The Atlantic - Latest Comments in Sanford, Arrogance, Etc.

Re: Sanford, Arrogance, Etc.

Arafat Thayeb — Tue, 27 Dec 2011 11:11:38 -0000

Couldn?t be written any better. Reading this post reminds me of my old
room mate! He always kept talking about this. I will forward this
article to him. Pretty sure he will have a good read. Thanks for
sharing!

wedding photo gallery

Re: Sanford, Arrogance, Etc.

M.Sheridan — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 15:11:08 -0000

Senator Carl Schurz defined patriotism best back in 1872: "My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right."

He was a Republican, too. Of course, that was back when the GOP could still realistically be called the "Party of Lincoln" rather than the party of Limbaugh.

Re: Sanford, Arrogance, Etc.

Rich n Mdriems — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 09:55:31 -0000

Didn't Al Franken call it?

"Republicans love their country like four year olds love their mommies."

Re: Sanford, Arrogance, Etc.

Bill in Illinois — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 16:52:53 -0000

I agree that you've definitely put your finger on something really important here. If you need another prominent example, you can look to Sean Hannity, who regularly talks of the U.S. being the greatest nation God has ever given to mankind on this earth, or words to that effect.

I also like the comment by Jennifer B, building on your second-to-last paragraph, and by pastor agnostic, differentiating between patriotism and nationalism.

I'm newly registered here, and I'll definitely be back. Perceptive post and a helpful discussion!

Re: Sanford, Arrogance, Etc.

pastor agnostic — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 16:28:26 -0000

I view nationalism and patriotism as very different animals.

Patriotism - when we landed on the Moon, when the US beat Spain this week, when Obama warmed the hearts of billions when he spoke in Cairo, - that is Patriotism. A justified pride in a great accomplishment.

Nationalism - a dangerous, "we are right, everyone else is wrong" attitude which often leads to conflict, even armed conflict, especially when it was not necessary to resolve the problem. Neocons and PNAC are among the worst when it comes to Nationalism, as is their willingness to shoot first, and ask questions later, but only questions directed to those who complain about their shooting first.

Re: Sanford, Arrogance, Etc.

John Imani — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 11:02:53 -0000

Interestingly enough, much of the most scathing criticism of GOP arrogance, exceptionalism, and lack of self-awareness comes from the "other" right: the paleos, the agrarians, the crunchies, etc. Humility, realism, and respect for non-American national cultures and traditions are themes that run deep with them.

I'm sure a lot of you have heard of Andrew Bacevich, but he wrote an excellent (and not too lengthy book) about exceptionalism and its costs.

I aso strongly recommend this Bil Moyers video:

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/08152008/watch.html

Re: Sanford, Arrogance, Etc.

strangelet — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 10:58:21 -0000

TNC.....it runs deeper than that.

All the GOP really runs on is gypsyhooks to pull the rubes into the tent.

Patriotism is one, "family values" is another.

How else can they scam the lefthalf of the bellcurve into supporting taxcuts for the masters of the universe?

Re: Sanford, Arrogance, Etc.

Sorn — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 19:25:15 -0000

Dude, Wallace was a southern Democrat. Southern Democrats being inherrently conservative and only democrat because they hated Lincoln.

Your second thought was the entire point of the post.

Re: Sanford, Arrogance, Etc.

PhoenixRising — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 19:16:42 -0000

I thought he was your editor, man! The Atlantic isn't paying him to quibble?

Well, then you're getting the full service package as a gift. Can't quibble with that.

Re: Sanford, Arrogance, Etc.

simeond — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 17:41:13 -0000

This post is spot on. I am reminded of a quote from Oliver Wendell Holmes:

"Certitude always leads to violence."

The religious/grandstanding right could do well by spending some more time in Phillipians 2 - where, of all the attributes of Christ, Paul thought it particularly important to point to his humility...

Re: Sanford, Arrogance, Etc.

mjdaniels — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 16:56:25 -0000

While your post has some merit, you manage to discredit yourself as a partisan hack when you try to paint this failing as a Republican foible . . . by quoting George Wallace (D - AL).

If anything, I'd say that a uniquely Republican flaw is their tendency to erroneously assert that their opponents across the aisle don't believe that the U.S. is the best nation on earth.

Re: Sanford, Arrogance, Etc.

KT — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 16:41:35 -0000

@Tim McGaha -

Excellent. LOTR nerds unite, right?

Re: Sanford, Arrogance, Etc.

Tim McGaha — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 15:40:55 -0000

Well, that does make sense, now that I think on it.

Re: Sanford, Arrogance, Etc.

rikyrah — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 15:35:31 -0000

I agree with this, and it has been the history of this country. There is a Washington to balance DuBois. There's Garvey, then Malcolm X. You look at Malcolm X and then the Black Panthers-who scared the shyt out of the average White person - and MLK doesn't look so bad. Folks who thought Malcolm and MLK were so different have never read their writings and speeches en masse.

