George Will Op-Ed: Validation By Defeat

[GTaudiophile]

Text

 

[cwjerome]

Can we say, "Arrogant Elites"?

Ooops, that's a bad word around here....

Good article.

 

[Pliablemoose]

Judging from previous threads, the liberals will never click on the link, they'll just start responding to the title...

 

[43st]

I'm liberal... no validation by defeat here. I'm sure Conservatives wouldn't go hide in a corner if they were on the back foot, though the media might suggest they do that. The system requires some sort of balance of power, I don't think anyone can deny that.

 

[Red Dawn]

If Iraq goes terribly wrong, if there are more Terorist attacks on US soil or if the economy takes a major dump within the next 4 years all this BS will be moot as the Republicans would go down in flames.

 

[r0tt3n1]

Using George Will as an example against liberal elitists is a gigantic oxymoron. A perfect example of calling the kettle black. This guy has always belittled the elitists that dont see things his own way, yet he IS an elitsit (or thinks he is anyway). He is overtly arrogant, always using big words to satiate his own intelect. He has to prove (to himself, I guess) that he is `above ` us by using uncommon words and phrases to trash all who oppose his views.
I wonder how long before someone says something really brilliant like; just because you are stupid and cant understand what he says blah blah blah..........
G Will makes me think of a line from the Peter Gabriel song Big Time; I'll be stretching my mouth, to let those big words come right out........

 

[JoLLyRoGer]

Originally posted by: r0tt3n1
Using George Will as an example against liberal elitists is a gigantic oxymoron. A perfect example of calling the kettle black. This guy has always belittled the elitists that dont see things his own way, yet he IS an elitsit (or thinks he is anyway). He is overtly arrogant, always using big words to satiate his own intelect. He has to prove (to himself, I guess) that he is `above ` us by using uncommon words and phrases to trash all who oppose his views.
I wonder how long before someone says something really brilliant like; just because you are stupid and cant understand what he says blah blah blah..........
G Will makes me think of a line from the Peter Gabriel song Big Time; I'll be stretching my mouth, to let those big words come right out........

How about attacking the content, not the character. I thought it was a good read.
The author makes some very good points addressing the "culture of victimhood" as he puts it. I think the message of the article illustrates hypocracy in America at its best.

 

[r0tt3n1]

Originally posted by: JoLLyRoGer

Originally posted by: r0tt3n1
Using George Will as an example against liberal elitists is a gigantic oxymoron. A perfect example of calling the kettle black. This guy has always belittled the elitists that dont see things his own way, yet he IS an elitsit (or thinks he is anyway). He is overtly arrogant, always using big words to satiate his own intelect. He has to prove (to himself, I guess) that he is `above ` us by using uncommon words and phrases to trash all who oppose his views.
I wonder how long before someone says something really brilliant like; just because you are stupid and cant understand what he says blah blah blah..........
G Will makes me think of a line from the Peter Gabriel song Big Time; I'll be stretching my mouth, to let those big words come right out........

How about attacking the content, not the character. I thought it was a good read.

His pieces are usually a good read. My rant was in response (mainly) to the above poster bashing the liberals. And, as is usual, this Will diatribe does disparages the Democrats as usual, as always etc etc...... He sometimes gives possible solutions to all the problems that the `liberals created`, but most of his stuff is just bashing using big words.

For example, quote from the article:

AARP OPPOSES BUSH PLAN TO REPLACE SOCIAL SECURITY WITH PRIVATE ACCOUNTS. But he has no plan to "replace" Social Security

When, not if, the Social Security system is reformed and younger generations build thier own retirements, this will effectively end Social Security. It will be gradual, but it IS the end of Social Security. How does the system intend to pay for all the current SS and short term future recipients til this transformation is complete? Does Will talk, rightly so, about these important issues? No, he just continues to bash away, using the example as fodder.

