary Magazine : Santorum Isn’t Wrong on Gambling

Sat, 18 Feb 2012 18:13:59 +0000

(I'm not necessarily endorsing the view expressed below, but I think it can be said to be an interesting contrast to the idea of finding "respectable work" when there is so much corruption in society that many people whore themselves in different ways.) http://www.haaretz.com/weekend/week-s-end/when-th... Prostitutes, who will be left unemployed, will then also realize they should find "real jobs." Thus they will join the large group of simple whores: those human beings who sell their souls in the crudest way for the sake of a career, money, fame and much more, but outwardly look like respectable creatures and call themselves journalists, gender studies professors, Knesset members and heaven knows what else. Hiring their services, for some reason, is not illegal.

Commentary Magazine : Santorum Isn’t Wrong on Gambling

Sat, 18 Feb 2012 18:11:03 +0000

Good article. As for prostitution, however, it is already legal, in a way. It is called pornography. Women get paid money to have sex. Why is there a distinction made between that which is filmed and that which is not? I don't think narcotics should be made legal, and I can see the point made above about gambling. But I think given the state of things in society now, there is an argument to be made for legalizing prostitution. It does not condone the morality of the interaction - and if you cheat on your wife, it's still wrong, a violation of the marriage covenant and contract. But the aim of legalizing prostitution would be to give protection for the women who are presently exploited by pimps - if they are going to sell their bodies, their right to their own integrity, as far as that goes, in doing so should be protected.

Commentary Magazine : Should Gingrich Drop Out?

Tue, 14 Feb 2012 15:36:24 +0000

http://www.justin.fm/2012/02/rick-santorum-dead-l... Official Delegate Count as of 02/13/2012: Mitt Romney: 73 Newt Gingrich: 29 Ron Paul: 8 Rick Santorum: 3 Official Popular Vote Total as of Today, 02/13/2012: Mitt Romney: 1,121,497 Newt Gingrich: 838,715 Rick Santorum: 431,819 Ron Paul: 307,866 Fact: Newt Gingrich has finished ahead of Rick Santorum in every contest whose results are binding - New Hampshire, South Carolina, Florida, and Nevada. Fact: Iowa, Minnesota, Colorado, and Maine are non-binding caucus contests. Zero delegates were chosen by these votes, Zero. Delegates are not chosen until each state's convention. The Missouri primary was a senseless vote as Missouri holds it's non-binding caucus on March 17th.

Commentary Magazine : Should Gingrich Drop Out?

Tue, 14 Feb 2012 01:35:11 +0000

Gingrich can't be a kingmaker, since few in the Republican party apparently have any respect for him. And let's remember Santorum back in 2008: As noted by blogger PolitJim, Santorum endorsed Romney BEFORE Huckabee was out of the race. He was questioned about it in Iowa where, like Santorum, Huckabee had already won. Santorum’s answer? Huckabee had lost South Carolina and Florida. Huckabee didn’t have a lot of money. So according to Santorum – you shouldn’t have voted for him! So unless we are going to hold Santorum to Santorum's standard, let's not hold Gingrich to Gingrich's standard. Both men, besides, are not interchangeable - they are very different.