Will Wilkinson - Latest Comments in The Party of Untrammeled Freedom and Maximum Individual Choice?!

Re: The Party of Untrammeled Freedom and Maximum Individual Choice?!

Traveller — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 02:47:30 -0000

What a useful post here. Very informative for me..TQ friends...

Re: The Party of Untrammeled Freedom and Maximum Individual Choice?!

Trouble — Wed, 06 May 2009 18:02:46 -0000

Oh.Come.On. Arguments like this are the major reason why I stopped taking social conservatives seriously.

These are examples of threats to the public peace, not public morals.

The purposes of just government are very nicely outlined by Jefferson, in the Declaration of Independence and elsewhere.

Re: The Party of Untrammeled Freedom and Maximum Individual Choice?!

Wed, 06 May 2009 16:16:01 -0000

Wait a minute, I just saw the "legislation of morality" part Will wrote.

Will, criminal law should only be about legislating morality.

This is one of those bumper sticker comments that gets repeated because it sounds good., but its intent is exactly backwards and ironic.

Re: The Party of Untrammeled Freedom and Maximum Individual Choice?!

Wed, 06 May 2009 16:01:19 -0000

Brooks writes this same piece every 2 or 3 months. And every 4th piece will be a variation of the theme that involves "networks, decentralized x, human reason has been shown to be flawed, blah blah blah..."

David is a great writer, but he really needs to get some new ideas.

Re: The Party of Untrammeled Freedom and Maximum Individual Choice?!

Bill — Wed, 06 May 2009 11:51:41 -0000

"legislation of morality"

What is law but society's expression of its definition of good and bad behavior (i.e., morality)? You mean I am not allowed to murder whoever I want? You mean I am not allowed to appropriate any of your property that I desire? I can't beat my children? You are restricting my freedom with your laws expressing your petty morality!

Re: The Party of Untrammeled Freedom and Maximum Individual Choice?!

Ben — Wed, 06 May 2009 00:17:10 -0000

These types love the words, "untrammeled," and "unfettered." The alternative to untrammeled, unfettered freedom, of course, is that the masses be put in fetters and trammeled from time to time at the whims of the opinion elite. Put that way, it doesn't sound very nice, so it's just awkwardly implied.

Re: The Party of Untrammeled Freedom and Maximum Individual Choice?!

Patrick — Tue, 05 May 2009 21:02:06 -0000

Is this an endorsement for Ron Paul as house minority leader?

Re: The Party of Untrammeled Freedom and Maximum Individual Choice?!

Pug — Tue, 05 May 2009 20:35:19 -0000

This while the DEA dictates that the Dems shoot down vouchers.

The DEA? I'll have some of what he's smoking.

Re: The Party of Untrammeled Freedom and Maximum Individual Choice?!

TGGP — Tue, 05 May 2009 20:22:48 -0000

Brooks & Frum are neoconservatives, not "realists". "Realists" are concerned with national interest, not "national greatness". Frum has specifically held up "realism" for ridicule.

Re: The Party of Untrammeled Freedom and Maximum Individual Choice?!

uknowbetter — Tue, 05 May 2009 18:40:33 -0000

Nope. The guy writes for the 'newspaper' that whitewashed Stalin. Enough said.

Re: The Party of Untrammeled Freedom and Maximum Individual Choice?!

uknowbetter — Tue, 05 May 2009 18:37:23 -0000

Definitely a point that needs to be made. The country has been getting more socially free over the last time years while trending more economically unfree.

libertarians of any stripe should be more concerned over the fiscal issues than the social ones. After all, you can always buy social freedom (drugs, prostitution, etc.) with enough money, but it's tough to summon up economic freedom with a magic wand.

Re: The Party of Untrammeled Freedom and Maximum Individual Choice?!

Octavian — Tue, 05 May 2009 18:19:44 -0000

Thread conclusion (and fact): Brooks is a great big douche. Anyone prepared to dispute this?

Re: The Party of Untrammeled Freedom and Maximum Individual Choice?!

Trouble — Tue, 05 May 2009 18:03:10 -0000

Roger that.

FWIW, I always have considered untrammeled freedom as being the best way of achieving civic and community order.

Re: The Party of Untrammeled Freedom and Maximum Individual Choice?!

Bilwick — Tue, 05 May 2009 17:34:31 -0000

You have to remember that Brooks is "Uncle Dave," the tame "house" conservative who always wants to assure his liberal pals that he isn't one of those "uppity" conservatives. The Republican Party he wants is one that would poseposes no threat to Massa 'Bama's plantation plantation but contendedly sing spirituals as they hand over their taxes.

