Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

September 17, 2010

STEWART, COLBERT TO HOST D.C. RALLY ON 10/30.... A couple of weeks ago, when Jon Stewart said on "The Daily Show" that he was planning some kind of announcement, I thought he was kidding. It sounded like a joke: "I, Jon Stewart, am announcing that I will have an announcement sometime."

As it turns out, he was serious. Last night, Stewart announced he will host the "Rally To Restore Sanity" on the Washington Mall on October 30. The central message of the event, which Stewart also characterized as the "Million Moderate March," will be "Take It Down A Notch -- For America." Featured signs will include reasonable maxims, such as, "I Disagree With You, But I'm Pretty Sure You're Not Hitler."

Shortly thereafter, Stephen Colbert announced he, too, would hold a rally at the same place at the same time. Keeping with his on-air persona, Colbert labeled his event the "March To Keep Fear Alive."

It sounds like fun, and if I had to guess, I'd say turnout should be pretty strong. Watching Stewart and Colbert, it didn't seem as if any kind of specific agenda would be pushed -- only the notion that the American mainstream shouldn't be drowned out by extremists.

For what it's worth, my only concern here is one that I often hear in the media -- the notion that the left and right are equally crazy, and the fringes are driving their respective parties' agendas. That strikes me as a mistaken assumption. Republicans really have moved sharply to the far-right and allowed extremists to call the shots, while Truthers and Code Pink have no meaningful influence whatsoever in Democratic politics.

But by all appearances, this has nothing to do with partisanship, and everything to do with restoring some sense of sanity to our public discourse. It's a notion I heartily endorse, and hope desperately is successful.

It's also worth noting, of course, that the event will be held on Oct. 30, which just so happens to be a few days before the midterms. Ideally, those hoping to elect sensible, reasonable officials to key public offices would be spending that Saturday canvassing and working in support of mainstream candidates' campaigns. That said, a rally like this one, especially if it's well attended, will likely get sane voters' attention, spark some excitement among younger voters (who often don't vote in midterms), and encourage more reasonable folks to care about what's at stake three days later.

As for turnout, Glenn Beck's shindig drew 87,000 people. I'd be surprised if Comedy Central went to great lengths to coordinate efforts to boost attendance (organizing buses, for example), but here's guessing Stewart and Colbert can generate an even bigger audidence.

Steve Benen 8:45 AM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (40)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

The truthiness shall set us free!

Posted by: Ranger Jay on September 17, 2010 at 8:53 AM | PERMALINK

Voltaire would welcome both Stewart and Colbert into his house gleefully! -Kevo

Posted by: kevo on September 17, 2010 at 8:56 AM | PERMALINK

I've worked in DC for 4 years. I've never attended a single rally and I'm a political news junkie.

But this...This event I will DEFINITELY attend.

What does that tell you?

Best.Idea.Ever.

Posted by: Trinity on September 17, 2010 at 9:03 AM | PERMALINK

"here's guessing Stewart and Colbert can generate an even bigger audidence."

I'm guaranteeing it, as Stewart/Colbert's audience is far more ambulatory than Beck's.

Posted by: Chris Rasmussen on September 17, 2010 at 9:06 AM | PERMALINK

Important Announcement: We Need You

Today, this country is faced with the typical problem of the political party in charge losing its voting strength in the mid-term election. This situation has occurred with some regularity in recent U.S. history. But, this election is different. We've witnessed the worst recession (some say depression) since the 30's and 40's. And, of course, severe unemployment and economic despair may cause many citizens to think that the Administration should take a different tact. However, it's a matter of whether President Obama is going to have a Congressional team to allow him to continue with the recovery, or whether we elect more Republicans (and in some cases extreme Conservatives), and radically change the complexion of the Congress, so as to create a reactionary movement back to the situation we were in before Barak Obama became President.

Many say, “What has he done for us?” Or, “Shouldn't he do more, or at least something different?” There may be various answers to these questions in our electorate, but many over-look what President Obama and the a friendly House of Representatives, despite a filibuster-crazy Senate, has accomplished anyway:

Decrease in national debt by 8% .
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/04/13/politics/washingtonpost/main6391441.shtml
This has been accompanied a stabilization of the Dow Jones Average at above 10,000.

Created a health care program—although flawed, some may say—which will provide protection for
an estimated 45 million people without insurance or under-insure. Sure, health care may not be an
important issue to the 80% of Americans already covered, but what about those who have no such
protection? How many people would otherwise die?.

