“I was a libertarian, then I grew up” bit of an odd attempt at a burn from someone at an outlet whose entire MO is a childish overreaction to Trump and frequent abandonment of principles because they need to be the opposite side of Trump.
Especially odd since, by all appearances, he has yet to grow up. As you say, like the rest of the outfit. Every appearance of his reminds me of several people I knew in high school, as they were in high school, not as they are today. Always with the, "I'm not being serious" schtick. Did it work better for him back in 10th grade?
I am very much on the "partisan politics melts your brain" side of the argument as articulated by Matt and Nick. Team Bulwark, both on stage and in the audience, confirmed this many times over.
David Samuels' long essay in Tablet is excellent. I didn't find its argument to be particularly conspiratorial. What I primarily took away is that Obama caught a wave of technological and cultural change, with David Axelrod being the chief facilitator--somewhat akin to the partnership between Reagan and Lee Atwater. Samuels' Gurriesque diagnosis of "Rapid-Onset Political Enlightenment" in our age of social media is all the more reason to turn away from putrid partisanship.
So I just finished watching that debate; and honestly, I am only inspired to quote the debate moderator from Billy Madison and say that we’re all a little dumber for having heard it. Clearly the audience, as well as the Bulwark missed a key point in the question posited. You have to choose a side in POLITICS! This doesn’t have to do with going to your parents house in West Virginia, or even choosing to be for civil rights - it’s particularly constrained to politics. And if I ever thought Tim Miller was insufferable before this; well, he’s pretty much beyond the pale for me now. He spends an hour being completely sanctimonious about how one cannot ‘sit on the sidelines,’ but then uses the last closing statement to give the game away by telling us he’s an obsessed political dork that TEXTS HIS FRIENDS and politics whenever he can. Well, yeah - OF COURSE that dude will think you need to pick. Godspeed to you Matt, and Nick, for having to sit through that…
The problem I've always had with the Bulwark is they want to play lip service to the idea that they are criticizing the Republican Party as an institution, but in practice it only comes out as being that Trump is the great corrupter who ruined a good thing.
The issues that MAGA is running on go back to the Republican/Evangelical alliance in the 70's. Their cultural war is based on the , ironically correct, idea that this is not their country anymore and mainstream institutions now seek to exclude and disenfranchise them.
This is the direction the Republican Party has been moving to all along and everyone from the Bulwark was all in on it prior to the emergence of the great Orange specter. If Donald Trump had been hit by a bus and killed in 1995, the people of the Bulwark would today be advancing the same MAGA foot soldiers like McConnell, Graham, and Cruz as the leaders we should all be following. That they don't seem to acknowledge that irony undermines any credibility they seek to have.
Subtitle made me laugh because when my nephew was 3, he woke me up 7am xmas morning, saying into my face as close as possible, “Merrychristmasthanksgiving!”
Reason vs Debate, “You don’t have to pick a side in politics,” cliff's notes (spoiler alert /s):
-
Reason: "Well, 1/3 of registered voters didn't vote, thus didn't pick a side." <mic drop>
Bulwark: "U MUST pick a side because: Trump bad! AmIRight?!"
<audience applause!>
Reason: "Uh, well here are a bunch of reasons to support our position, including...."
Bulwark: "NO, everyone must pick a side because: Trump bad! AmIRight?!"
<audience applause!>
Bulwark: "Reason is center-right wing, so they are biased, unlike us. Trump bad! AmIRight?!"
<audience applause!>
Conclusion: Bulwark wins the debate.
-
Um.... Didn't Trump win the election? Seems like Bulwark's argument was: Trump will win if *everybody* doesn't choose our ('correct') candidate, guess they were right on that one.
Just listened to the Reason/Bulwark debate and noticed Tim threw a little dig at Kmele at one point, sarcastically saying they should have invited Kmele so they could discuss “cancel culture” 🙄 Just a loathsome duo Tim and Sarah, who kept implying throughout the whole event it was silly and not worth their time. Feeling blessed their site is paywalled so I don’t bother giving them undeserved clicks 🙏
Miller's comments on West Virginia, his unconcealed contempt for merely having to travel there, summed them up for me. Despite Longwell's professed love for the USA and it's Constitution, they love just a sliver of the USA, not all of it - and the hint of influence that came from the hill they chose to die on. It seemed, from much of what they said, that the only part of the country they don't disdain is the gay part - or maybe just Washington, DC. And they talked like their mentality never adjusted after high school.
“I was a libertarian, then I grew up” bit of an odd attempt at a burn from someone at an outlet whose entire MO is a childish overreaction to Trump and frequent abandonment of principles because they need to be the opposite side of Trump.
It a verbal representation of a total lack of an argument
For some reason they can’t fathom that not choosing between a douche and a turd sandwich is OK.
Hahahaha, I post this after Longwell’s opening, so glad Nick actually had the video.
His puka shell necklace suggests otherwise around his claim he’s grown up…
Especially odd since, by all appearances, he has yet to grow up. As you say, like the rest of the outfit. Every appearance of his reminds me of several people I knew in high school, as they were in high school, not as they are today. Always with the, "I'm not being serious" schtick. Did it work better for him back in 10th grade?