Re: The Party of Untrammeled Freedom and Maximum Individual Choice?!

Paul_G_Brown — Tue, 05 May 2009 17:05:54 -0000

I'd rather count the wrinkles on my dog's balls that hear anything at all about David Brooks.

*blinks*

Yes Ma'am. But that .... that wouldn't be th' cowboy way now. Would it?

*mumbles* Ahh thought them prairie oysters were a touch onna small side ...

Re: The Party of Untrammeled Freedom and Maximum Individual Choice?!

Some Guy — Tue, 05 May 2009 17:01:42 -0000

You must be thinking of a different Nixon administration than the one I remember. Nixon was no fiscal conservative. He drove the final nail in the coffin of the gold standard, instituted wage and price controls, and did precisely squat to slow down the expansion of the welfare state.

The only decent thing he did was pursue a policy of detent with the Russians and the Chinese. When it comes to his domestic agenda, Nixon was goddamned Rockefeller Pinko.

Re: The Party of Untrammeled Freedom and Maximum Individual Choice?!

mishu — Tue, 05 May 2009 16:52:27 -0000

>>>Democrats have been able to establish themselves as the safe and orderly party

Sure, as long as you give them a taste of the action, they'll allow you to enjoy some order over by dare.

Re: The Party of Untrammeled Freedom and Maximum Individual Choice?!

Alice Longshortte — Tue, 05 May 2009 16:34:02 -0000

I'd rather count the wrinkles on my dog's balls that hear anything at all about David Brooks.

Re: The Party of Untrammeled Freedom and Maximum Individual Choice?!

willybobo — Tue, 05 May 2009 16:27:51 -0000

Exactly. That's not anything like offering vision and leadership in service of stronger, freer, more stable and resilient communities. That's what Brooks is saying. Brooks believes people want really want better communities. He's saying the Republicans have failed to offer any picture of how that's achievable in present day America, merely trumpeting the virtues of low taxes and not allowing gay marriage and such and such as ends in themselves. There are no policy ideas, and there is no narrative, that connect the dots from stronger, more vibrant local communities to anything the Republicans push for. So the Dems get to be the only ones that seem at least remotely in touch with what people want. And we're all the wors off for it.

Re: The Party of Untrammeled Freedom and Maximum Individual Choice?!

Fat Man — Tue, 05 May 2009 16:11:36 -0000

"Chance is the fool's name for fate"

The true answer to the Brooks conundrum poped up in my inbox mere minutes after I posted the above. He has been assimilated to the Borg: "Axelrod on Brooks: ‘true public thinker’" by Michael Calderone on 27-Apr-09
http://www.politico.com/blo...

Last night at the St. Regis, David Axelrod ... introduced the New York Times David Brooks,

* * *

Axelrod was guest speaker at The Week's "Sixth Annual Opinion Awards," where Brooks was being honored as columnist of the year. ...

Axelrod described Brooks as a “true public thinker,” and said that “there are days, sitting in the White House, when I wish I could trade places with David and the scribes in editorial suites and academic centers who are always generous with their advice.” ...

Margaret Carlson, The Week’s Washington editor-at-large, said as Brooks came on stage, that he’s the only columnist who can describe Obama in print as a “senior administration official.”

Re: The Party of Untrammeled Freedom and Maximum Individual Choice?!

Joe — Tue, 05 May 2009 15:58:28 -0000

>>>Democrats have been able to establish themselves as the safe and orderly party

I think he meant to write "ordure."

Re: The Party of Untrammeled Freedom and Maximum Individual Choice?!

Trouble — Tue, 05 May 2009 15:57:45 -0000

Huh?

Their messaging has been their own version of pie-in-the-sky nanny-statism for the most part. That said, Republicans are all for freedom - as long as you use it in ways of which they approve.

Kinda like the Democrats really.

Re: The Party of Untrammeled Freedom and Maximum Individual Choice?!

megapotamus — Tue, 05 May 2009 15:52:42 -0000

A long trail ahead and no whiskey? That is the bleakest outlook I have seen. We can always make our own whiskey, right?
Oh yeah.

Re: The Party of Untrammeled Freedom and Maximum Individual Choice?!

Fat Man — Tue, 05 May 2009 15:49:07 -0000

Ah Communitarianism, a/k/a fascism lite. Brooks has been deranged by the beatings administered by Andrew Rosenthal. Trying to end the torture, Brooks threw himself on an altar covered with a photograph of BO, and started blubbering that he loved big brother.

Re: The Party of Untrammeled Freedom and Maximum Individual Choice?!

Mike D — Tue, 05 May 2009 15:48:11 -0000

"Perps"?