Although unemployment is still unacceptably high, the Obama administration has halted this
increase which was occurring when President Obama took office. We are at a pinnacle like has
never occurred in our recent experience. It is no longer necessary just to create industries
—industries that can just outsource jobs overseas—we need to create industries which will keep
jobs in this country, and cannot be shipped overseas. Do you really think the Republicans can do
this? They don't even know that this is the goal. The old way just doesn't work any more.

His administration Reformed the rules of the Wall Street financial industries. Many say, “Not
enough”, and I agree. But at least the Congress got something positive accomplished amidst
Republican objection. Can you imagine how little would have been accomplished if the
Republicans had been in charge? Nothing.

To view a list of 100 of Obama accomplishments in his first year of Presidency, see
http://simplifythepositive.blogspot.com/2010/03/100-accomplishments-of-president-barack.html .

A vote for the Republican Party this November means a vote for the 25% far-fight, radical element, which is embraced by the Conservative (Republican) Party. Why, that's only somewhat smaller than the percentage of people in the U.S. who believe the solar system revolves around the Earth—and probably includes much of the same people. Let's look at what these people believe—as represented by some of their most vocal representatives—before considering turning our government over to them:

Not only are Conservatives supporting the Bush tax cuts for the middle class, but only is it
includes a tax cut for the upperclass—who really need it. In January, the Bush tax cuts are set to
expire. The Democrats support reinstating them for the middle class, but not the upper class. By
allowing these tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires, the Republicans deny the government
several trillion dollars in revenue, based on the assumption that these people will put it back into
the economy through investment. But who say this will happen? If it doesn't, this country stands
to increase the deficit by $3-4 trillion dollars. What a gamble, based on a theory. I say 'a bird in
the hand is worth two in the bush'--no pun intended.

Some of the most radical members have seemed to suggest 'gun play' in the event they don't win.
Others suggest ending social programs, like medicare and social security, because they're too
expensive, while profiting from these very programs all these years. Or, that science is creating d
mice with fully developed human brains. Do we really want persons like this representing the
American people?.

What do conservatives have to offer about improving the economy? All they can talk about is
complaining about 'tax and spend' Democrats—on balance, will they take a page from the
George Bush play book, and become 'borrow and spend' Republicans instead, or just continue to
talk? I still I haven't seen the Republican plan.

Many of the right-wing have exhibited statements suggesting religious, ethnic, and
gender intolerance—currently directed toward the Muslim and GLBT community. Essentially,
they simply don't believe in freedom for all people—to them freedoms are bestowed upon whom
they prefer to pick and choose. We have seen this in our history with the KKK, and
anti-Semitism, and prejudice toward many other immigrant groups. And we've seen it more
recently, with the emergence of 'the Birthers' and a wealth of photos depicting President Obama
as a witch doctor or pimp—next thing you know they'll be saying he's a space alien. Do you
really want these kind of sentiments having an influence on government?

Conservatives are constantly calling attention to the high unemployment rate. But they forget
to remind you that during the Reagan administration, the unemployment rate went to 9.7-9.8%
and remained there for two years—and that was a mild recession compared to this near
depression.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-abrams/pop-quiz-under-reagan-wha_b_341348.html
Changing the economy is not an easy job; and the Republicans don't have the answer by
regressing back to the practices of the Bush days.

If you agree with what I've said here, go out and vote Democratic in November. We're almost certain to lose some seats in congress because of a traditionally low turnout of progressive voters during mid-term elections. So we need Independent and Democratic voters to turn out and vote for progressive candidates to minimize the number of seats lost to reactionary conservatives. We're especially vulnerable to losing the House of Representatives, where some important bills originate. Don't let this happen! And vote Democratic for Governor too—where applicable.

Posted by: tadcf on September 17, 2010 at 9:10 AM | PERMALINK

So, who will be the Progressive who has the "courage" to show up? Last week in the Oregonian, some RepuG writer to the LTE section, said that the niece of Dr Martin Luther King showed "courage" for speaking at Beck's Fun Fest. That niece, Dr Aveda King, is a RepuG, supported Steve Forbes in his failed presidential run, is a strong Pro-Life supporter and has been adament against any rights and, especially, marriage for Gays. Yeah, a whole lot of "courage". She, simply, went to Choir Practice.

Now, which Progressive will stand up with Stewart and Colbert?

