Who am I?
Christian. Skeptic. Ponderer. Sold on Western Civilization. Background in engineering and software. Rational, but not rationalist.
I'm a Hugh-inspired, long-tail blogger.
I Value
Informs my values.
News
Blog Search
Posts On This Page:
- · If America didn't do it...
- · How can you argue with a dream?
- · Newsweek's Retraction
- · Steyn Strikes Again
- · Top 10 U.N. Slogans
Archives
- October 2004
- November 2004
- December 2004
- January 2005
- February 2005
- March 2005
- April 2005
- May 2005
- June 2005
- July 2005
- August 2005
- September 2005
- October 2005
- November 2005
- December 2005
- January 2006
- February 2006
- March 2006
- April 2006
- May 2006
- June 2006
- July 2006
- August 2006
- September 2006
- October 2006
- November 2006
- December 2006
- January 2007
- February 2007
- March 2007
- April 2007
- May 2007
- June 2007
- July 2007
- August 2007
- September 2007
- October 2007
- November 2007
- January 2008
- February 2008
- March 2008
- April 2008
- July 2008
- August 2008
- September 2008
- October 2008
- November 2008
- December 2008
- February 2009
- June 2009
- July 2009
- October 2009
- December 2009
- January 2010
- February 2010
- April 2010
- May 2010
- July 2010
- February 2011
- April 2011
- May 2011
- February 2013
Look closer. Think harder. Choose the sound argument over the clever one.
Tuesday, May 31, 2005
If America didn't do it...
...no one seems to care. (Radical Hindus burn the Quran. No protests. No outcry.)
HT: I don't remember who. :-(
Tuesday, May 24, 2005
How can you argue with a dream?
One of my favorite bloggers reads one of my favorite authors.
Horowitz says it so well...
conservatism was an attitude about lessons from an actual past. By contrast, the attention of progressives was directed towards an imagined future. Conservatism was an attitude of caution based on a sense of human limits and what politics could accomplish. To ask whether conservatives were conservative was to ask a practical question about whether particular institutions were worth conserving...
The reason why progressives were unable to ask a similar question went to the root of their intolerant attitudes. Because the outlook of progressives was based on the idea of a liberated future, there was no way to disagree with them without appearing to oppose what was decent and humane. To criticize the radical project places one in opposition to a world in which social justice and harmony would prevail.
To which she eloquently adds...
In summary, he is saying: how can you argue with a dream? Although dreams ordinarily don't hurt people, this one has caused profound harm to untold millions of people during the course of the twentieth century, and is still causing misery in certain places. ...
"Progressives" feel that conservatives ... get their kicks from stomping on a dream.
No, we "non-progressives" [sic] don't get our kicks that way. But we, like Hobbes (as opposed to your Rousseau), see human nature as an imperfect given, something that needs to be taken into account when advocating a plan for society, or attempting a remedy for social ills.
Tuesday, May 17, 2005
Newsweek's Retraction
[Newsweek's Washington bureau chief:] "We think that people acted responsibly and professionally and ... there was no malice, no institutional bias, just a mistake that was made in good faith."That's good faith? Reminds me of this:
Such reasoning recalls the wonderful line from the Costa-Gavras film "Z": "Always blame the Americans. Even when you're wrong, you're right."
Steyn Strikes Again
Mark Steyn's wit and clarity, on the Bolton nomination and the UN. Don't miss this one.
Hat-tip: Carpe Bonum
Monday, May 02, 2005
Top 10 U.N. Slogans
Thanks, IMAO.