Charlie Rose

NoPardonforMichaelMilken  08/01/2009 04:00 AM Report

Ross Douthat is a stale, limited, and all-too-predictable propaganda artist of the Neoconservative rank. He provided the weak bromides of the Neoconservative extremist right regarding Likud and Benjamin Netanyahu while stumbling and mumbling around the name and racist policies of the leader about whom no Neoconservative dare speak, Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman. He showed only that the Neoconservative movement will again rely on false charges of anti-Semitism, terrorism (remember Begin and his hotel bombing days?), McCarthy-like questions of patriotism, the mindless adoration for tyrants such as Augusto Pinochet and Ferdinand Marcos (two of Marge Thatcher's dear pals), and endless propaganda as the basis for any and all Conservative campaign and governing efforts. Apparently America has little more than a young Silver Spoon trailing far behind the average community college field and saved only by his offshore bank accounts and the private numbers of AIPAC headquarters, Likud, Netanyahu, Lieberman, AEI, Heritage, WINEP, Martin Indyk, and his lover, Dennis Ross, on his personal Blackberry.

ShalomFreedman  07/30/2009 11:01 AM Report

Ross Douthat is a refreshing, intelligent and interesting commentator on political affairs. He provided telling insights regarding the Rockefeller Republican Administration of Harvard, and its super-left- wing faculty , and the almost impossible demographics of future Republican victory. Apparently America has a new political commentator of the first rank.

tartufe  07/29/2009 11:34 PM Report

Philisophical query: Does a school of divinity fudge on the truth?

NoPardonforMichaelMilken  07/28/2009 04:34 PM Report

Charlie,

It's like a sickness with you. You just cannot refuse the opportunity to kiss the posterior of a Neoconservative. If it's not Marty Indyk, it's his lover, Dennis Ross. If it's not Marty Peretz, it's Lally Weymouth.

The Neocons just deposit the money in your offshore bank account and you let them use the taxpayer-funded PBS to practice their latest Charles Coughlin routine, circa the 21st century.

cello10  07/28/2009 04:30 PM Report

Let's try to deconstruct this conversation so we can understand why it makes so little sense. We will start with the problem of our higher education institutions dereliction in their so called "core function" of providing higher education. In truth, higher education in this country is not about higher education, it is about generating research dollars to provide institutional funding. "Publish or perish" takes precedence over raising the next generation of capable leaders. American education is simply the end waste product of that research economic imperative. The second problem is getting a broad liberal arts education from a collection of narrow academic specialists is something of an oxymoron: At best, the students must connect the dots themselves because our higher education institutions are too dysfunctional to do it for them. All this perhaps explains why Ross Douthat failed to connect the dots and instead grew up to become a conservative, one who severely compartmentalizes everything that he looks at when he isn't failing to recognize his narrow, parochial blind spots. Unfortunately, we are rapidly approach a new paradigm shift in the 21st century that will be triggered by a rapid succession of sustainability crises over the next 40 years. What is required to meet these crises is the construction of a new integrated paradigm of civilization. This in turn requires capable people, with a new integrated, interdisciplinary vision to construct it. There is no room for traditional conservatives in this brave new world rapidly hurtling toward us. Resource scarcity, environmental degradation, climate change, and overpopulation will collide in a perfect storm with a highly leveraged economic system, one that requires positive exponential growth to avoid collapse, and a US political system that favors policy making for corporations at the expense of individual people and the environment. Faced with such a perfect storm, the conservative will continue to demonize "Tax and Spend Liberals" while forgetting that "Debt and Spend Conservatives" got us into this 10 trillion dollar national debt mess. At the same time, while closing their eyes to the problem of sustainability, they then proclaimed a "New Day in America". And if that weren't enough, they then erected an enormous Propaganda-Fear-Hate machine that preached the necessity of moral values even though the Propaganda machine itself never valued truth. My advice to Ross Douthat is to find another university, go back to school, and try to get an education this time. Harvard has obviously failed him. _ Cameron L Stewart

REMant  07/28/2009 02:21 PM Report

Brooks wrote: "This is not compassionate conservatism (which flattered the mind of the compassionate donor), it's hard-work conservatism, which uses government to increase the odds that self-discipline and effort will pay off." This may separate the Reaganites, just as it did the Jacksonians, from the Whigs, but for both, it was perhaps better put as "govt helps those who helps themselves," and there's very little evidence that it resulted in any self-discipline. I will not question Brooks' interpretation, but I would think that the Times would like to "define" the GOP as forever the party of Reagan. It will gratify also those who argue for a "big tent" approach, and politics as usual.

tartufe  07/28/2009 12:34 PM Report

An Ivy League, Harvard et al, education is an abject failure if after graduation you embrace religion and particularly the Catholic religion. (Larry Summers demeans it enough.) Catholicism demeans reason and logic beyond redemption. If an Ivy League education doesn’t excel in these abilities for each of its grads, what does it’s lofty reputation stem from? And the NYTs?

Ahh, my bigotry is showing. Harvard and religion is not an oxymoron. I’m ashamedly remembering it has a School of Divinity. Probably computes. It takes religious oriented financial wise-guys, a la Harvard et al, to scuttle the world’s economy without remorse, because god said it was ok.

As the great word-play expert doodahdaze points out his name itself has a negative connotation. Too bad it didn’t lend to a more inquiring approach to his education. A religious scholar or religion and scholar are incompatible concepts. All religions are fanciful and wildly silly. In the case of Christianity ironically so. It’s very foundation is based on two human evolutionary frailties. Joseph’s ego made his gullibility susceptible to Mary’s carnal act and her vivid description as heavenly making her yell repeatedly, oh god, oh god, oh god made her conclude, well why not? Ole Joe will go along, he’s a pushover. And there you have a more Darwinian human animal and real foundation for the Christian religion. Islam is no better with Mohamed on horse-back into seven heavens or so. Jews, Abraham, Moses, burning bushes. All childish conceits that force a fancy that someone or thing (usually in our own image) gives a shit.

The species immolation will come about by adherence to the Armageddon instructions in the users manual chapter Revelations.

A species that holds up anyone that believes the hideousness of the ‘good book’ as a scholar or intellectual is doomed to fail. AND DESERVEDLY SO!

doodahdaze  07/28/2009 11:38 AM Report

'Mr. Doubt-that' is a double negative/cynical/uncooperative/untrusting name. Along the same lines as the name 'Peter O'toole' being a double phallic name; as was exemplified by the indelible, great philosopher, professional communist-amateur comedian, Groucho Marx. .. <taking a bow>