Posted by: berttheclock on September 17, 2010 at 9:10 AM | PERMALINK

Yeah, I'm a little bugged by the implication that we need more moderates. On Facebook, there is a movement that calls itself the Coffee Party that is dedicated to bridging the partisan divide and getting together to solve our problems, but it seems misguided to me. It's not partisanship that is threatening our country, it is the fact that one party is insane.

Posted by: Daryl McCullough on September 17, 2010 at 9:11 AM | PERMALINK

BTW, for years, Dr Aveda King made the false claim that her uncle had, always, been a Republican.

Posted by: berttheclock on September 17, 2010 at 9:12 AM | PERMALINK

Wow, I haven't been to a rally in DC since the no nukes era. I shall return! We need sanity, no doubt. They will draw much more then 87,000.

Posted by: KK on September 17, 2010 at 9:18 AM | PERMALINK

"It's not partisanship that is threatening our country, it is the fact that one party is insane."

With respect, I think JS is saying that the threat is anyone asserting that others viewpoints are illegitimate. I think JS wants you to try disagreeing without being disagreeable. You need to explain (preferably with facts) why your opponents' opinions are wrong, why they may be mistaken or ill-informed, not that they are insane, or the reincarnation of Hitler and his Nazis.

Posted by: Johnny Canuck on September 17, 2010 at 9:21 AM | PERMALINK

I wonder is someone like Rachel from the 'worst element' of the Democratic Party will be invited.

Posted by: Michael7843853 on September 17, 2010 at 9:32 AM | PERMALINK

This is why Jon Stewart is the most trusted newsman in America. He is SANE.

Posted by: John R on September 17, 2010 at 9:35 AM | PERMALINK

Johnny Canuck, some of us have been doing just that for some time, with no apparent effect on the other party. After a while, one begins to wonder if the insanity definition "to repeat the same act over and over, hoping for a different result" might not apply.

And "insane" is convenient shorthand. I suppose "logically and historically challenged" is more accurate.

Posted by: dr2chase on September 17, 2010 at 9:38 AM | PERMALINK

I live on the West Coast and am seriously considering getting a plane ticket, a hotel room and attending.

I've been calling for some kind of counter-protest for months now, and if Stewart and Colbert are the only people willing to pull such an event together, I'm going to be there.

We have to show these mofos that they AREN'T THE MAJORITY.

Posted by: bdop4 on September 17, 2010 at 9:43 AM | PERMALINK

"Decrease in national debt by 8% .
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/04/13/politics/washingtonpost/main6391441.shtml
This has been accompanied a stabilization of the Dow Jones Average at above 10,000."

tadcf - I'm all for rallying voters to the cause, but please try to get your facts straight. You cited a decrease in the national debt. The story talks about the national deficit.

Try to learn the difference.

Posted by: Badlands on September 17, 2010 at 9:56 AM | PERMALINK

I watched this clip. John Stewart is 100% wrong in equating the loons of both sides. Left wing marches are ignored by both the media and democratic politicians. No one in the democratic party catered to conspiracy theories about 9/11. Code pink is not mainstream. Republican right wing loonies and crazies are hosted by the republican party. Sarah Palin, the republican vice presidential candidate, wrecked havoc on the health care debate with her death panel fear mongering. She threw fire into the anti muslim flames with her bullshit tweet about the mosque. Newt is a former speaker of the house (and possible presidential candidate)and the so called higher up in the republican party, and he is the one peddling garbage about Obama. It is not the lunatics of both parties. It is only the lunatics of one party who are aided and abetted and encouraged by republican politicians and the rich guys funding them that are causing so much trouble and hatred. The lunatics are the republican party, because the sane republicans are leaving the building.

Posted by: rk21 on September 17, 2010 at 9:59 AM | PERMALINK

Oooh, wouldn't it be great if a couple of hundred thousand showed up for this outdoor "MOCK CONCERT?"

The crowd will be a lot younger, so the venders are going to have to switch from Depends, denture cream, bunion pads, and wheelchair batteries to some hipper products, not hip-replacement products.

Posted by: c u n d gulag on September 17, 2010 at 10:04 AM | PERMALINK

I yield to no one in my love of Stew Beef, but I'm appalled by the false equivalence he's been peddling of late. Searching for the magic pony of reasonable discourse between those of differing opinions is exactly what's gotten us into this mess. Had Pres. Obama spent more time fighting the extremist lies of his opposition from Day One instead of pursuing some kind of glorious bipartisanship, we'd have had a more substantial stim, a public option, an energy bill, etc etc. Fact is, when the other side is running lunatic candidates -- yes, lunatic -- that (to name but one inane example) oppose abortion under any/all circumstances, our side needs to yell and scream and punch back just as hard. Let's not kid ourselves: the lies and over-the-top rhetoric that dominate the debate aren't coming from Progressives. Hell, we barely get a chance to make our case in the national media arena. Sadly, Stewart is selling the same hippie-punching Village nonsense we get from pinheads like Mark Halperin and his ilk.

