Interesting stuff that my friends write

I’m blessed to have made a lot of good friends in the blogosphere, and this morning I got a bunch of emails from them, all of which were intriguing, thoughtful and even exciting discussions of current affairs.  I pass them on to you:

Kim Priestap and the Anchoress both think that Elena Kagan may be the best of a bad lot.  I’m inclined to agree.  I certainly agree with Jennifer Rubin that, given Kagan’s history, it’s hard to imagine her being the one person who can make Kennedy a reliable liberal vote.

Caleb Howe offers a timely reminder that we shouldn’t fall into the liberal trap of demonizing our opponents.  Bad ideas are routinely found in people with otherwise good qualities.  The question, of course, and one I’d love to see debated here, is at what point the bad overwhelms the good, demanding the appellation “evil” as opposed to “misguided.”

As Tom Elia reminds us, seventy years ago today, Winston Churchill made his famous “Blood, Toil, Tears and Sweat” speech.  There are bulwarks against evil.  And sometimes they only show up at the last minute.

Get ready to applaud, because you’ll definitely want to after reading how Dr. Rusty Shackleford introduced another terrorist to his appropriate home — jail.

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments

  1. suek says

    “…both think that Elena Kagan may be the best of a bad lot. ”
     
    How do you make that judgment when you’re talking about the Supreme Court?  Her vote will most likely be consistently liberal/leftist.  As will Sotomayor’s.  On the plus side, she’s unlikely to persuade the conservative justices to vote with her.  If you assume that the extent of her influence (actually, of both of them) will be her vote, you (all) are probably right.  It would be worse to find someone who is really qualified to argue in a way that might actually sway the conservatives to move more to the left.  I don’t see these two women as being capable of  doing  that.
     

  2. Zhombre says

    My sentiments too.  She’s not Cass Sunstein or Elizabeth Warren.  Kagan is part of the complacent liberal establishment, has all the Ivy League and progressive bona fides that obscures a mediocre mind, and she won’t convince anybody else on the court.  Scalia, Thomas, Alito, Roberts and Kennedy will remain undazzled.

  3. Tonestaple says

    “… at what point the bad overwhelms the good, demanding the appellation ‘evil’ as opposed to ‘misguided.’”

    Taking a stab at it:  I think liberals are, by and large,  not able to apply Hazlitt’s One Lesson and look past the immediate effects of any of their policies.  They pick a policy, it makes them feel warm and fuzzy, and that’s it, that’s all the confirmation they need.

    That’s misguided, ignorant, and woefully unimaginative.

    But I believe there are liberals who can apply the One Lesson and do see past the end of their own noses – I think Rahm Emmanuel is one based on his principle of never letting a good crisis go to waste - and honestly don’t give a damn about the effects of their policies beyond the immediate beneficiaries.  And that’s evil.

Leave a Reply