Who’s taller, me or Jesse?
It’s forced perspective, right, like in lord of the rings?
Yes. Chaya is 6'1, 145. Jesse is 5'3, 355. Ironically Jesse is also a black transsexual, it just doesn't come across clearly in pictures.
I am very much on the "partisan politics melts your brain" side of the argument as articulated by Matt and Nick. Team Bulwark, both on stage and in the audience, confirmed this many times over.
David Samuels' long essay in Tablet is excellent. I didn't find its argument to be particularly conspiratorial. What I primarily took away is that Obama caught a wave of technological and cultural change, with David Axelrod being the chief facilitator--somewhat akin to the partnership between Reagan and Lee Atwater. Samuels' Gurriesque diagnosis of "Rapid-Onset Political Enlightenment" in our age of social media is all the more reason to turn away from putrid partisanship.
Gooey Sentiment was my name when I was a dancer…
excellent tips for viewing, listening and reading. what a week its been !!!
That Scott Horton interview was impossible to listen to.
I hate to level ad hominem but he is also very gruesome to look at and it's not helping him. He always looks like a cancer patient.
For me it's 100% his dumb ideas and shitty attitude.
It's Chrismukkah Mr. Welch. Happy Chrismukkah to all!
So I just finished watching that debate; and honestly, I am only inspired to quote the debate moderator from Billy Madison and say that we’re all a little dumber for having heard it. Clearly the audience, as well as the Bulwark missed a key point in the question posited. You have to choose a side in POLITICS! This doesn’t have to do with going to your parents house in West Virginia, or even choosing to be for civil rights - it’s particularly constrained to politics. And if I ever thought Tim Miller was insufferable before this; well, he’s pretty much beyond the pale for me now. He spends an hour being completely sanctimonious about how one cannot ‘sit on the sidelines,’ but then uses the last closing statement to give the game away by telling us he’s an obsessed political dork that TEXTS HIS FRIENDS and politics whenever he can. Well, yeah - OF COURSE that dude will think you need to pick. Godspeed to you Matt, and Nick, for having to sit through that…
The problem I've always had with the Bulwark is they want to play lip service to the idea that they are criticizing the Republican Party as an institution, but in practice it only comes out as being that Trump is the great corrupter who ruined a good thing.
The issues that MAGA is running on go back to the Republican/Evangelical alliance in the 70's. Their cultural war is based on the , ironically correct, idea that this is not their country anymore and mainstream institutions now seek to exclude and disenfranchise them.
This is the direction the Republican Party has been moving to all along and everyone from the Bulwark was all in on it prior to the emergence of the great Orange specter. If Donald Trump had been hit by a bus and killed in 1995, the people of the Bulwark would today be advancing the same MAGA foot soldiers like McConnell, Graham, and Cruz as the leaders we should all be following. That they don't seem to acknowledge that irony undermines any credibility they seek to have.
Subtitle made me laugh because when my nephew was 3, he woke me up 7am xmas morning, saying into my face as close as possible, “Merrychristmasthanksgiving!”
It has become our holiday greeting ever since.
Reason vs Debate, “You don’t have to pick a side in politics,” cliff's notes (spoiler alert /s):
-
Reason: "Well, 1/3 of registered voters didn't vote, thus didn't pick a side." <mic drop>
Bulwark: "U MUST pick a side because: Trump bad! AmIRight?!"
<audience applause!>
Reason: "Uh, well here are a bunch of reasons to support our position, including...."
Bulwark: "NO, everyone must pick a side because: Trump bad! AmIRight?!"
<audience applause!>
Bulwark: "Reason is center-right wing, so they are biased, unlike us. Trump bad! AmIRight?!"
<audience applause!>
Conclusion: Bulwark wins the debate.
-
Um.... Didn't Trump win the election? Seems like Bulwark's argument was: Trump will win if *everybody* doesn't choose our ('correct') candidate, guess they were right on that one.
That was hard to listen to, seriously.
Just listened to the Reason/Bulwark debate and noticed Tim threw a little dig at Kmele at one point, sarcastically saying they should have invited Kmele so they could discuss “cancel culture” 🙄 Just a loathsome duo Tim and Sarah, who kept implying throughout the whole event it was silly and not worth their time. Feeling blessed their site is paywalled so I don’t bother giving them undeserved clicks 🙏
You spoil us! Looking forward to holiday listening. Debate was clearly rigged! Stop the steal!
Miller's comments on West Virginia, his unconcealed contempt for merely having to travel there, summed them up for me. Despite Longwell's professed love for the USA and it's Constitution, they love just a sliver of the USA, not all of it - and the hint of influence that came from the hill they chose to die on. It seemed, from much of what they said, that the only part of the country they don't disdain is the gay part - or maybe just Washington, DC. And they talked like their mentality never adjusted after high school.
I really struggle to make sense of the Libertarian Institute libertarians vs the Reason libertarians!
To be honest, I kind of feel like a POS for snitch tagging Kmele like that.