"Why can't we all just get along?" Because there is no middle ground between what's right and wrong, dammit!

Posted by: Millstream Pigworker on September 17, 2010 at 10:21 AM | PERMALINK

dr2chase: "And "insane" is convenient shorthand. I suppose "logically and historically challenged" is more accurate."

But inaccurate, eg historically challenged= ignorant not insane.

In the 1960's it used to drive me crazy when supporters of the Viet Nam war would say, we must trust the President, he's the only one with all the facts. It was pretty clear that LBJ didn't have all the facts, and he often lied or covered up the facts he did know (eg Gulf of Tonkin incident and subsequent Senate hearings). As a keen observer from north of the border, and for the first time in my life, I say trust this President!! His, you can disagree without being disagreeable, is really what JS is also doing.
And is probably the best curative for right wing "insanity".

Which is the correct metaphor, for persistence or to give up trying? I prefer: When you hit a rock with a hammer, you may not get results immediately, how many blows will it take before the rock cracks? don't know, but if you give up trying, I can guarantee it won't.

Posted by: Johnny Canuck on September 17, 2010 at 10:22 AM | PERMALINK

It's also worth noting, of course, that the event will be held on Oct. 30, which just so happens to be a few days before the midterms.

It's also the Saturday/one day before Halloween, so look for a lot of weirdos in costume to show up. Yes, that'll get the media excited.

Posted by: Marko on September 17, 2010 at 10:32 AM | PERMALINK

Millstream: I fear that if Obama had followed your advice, nothing would have been accomplished. Obama and co have to count to 60. Those are the "rules" and unless there are 60 senators willing to change the rules, they are going to stay that way all session long.
Obama is a student of history. Roosevelt compromised a lot. Lincoln was seen as weak and ineffective by his rivals. That isn't the way history looks back at either of them.

Politics is the "art of the possible", and that is what Obama is practicing. Yes, the stimulus was too small, but without Snowe's vote it wouldn't have been as large as it was.

Posted by: Johnny Canuck on September 17, 2010 at 10:34 AM | PERMALINK

I am sure that Stewart will have a huge crowd if I was still in college i would definately be attending, but in all fairness the that other rally I think that 87000 was too low of an estimate. It looked much more like a couple of hundred thousand.

Posted by: johnnj on September 17, 2010 at 10:50 AM | PERMALINK

People ignore the fundamental difference between Beck and Colbert/Stewart: the latter are *intentionally* hilarious.

-Z

Posted by: Zorro on September 17, 2010 at 11:03 AM | PERMALINK

I booked my hotel room before Jon was even done annoucing it!

Posted by: joyzeeboy on September 17, 2010 at 11:11 AM | PERMALINK

Some of the commenters need to loosen up a bit. THESE GUYS ARE COMEDIANS. You can't mock the right for their whackos and give a pass on the other side.

Listen, this is the closest thing to a progressive counter-protest that I've seen since Obama was elected. We have to make some kind of visceral statement as to our numbers, but noone on the left has stepped up to the plate.

If DKos or FDL or MoveOn or any other progressive organization (or a coalition, perhaps?) wants to stage a major DC rally, I'm all ears. But I haven't heard anything from the "serious" progressive organizations that remotely seems real. According to Stewart, they've actually pulled the permits.

So, stay at your computers and bitch and moan. I'm going to be there and make a statement for SANITY.

Posted by: bdop4 on September 17, 2010 at 11:19 AM | PERMALINK

Johhnj,

From what I've read, 87,000 is the estimate given by people trained to make those kinds of calculations.

I think I'll go with their expertise against your wishful thinking.

Posted by: bdop4 on September 17, 2010 at 11:24 AM | PERMALINK

Johnny Canuck - I'm all about the "art of the possible." The problem is that there has to be equal openness to realistic compromise from both sides. "Lop off, say, $100 billion, from the stim and we'll vote for it," as per the Senators from Maine, was not about finding a bipartisan agreement to solve our economic problems. Rather, it was gamesmanship with no goal other than showing off their power. If the Republicans want to be actual, serious-minded partners in governing, then great, let's horsetrade. But until then, Obama needs to say, "Eff you, buddy. Get out of the way so we can try to save this country before it goes down the crapper."

