Skip to main content

Drawing Lines At The Forum

Ideological battles are not that much different than military battles. Winning, in both cases, involves establishing defensive lines while attacking the enemy aggressively. In politics, capitulation is always the easier course. The first step in the battle is the drawing of lines on a strategic map.

The difference between Colin McEnroe, just to pick a thoughtful progressive at random, and Dan Gerstein, Sen. Joe Lieberman’s front man and the progressive everyman’s bĂȘte noire, also a thoughtful political commentator, is a matter of ideological circumference.

In most matters, moderates like Gerstein and Lieberman have a wide range. Their circle of ideas is wider than that of progressives or conservatives and includes the kinds of inconsistencies Ralph Waldo Emerson boasted of when he said a “foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.”

Now, here in Connecticut, as everyone must realize, there are few if any entrenched conservative incumbent politicians. Conservatives are regularly picked off by liberal, progressive and moderate sharpshooters in the media as soon as they lift their heads out of their foxholes. The Northeast – especially Connecticut – is the lair of the moderate and his fertile breeding ground. Here, in the Land of Steady Habits, we have a moderate habit, a liberal habit and a progressive habit; there are no conservative habits.

Conservatives claim it is the bad progressive and liberal habits that have given us swollen budgets, business flight and readerless newspapers.

When the Hartford Courant recently hosted a forum on blogging, no conservative bloggers were represented on the panel that included McEnroe, introduced as a blogger, a progressive radio talk show host and a Courant columnist. There are no conservative columnists on the op-ed staff of the Courant; John Zakarian, the longtime Editorial Page Editor of the paper pronounced a doom upon them during his tenure and, ever eager to carry forward traditions, other editorial page editors followed suit. The result is: Conservative viewpoints on state issues are bleached out of the paper, and the resulting product is, predictably, wan, feeble and shallow, hardly more than a recitation of comforting liberal and progressive platitudes. In their progress, writers at the Courant rarely confront a hard, immovable, antithetical thought; for them, thinking is a matter of arranging their prejudices in a pretty way and setting up straw dummies they can then torch from within their own impregnable bunkers.

The forum on blogging is emblematic of what passes for “debate” in the state; it was, in essence, a five person one man show. Everyone agreed on the most important points, and a good time was had by all. In fact, nothing new was added by the bloggers to the “debate,” and most of the points made at the forum had been circulating through the mainstream press for some time. No contrary opinions were permitted to disturb the “debaters.” Where all were agreed, all were agreeable. One would hardly have guessed from the panel that nearly the oldest blog in Connecticut, YourNews2, is a conservative blog.

Prior to the forum, Blogdom was treated to a faux debate shortly after Gerstein ventured to write a piece for a new blog on Lieberman’s victorious campaign and the roll played in it by bloggers. Here at least, at the beginning of the discussion, one detected the first faint stirrings of a real debate; but that discussion soon was overwhelmed by the piling on that followed, so sustained and so fierce that McEnroe felt comfortable in loftily refusing to address the points made by Gerstein in his piece. He would leave Gerstein, McEnroe said on his blog, to the un-tender mercies of other bloggers. When only one note is being played in the score, why hammer it home in your own blog? The beef against Gerstein’s piece was that its author was not non-partisan; but then neither is Tim Tagaris, the tech wizard who ran Ned Lamont’s campaign web site, one of the five progressive panelists the Courant asked to dilate on blogging at its forum, and the four remaining panelist were all members of the progressive hood.

The ideological lines in Connecticut, when they appear at all, are not drawn between liberals and conservatives. All the pitched battles are fought between the ancient liberal regime and progressives banging at the gate demanding admittance to the political helm. To conservatives these occasional tugs of war are vastly amusing. It may be interesting – but certainly it is unimportant from a conservative perspective -- that CtKeith, a frequent commentator, does not consider Ghengis Conn, the propriator of Connecticut Local Politics, progressive enough. In Connecticut, the ideological diving line separates old time liberals and progressives. Conservatives have no dog in that fight.