 

[isasir]

In his first paragrah, the writer talks about how a small, but significant group of Democrats are elitists who think America is dumb. Yet, in the third paragraph he notes that it's Democrats that are generally the ones that support trial lawyers, which, in essence represent these dumb Americans that need stupid warning labels.

So which is it? Do these Democrats think a majority of the American population is dumb, or do they think that manufacturers are dumb, and Americans are victims?

 

[r0tt3n1]

Originally posted by: isasir
In his first paragrah, the writer talks about how a small, but significant group of Democrats are elitists who think America is dumb. Yet, in the third paragraph he notes that it's Democrats that are generally the ones that support trial lawyers, which, in essence represent these dumb Americans that need stupid warning labels.

So which is it? Do these Democrats think a majority of the American population is dumb, or do they think that manufacturers are dumb, and Americans are victims?

Sorry, off topic again, but responses like this kinda validate my position that Will's pieces, more often than not, are hugely biased and promote Democrat, liberal bashing. In a way, they do promote discussion of meaningful subjects. There are numerous thoughts in the article that need further examination. I agree with the assertation that there is far too much of the `normal Americans are too stupid ` to think for themselves aspect. (hehe, that kinda makes it on-topic ) But to me, the undertone is (like a whole lot of various views here on both sides) too one sided.

 

[dmcowen674]

The whole Country is dumb, end of discussion.

That is what has been "Validated".

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
The whole Country is dumb, end of discussion.

That is what has been "Validated".

^^^ didn't read the article...or did but didn't understand it.

CsG

 

[Kibbo]

There is a sector of the left to whom this does apply. It's unfortunate that many of the right on this board are spending thier times painting all of us with a brush whose tint clashes with our actual beliefs. Remember that this particular sword cuts both ways.

I'd rather be an arrogant elite than a Falwell or a Keys. I'd even rather be a Moore. He can always diet.

 

[Vadatajs]

Originally posted by: cwjerome
Can we say, "Arrogant Elites"?

Ooops, that's a bad word around here....

Good article.

I didn't need to read past the first sentence to realize it's more of the tired "liberals think you're stupid" argument.

BTW we do, and you (the royal you, conservatives & americans in general) are.

 

[b0mbrman]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
Judging from previous threads, the liberals will never click on the link, they'll just start responding to the title...

I'm a liberal and have read the first two paragraphs already. I will continue to read until I've finished the article...at which point, I will formulate a response.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
If Iraq goes terribly wrong, if there are more Terorist attacks on US soil or if the economy takes a major dump within the next 4 years all this BS will be moot as the Republicans would go down in flames.

Planning for victory by hoping for oppenent to fail is not much of a plan.

 

[Pandaren]

I know many people in my hometown who vote Republican on exactly 1 issue - abortion. I've asked them about the war, the economy, the national debt, increasing poverty, etc. etc. and the answer I get is always the same: "we don't vote on those issues."

How can you reason with such people? How bad do things have to get before these issues become relevant?

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Pandaren
I know many people in my hometown who vote Republican on exactly 1 issue - abortion. I've asked them about the war, the economy, the national debt, increasing poverty, etc. etc. and the answer I get is always the same: "we don't vote on those issues."

How can you reason with such people? How bad do things have to get before these issues become relevant?

Kinda like those people that vote only keep abortion legal?

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: Pandaren
I know many people in my hometown who vote Republican on exactly 1 issue - abortion. I've asked them about the war, the economy, the national debt, increasing poverty, etc. etc. and the answer I get is always the same: "we don't vote on those issues."

How can you reason with such people? How bad do things have to get before these issues become relevant?

When you divide things into two categories (Good and Evil) and place issues in them properly, they (The issue's) tend to be repaired or dismissed based upon what list they end up in.

 

[Moonbeam]

The article in essence:

Statement of the lsupposed liberal mantra:

"Belief in the infantilism of the American public has been an expanding facet of 'progressive' thinking for 50 years and is especially intense now....."

followed by a childish argument trying to refute this obvious fact.