Posted by: Millstream Pigworker on September 17, 2010 at 11:52 AM | PERMALINK

Stewart/Colbert may be intentionally humorous; what's more important is that like most good humorists they are deeply serious. I don't sense that seriousness in people like Beck or Palin, aside from their career advancement or their bank account.

I've never forgotten Stewart's first show after 9/11, and it did not surprise me to learn that Colbert teaches CCD. Other examples abound.

Posted by: Steve Paradis on September 17, 2010 at 12:15 PM | PERMALINK

Johnny Canuck, for compromise and mutual respect and all that good stuff to be possible, it has to be that both sides want what is best for the country, and just disagree about what that is. Is that true today? Frankly, I don't know. The other alternative is that one side wants things to be as bad as possible, knowing that hard times benefit challengers, politically. If the latter is the case, then it is not possible to reach an agreement based on the common goal of what's best for the country.

Posted by: Daryl McCullough on September 17, 2010 at 12:16 PM | PERMALINK

set up a booth at the rally, steve! you could really help generate more people going by saying you'll be there.

Posted by: marydem on September 17, 2010 at 12:39 PM | PERMALINK

Yup I also am offended by John's attempt to equate the fear and loathing smear campaign of the right with organizations like Code Pink and the person who got close enough to Cheney to yell "Go fuck yourself" in direct reference to what the Vice President of the USA bellowed at the dignified Dem head of the Judiciary Committee Patrick Leahy on the floor of the Senate. I understand where he's coming from but the comparison is very weak which is where Colbert comes in with his March to Keep Fear Alive. The message will get across but the come on from Stewart is lame.

Posted by: bobatkinson on September 17, 2010 at 2:13 PM | PERMALINK

Yup I also am offended by John's attempt to equate the fear and loathing smear campaign of the right with organizations like Code Pink and the person who got close enough to Cheney to yell "Go fuck yourself" in direct reference to what the Vice President of the USA bellowed at the dignified Dem head of the Judiciary Committee Patrick Leahy on the floor of the Senate. I understand where he's coming from but the comparison is very weak which is where Colbert comes in with his March to Keep Fear Alive. The message will get across but the come on from Stewart is lame.

Posted by: bobatkinson on September 17, 2010 at 2:25 PM | PERMALINK

Love Stewart but as the heads are rolling down the street and liberals are being shot right and left Colbert will be yelling "I was just kidding you guys...don't you get it...it was all a joke...I was just kidding".

Colbert still can't get it through his head how stupid conservatives can be. So many take him seriously and don't have a clue about satire. "Idiocracy" was a documentary to this crew.

Posted by: bjobotts on September 17, 2010 at 3:29 PM | PERMALINK


"Posted by: tadcf on September 17, 2010 at 9:10 AM |

"Masturbator"-tea party candidate Christine....

Satire, humor and mockery can heighten a political agenda or invalidate one by complete distraction. But with these guys count on a giant political leaf blower whirling stupidity from the sidewalks of the crazy fringe tormenting American politics. Millions will be watching...I hope in person.

tadcf's comments above demonstrate the paranoia we all share at a republican take over of anything.
We may need better dems but this is...the best that can be achieved at present vs the worst that could happen.

If you think dems losing majorities will teach them a lesson so they will do better the next time we elect them, consider that with one more repub majority in congress again...there won't be a "next time". We will slide right into a plutocratic corporatocracy of homeless serfs willing to work 60hr/wks for $.60/hr beginning at age twelve with no affordable health care. "Citizens United" will make sure of that (along with the "Shock Doctrine" and the new Brownshirts.) Nature demands a "Fourth Turning" with or without our help.

Posted by: bjobotts on September 17, 2010 at 3:58 PM | PERMALINK

"... it has to be that both sides want what is best for the country, and just disagree about what that is. Is that true today? Frankly, I don't know. The other alternative is that one side wants things to be as bad as possible, knowing that hard times benefit challengers, politically. If the latter is the case, then it is not possible to reach an agreement based on the common goal of what's best for the country."
Posted by: Daryl McCullough on September 17, 2010 at 12:16 PM |

Millionaires and Billionaires and their transnational corporations don't give a rat's ass about the good of our country only themselves, that's why they outsourced jobs and manufacturing and headquarters, want no regulations or taxes or unions demanding safe working conditions etc. Don't kid yourself...cons say anything to get elected but once there their only mission is to protect the interests of the wealthy. The wealthy don't give a damn about abortion, school prayer, gays, drugs, guns as their wealth allows them to have and do whatever they want in those areas. Taxes, regulations, unions, restrictions of any kind that prevent them from getting the resources they want or or doing what ever they want to do is what they care about and they spend billions buying up government and have their lobbyists write the legislation.

