March 25, 2010

Bruce Bartlett on David Frum

This is exactly the reason why I became disaffected with the conservative "movement:" it isn't a movement, it is an orthodoxy. Any deviation from the party line is quickly identified and punished, at best with a lampooning and at worst with what happened today to Frum.  (UPDATE:  Please read Rick Moran on this same point.)

6 comments:

M1rth said...

Oh good effing grief.

Damn right they could fire you from your job, if your job is public speaking and you are directly contradicting them. What, they should keep you on staff for that? The Democrats do the same shit all the time, firing people who say something that - whoops - didn't match their party line.

You really think it's an "orthodoxy"? Fine. But at least they don't want to hold riots just to stop you from speaking. And they certainly don't insist you never talk again.

Left wing kookery is worse than an orthodoxy, it's downright fascist bullshit.

Transplanted Lawyer said...

1. I didn't say AEI couldn't have fired Frum, I said it shouldn't have. Could and should are different.

2. "But that other kid was doing worse stuff than me" is not a defense.

M1rth said...

And yet, somehow, you don't care about the other side - you just want some excuse to rip on people with whom you have certain intellectual disagreements.

I have yet ONCE to see you criticize the other side. How about the violent thugs who throw riots at campuses like Berkeley, Concordia, and the latest at University of Ottawa to stop someone from even speaking, huh?

As for "shouldn't have" - AEI has a position. One criteria for being on their staff is advocating the aforementioned position.

Given that Frum regularly showed up on CNN, and clearly was conducting himself in public in a manner that was not in keeping with what he was hired for, yes, he should have been fired. Actually, he should have just stepped down, but AEI had no reason (moral or otherwise) to keep funding someone who was undercutting their positions.

Transplanted Lawyer said...

"...you just want some excuse to rip on people with whom you have certain intellectual disagreements."

Et tu, Brute?

Transplanted Lawyer said...

From the Transplanted Lawyer FAQ:

Q: Why didn't you write about [insert subject here]?
A: There might by any of a number of reasons for that. Likely candidates include: 1) I haven't gathered enough information about [subect] to feel I have anything intelligent to say about it, 2) [subject] does not interest me at the moment, 3) I haven't found the time to write about [subect], or 4) pretty much everything that's needed to be said about [subject] can be found easily elsewhere. The internet is a big place and you should be able to easily find some discussion or coverage of [subject] if you can't find it here. I reject any moral judgments, whether explicit or implicit, concerning any failure, whether real or imagined, whole or partial, to comment on [subject]. If you think [subject] requires commentary that you do not believe is forthcoming here, well, Blogger and other similar services are 100% free and there is nothing to stop you from commenting on it yourself in your own forum.

zzi said...

"Could and should are different."

Mrs Klein (3rd grade)