Michael Maiello's picture

    Getting Weird At The Cafe

    Sorry if bringing Cafe complaints here is a little off-putting but the current discussion of the Reagan book "Tear Down This Myth" has really taken an odd turn when two Reaganites joined the fray.  The worst of them is Stephen Knott, a professor at the Naval War college who believes that: Reagan had nothing to do with Iran-Contra and that congressional oversight into Iran-Contra weakened our intelligence services to the point that they helped pave the way for 9/11.  He didn't say all that in his posts but I did a little research.

    Another oddity revealed in my exchange with Knott was that the author of the book revealed that the authors pick the book club participants which is a little weird to me.

    Anyway, didn't know if you all were following the Reagan posts.  Some truly weird stuff.  Between that and Matt Cooper claiming that the DC establishment doesn't have any Republican bias... errr... is this the mainstreaming of TPMCafe?

    Not that it was ever a radical place, especially but the "left of center" is getting decidedly more centery.

    Having Dean baker and Robert Reich posting there helps a lot, of course.  But... sheesh, getting weird over there.  How are things around here?  The interface seems far superior.



    Oh and... great site, guys!  Stylin' and profilin'!  Whooo!

    Things were great until Genghis laid us all off. Watch your back. Even though you're not currently on his "must go" list, he won't like that your shirt is more flamboyant than his. It's only a matter of time.

    Hey Destor. Welcome! I like the new Flair. I was just thinking that we need some new blood around here. (Note to Orlando, you have 28 minutes and 37 seconds to get the trifly jeezle out of here.)

    Thanks for the interface compliments, though its mostly the open source software, our tech budget being on the low end. You know, the economy and all

    I do feel a bit funny about TPM complaints at dag--it's like Joanie Loves Chachi dissing on Happy Days. I will say that I hope that the reader blogs don't turn into alt.tpmcafe. We started dag so that we wouldn't be limited to writing about politics, not to replace the cafe, so I'd love to see people contributing on a variety of topics.

    Speaking broadly to the topic of your post, this reminds me of the Ahmadinejad negotiation debates during the primary. Or more pointedly, to Columbia's invitation to have Ahmadinejad speak. Do you offer someone with whom you strongly disagree a pulpit to facilitate lively debate or do you resist giving him the opportunity to express abhorrent views.

    I lean to towards the former. I'm not saying that it's immoral to refuse to invite someone to speak or write. If it's your platform, you have the right to invite whomever your like, and it bugs me when people cry about censorship from private organizations. But even if it's not immoral to refuse to invite opposition, I think it's unhealthy. Without dissent, you become wrapped up in your own worldview; you lose perspective.

    I read your comment at the other place about Knott's authoritarian views. There's something to that. I wouldn't invite Hitler to guest blog. But I do think that dissent should be discomfitting. If your opposition is too amenable to your way of thinking than it's not really opposition.

    So here's a challenge to you: Who do you feel is the most intelligent voice of conservatism today?

    Nice challenge Genghis!  I'll blog about it here tomorrow.  I always did like Buckley, I must admit.  But he's a bit dead.

    Love Destor (please keep commenting there and here), not sure about TPM.  It is what it is.  I won't comment about Cooper because I don't want to be doing the Chachi thing here.  I am very intrigued about the voice of consevatism today and looking forward to what people bring out.  What is the Katherine (?lastname?) woman that nailed Palin doing now?  Wasn't there a bit about the conservative voice when Buckleys son left his dads magazine?

    Latest Comments