Comments

Don so true.. but the reason I, a Conservative/Liberatian blogger wouldn't attend that forum is

A) I refuse to pay $20 to attend
B) It was sponsored by The Hartford Courant
C) Colin McEnroe was on the panel

That about sums it up.
Don Pesci said…
Judy,

That certainly is your choice. But the point I am making is that, as a libertarian/conservative blogger, you were not asked to participate.
Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said…
You're right, Don. Brian and I have been blogging almost every weekday since October 2004 and FIC Blog just may have the most lively comments section of any conservative blog in the state. But of course the Courant would never invite me--or you, Judy, or Your News 2--for the reasons you laid out.

A debate--or even a truly balanced panel--was never a Courant priority.
mccommas said…
I have not picked up a Hartford Courant is AGES!

I hardly even read my hometown rag anymore -- the Chronicle. I get most of my news online if I have time to read at all.

The Hartford Commie does have a few good writers which I catch online for nothing every now and then.

Kevin Rennie is a breath of fresh air. Laurence Cohen is great too. He cracks me up.

http://www.courant.com/news/opinion/columnists/hc-rennie,0,82034.columnist?coll=hc-utility-commentary

http://www.courant.com/news/opinion/columnists/hc-cohen,0,3983106.columnist?coll=hc-columnists-opinion

The Norwich Bulletin has a great new writer I want to see more of. Don something....
Actually someone did ask me to participate - but not as a panel member. They had just asked me to go and shell out $20 to attend. I wasn't interested for the reasons stated above. besides that, The Hartford Courant's forums are irrelevant to me.
Don Pesci said…
Turfgrrl

I agree with most of that analysis. It may be even worse than you suppose: TR was not only the enemy of the Trusts, he was an energetic warmonger lampooned by Mark Twain. That is a side of his character, and an element in historic progressivism, that modern progressives comfortablre with the anti-warmongers wisely choose to ignore. They interest me mostly as those who wish to storm the gates of the Democrat Party. I’ve written about this many times in the blog site.
Don Pesci said…
Turfgrrl

Right. If governing is fixing potholes, and preventing 9/11's they're not interested. They have more in common with lobbyists than governors. The lobbyist wants to use the government to advance his own or his client’s interest, while escaping any responsibility for the consequences of his efforts. Cheap talk is a form of cheap grace. My job -- and your job -- is to not allow them to get away with it.

Popular posts from this blog

The Blumenthal Burisma Connection

Steve Hilton , a Fox News commentator who over the weekend had connected some Burisma corruption dots, had this to say about Connecticut U.S. Senator Dick Blumenthal’s association with the tangled knot of corruption in Ukraine: “We cross-referenced the Senate co-sponsors of Ed Markey's Ukraine gas bill with the list of Democrats whom Burisma lobbyist, David Leiter, routinely gave money to and found another one -- one of the most sanctimonious of them all, actually -- Sen. Richard Blumenthal."

Powell, the JI, And Economic literacy

Powell, Pesci Substack The Journal Inquirer (JI), one of the last independent newspapers in Connecticut, is now a part of the Hearst Media chain. Hearst has been growing by leaps and bounds in the state during the last decade. At the same time, many newspapers in Connecticut have shrunk in size, the result, some people seem to think, of ad revenue smaller newspapers have lost to internet sites and a declining newspaper reading public. Surviving papers are now seeking to recover the lost revenue by erecting “pay walls.” Like most besieged businesses, newspapers also are attempting to recoup lost revenue through staff reductions, reductions in the size of the product – both candy bars and newspapers are much smaller than they had been in the past – and sell-offs to larger chains that operate according to the social Darwinian principles of monopolistic “red in tooth and claw” giant corporations. The first principle of the successful mega-firm is: Buy out your predator before he swallows

Down The Rabbit Hole, A Book Review

Down the Rabbit Hole How the Culture of Corrections Encourages Crime by Brent McCall & Michael Liebowitz Available at Amazon Price: $12.95/softcover, 337 pages   “ Down the Rabbit Hole: How the Culture of Corrections Encourages Crime ,” a penological eye-opener, is written by two Connecticut prisoners, Brent McCall and Michael Liebowitz. Their book is an analytical work, not merely a page-turner prison drama, and it provides serious answers to the question: Why is reoffending a more likely outcome than rehabilitation in the wake of a prison sentence? The multiple answers to this central question are not at all obvious. Before picking up the book, the reader would be well advised to shed his preconceptions and also slough off the highly misleading claims of prison officials concerning the efficacy of programs developed by dusty old experts who have never had an honest discussion with a real convict. Some of the experts are more convincing cons than the cons, p