That's why Boehner has briefings with representative lobbyists before voting on any legislation...in every area...they tell him what to do and say. He's literally dumb as a box of rocks.

Posted by: bjobotts on September 17, 2010 at 4:11 PM | PERMALINK

Fox News is already reporting that only a couple hundred people showed up for "that liberal Jon Stewart's rally", while hundreds of thousands of people showed up for Beck's Freedom Fest, and thousands more are showing up every day.

Posted by: josef on September 17, 2010 at 5:47 PM | PERMALINK

My concern is that this type of event will end up discrediting...telling the truth about the far right takeover of the GOP and make describing their crazy agenda seem uncivil. Civil political discussion is great, but non-insane policy is better. As either Steve or Drum or Digby keep saying, what does it benefit us to win at debate when the other side is playing rugby?

Now is not the time to go all wobbly, as a famous lady once said.

Posted by: Davidwonk on September 17, 2010 at 8:35 PM | PERMALINK

Josef,

How can Faux News report on something that hasn't happened yet?

Posted by: bdop4 on September 18, 2010 at 2:04 PM | PERMALINK

Hell, I live in Hawaii, and I'm thinking about going. The only real weapon that we have against the lunatics on the right is humor!

Beck/Palin!
Bi/Polar!

Posted by: hawiken on September 20, 2010 at 2:49 AM | PERMALINK

The fact that Mr. Benen sees no political agenda in the Colbert/Stewart Party Rally and the fact that posters see the "Coffee Party" as something in the middle suggests how far the U.S. has gone Statist. Colbert and Stewart have made their livings by spewing hate towards Bush, Cheney, Republicans, Tea Party supporters, and Constitutionalists. They are RADICALLY LEFT insofar as their is Left and Right. The "Coffee Party" is simply a distraction designed to persuade the public that the Tea Party is too far "Right." That Mr. Benen and his posters think that these forces represent the Middle, or Moderate position, is astounding. It confirms that the "Left" has "won" and that they control (through Mainstream Media, of course) the conversation.

Now, if you want a reality check, understand that there is no Left and there is no Right. There are Statists and Anti-Statists, with varying degrees of adherents in each. Obama, Pelosi, Reid, Frank, the Mainstream Media, the walking laugh riot that is Keith Olberman, the walking embarrassment that is Chris Matthews, and almost the entirety of Academia, falls into the category of Radically, or Committed, Statist. Someone like Bill Clinton falls a little less so into the hard core Statist camp. Among Anti-Statists, you have everyone from activist enviros who abhor the State (though some enviros are in the Statist, enviro-fascist camp) to Libertarians to those who never miss the chance to get gassed at a G-20 summit. So, the Anti-Statists range from anarchists to mainstream Libertarians and to many, if not most, of the Tea Party. Commentators like Mark Levine, Michael Savage, Rush Limbaugh, Shaun Hannity, Jerry Doyle, and the like are Anti-Statists. They favor the Rule of Law, Constitutional foundations and controls, limited central government, and a non-activist Judiciary.

So, there is really no Left and no Right. Think of it, if you must think of it in simple terms, as the face of a clock. At the 12 o'clock position, you have absolute liberty in the State of Nature. You can move clockwise or counterclockwise from there. Clockwise gives you anarchists at 1 minute past 12 all the way to those "Right Wingers" who would fully accommodate the Statists at 5:29 (these are the "Right Wingers" who are complicit in the creation and maintenance of tyranny--think FDR). Counterclockwise gives you James Madison at 11:59, Alexander Hamilton at 9:00, Obama at about 7:15, but Stalin, Hitler, and Mao at 6:00.

The more complete way to look at this is not as a clock face, but as a sphere--a globe. There is much movement from one area on the sphere to the other as fallible human beings manipulate politics, economics, and culture to benefit themselves at the expense of rationality and the Rule of Law. At no time has tyranny been totally dominant. At no time has true and total liberty prevailed. It all ebbs and flows and always will. "There is nothing new under the Sun."

Posted by: Federalist45 on October 29, 2010 at 4:52 PM | PERMALINK




 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly