The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

E. J. Dionne Gets His Winston Smith On

Posted on | December 26, 2011 | 8 Comments

by Smitty

Sweet, sweet NewSpeak.
How thou makest
the truth to reek.
And those blindest
Who’d their past seek.

Dionne’s column is masterful. Wander through the professional-grade propaganda has E. J. denounces the GOP candidates. A taste:

The GOP is engaged in a wholesale effort to redefine the government help that Americans take for granted as an effort to create a radically new, statist society. Consider Romney’s claim in his Bedford speech: “President Obama believes that government should create equal outcomes. In an entitlement society, everyone receives the same or similar rewards, regardless of education, effort and willingness to take risk. That which is earned by some is redistributed to the others. And the only people who truly enjoy any real rewards are those who do the redistributing — the government.”
Obama believes no such thing. If he did, why are so many continuing to make bundles on Wall Street? As my colleagues Greg Sargent and Paul Krugman have been insisting, Romney is saying things about the president that are flatly, grossly and shamefully untrue. But Romney’s sleight of hand is revealing: Republicans are increasingly inclined to argue that any redistribution (and Social Security, Medicare, student loans, veterans benefits and food stamps are all redistributive) is but a step down the road to some radically egalitarian dystopia.
Obama will thus be the conservative in 2012, in the truest sense of that word. He is the candidate defending the modestly redistributive and regulatory government the country has relied on since the New Deal, and that neither Ronald Reagan nor George W. Bush dismantled.

If American history had begun in 1913, then maybe Dionne’s argument would be less of a dirty diaper shoved in the face.

redefine the government help that Americans take for granted as an effort to create a radically new, statist society

It’s not that I would deny E. J. the private right to velvet handcuffs, and whatever other kink turns him on. It’s the fact that this “government help” suppository is being rejected. The plurality of Americans think ObamaCare stinks, and are glomming onto the fact that the rest of the “safety net” programs are also made of industrial strength crap. What is the difference between entitlements and a pressure-sale for a timeshare? I don’t know, either.
And the joke about President Wall Street:

Obama believes no such thing. If he did, why are so many continuing to make bundles on Wall Street?

Ummm, so that the Wall Streeters can line BHO’s wallet? If you really believe there isn’t Wall Street/White House collusion afoot, Dionne, you may represent a safety hazard while driving a vehicle. And alluding to Krugman, E. J., helps your credibility about as much as saying ‘I snort Drano‘.
And truth?

Obama will thus be the conservative in 2012, in the truest sense of that word.

Have you seen truth at any point this year, Dionne? Conservatives conserve liberty. The Federal government, as such, is never an object of conservation. We conserve liberty like we conserve the environment, and both precede this decadent, Postmodern era, filled with lousy, deceptive twerps who urinate down the public back and declare precipitation.

The interesting question, E. J., is whether you have any self-awareness of the falsehood of the ideas you peddle. Are you really so flush with commie kool-aid that you believe this stuff, or are you just a simple prostitute, turning in these acts of Hooverism for a paycheck?

via Alan Colmes


8 Responses to “E. J. Dionne Gets His Winston Smith On

  1. Fred Beloit
    December 26th, 2011 @ 8:48 am

    One wonders what EJ thinks Obama meant when he declared he intended to  “fundamentally change America”? Only a lie monger like EJ would have the hopey audacity to think he could sell this plan as being that of a conservative.  It is clearly the opposite. It is clearly “I’ll say anything for my lord and master in the White House”. Disgusting.

  2. ThePaganTemple
    December 26th, 2011 @ 9:53 am

    What’s really disgusting about people like EJ Dionne isn’t that he says this, or believes it if he really does, but that no one in the media calls him out on it. But then, why should they, they are all part of the same propaganda network.

  3. Mortimer Snerd
    December 26th, 2011 @ 10:57 am

    “Obama believes no such thing. If he did, why are so many continuing to make bundles on Wall Street?”

    Two reasons occur to me.

    First, Rome wasn’t built in a day.

    Second, Goldman Sachs — to cite one example — contributed $500,000 to his campaign.  Which brings to mind Churchill’s observation that appeasers feed crocodiles in the hope that they (the crocodiles) will eat them last.

  4. DaMav
    December 26th, 2011 @ 12:07 pm

    Dionne is one of the biggest lefty dopes out there.. second to Andy Sully.  

    Nevertheless, the antics of a poorly managed selection process for Republicans have heaped material on him over the past few months.  

  5. Adjoran
    December 26th, 2011 @ 12:50 pm

    Dionne has been spewing these lies so long he might even believe them, but he has never been anything but a leftist hack.  I used to read Hugh Hewitt daily years ago, but Dionne was too frequent a guest and treated with far too much respect for me to trust Hewitt any longer.

    If anyone runs into this little puke in person, stomp your foot at him and get back to me.  I have a running bet that he will pee his pants.

  6. Dangerous Right-Wing Extremist
    December 26th, 2011 @ 2:04 pm

    this argument reminds me of why i prefer to think of U.S. conservatism as a specific ideology rather than allegedly Burkean preservation of whatever the natural order of things happens to be at the time — if you think of it as the latter you inevitably get liberals blabbing about how the Democrats are the “real” conservatives, AKA the Andrew Sullivan argument.

    if the country’s institutions are fundamentally tilted toward leftist assumptions then non-ideological small-c conservatism is completely worthless.

  7. Nadz
    December 27th, 2011 @ 9:19 am

     I find your “critiques” of  EJ unconvincing. You start with the axiom that BHO is pure evil and conclude, unsurprisingly, that anyone arguing otherwise must be wrong. 

  8. smitty
    December 27th, 2011 @ 9:50 am

    I find your critique of my critique unconvincing. 
    I’m starting with history, pointing out where the ideas informing the Constitution have been replaced with a cheap substitute, and then point out that desire to conserve a cheap substitute really isn’t conservative.