Re: Sanford, Arrogance, Etc.

KT — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 15:30:39 -0000

Wormtongue would be the loose friends - but Denethor, he was the one being talked to (and Sauron is of course much worse than Wormtongue, as a loose friend). Instead of doing the hard and humble thing and standing up at the end, he listened to the palantir and gave in to his pride and despair. He was the one listening to the fast talk and made the darkest hour even darker than it needed to be, with Gandalf saving Faramir couldn't save Theoden on the battlefield.

Re: Sanford, Arrogance, Etc.

deva — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 15:13:08 -0000

Xochi, that's funny becuse it's so true. And it could happen. Maybe not in such blatant terms, but it pretty much did happen with GWB. That's what Neocons want the American head of state to be like. It's so difficult for me to wrap my head around, but there's the truth of it.

Another kick-ass post, TNC.

Re: Sanford, Arrogance, Etc.

Tim McGaha — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 14:50:24 -0000

Wormtongue does seem to fit. (Why am I having the mental image, all of a sudden, of Wormtongue as a boxing promoter?) But why Denethor? Denethor ended up giving in to his worst self, but he wasn't the one who talked himself into it.

Re: Sanford, Arrogance, Etc.

Red — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 14:34:10 -0000

Excellent post. Whenever I read about a "person of faith" stating that "we're the greatest nation on earth", I imagine God in heaven shaking his head and saying: "Idiot".

Re: Sanford, Arrogance, Etc.

KT — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 13:54:14 -0000

Or is that sycophancy, fast talk proffered by loose friends, who in your darkest hours, who in your darkest hours appeal to your worst self.

At first I thought Wormtongue. But now I'm thinking, maybe Denethor.

Re: Sanford, Arrogance, Etc.

Polywogy — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 13:54:06 -0000

I remember back in the early nineties (I think... I was young then) the US was in a recession and Japan was kicking our butts in terms of great products and a great economy. You know, threatening our self image as the best at everything. At the same time, there started to be a huge amount of resentment and stereotyping of Japanese people -- camera clicking tourists and "buying up our country."

It reminded me of the stereotype of the French hating Americans. (I know how flawed that stereotype of the French is, BTW.) Anyway, it got me wondering about what it must have been like for France to go, metaphorcally, from being the center of world fashion/culture and politics (French was the international language at one point, and still is on our passports) to, well, not being that. It's something Americans will almost certainly have to grapple with at some point -- I mean no one can be at the center forever.

Re: Sanford, Arrogance, Etc.

Pesto — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 13:44:18 -0000

Ta-Nehisi, you've put your finger on the aspect of our culture that I think I hate the most -- the assumption of American superiority. No, assumption is probably not the right word. It's really more of an ideological commitment to the proposition that America, and Americans, are intrinsically superior to everyone else on Earth.

I'm sure every people likes to be told flattering accounts of themselves, from us Americans to the French to the Maori to the Bolivians. But the US actually has the power to bash people who have the audacity to provide evidence contrary to our self-image. The combination of commitment to the illusion and that kind of power is sickening and frightening.

Hunter S. Thompson wrote in the weeks leading up to the 1972 election:

"This may be the year when we finally come face to face with ourselves; finally just lay back and say it — that we are really just a nation of 220 million used car salesmen with all the money we need to buy guns, and no qualms at all about killing anybody else in the world who tries to make us uncomfortable."

Re: Sanford, Arrogance, Etc.

lebecka — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 13:31:32 -0000

Dude, did you ever meet Mr. Punctuation? Use that little period key near the bottom of the keyboard occasionally.

Re: Sanford, Arrogance, Etc.

dmf — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 13:30:08 -0000

not sure if this whole slant here is on topic but since you asked there is no real way of measuring this kind of historical what-if question of cause and effect but for the Feds Martin's links, real and imagined, to international communism was seen as much more theatening/radical than the Nation or other people who were identifying themselves Muslim as we can see from the FBI files and all, you have to remember that as big, and important as the civil-rights/race issues where they paled, pardon the pun, for the white majority to issues around the Cold War; Nukes, Vietnam, etc. which impacted their lives more directly, at least as a threat.

Re: Sanford, Arrogance, Etc.

Mr. Shrimp — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 13:28:24 -0000

This thread really isn't about Sanford - I guess you could see him as an example of this kind of arrogance, but in his case, he strikes me as more disturbed, like he really has a tenuous grip on reality, or at least did for a few days.

Liz Cheney has no such excuse. What gets me about this is how transparently WEAK it is. What person living in any other country wouldn't look at that and think, how scared are they? They have to say they're the best ever?

It seems like pure insecurity about a future in which white conservatives no longer hold the reins of power at home, and more broadly, the United States is no longer the world's sole superpower. In my eyes, the true promise of Barack Obama is that he is trying to lead us into that reality so that when we get there, we aren't complete toast. And the Cheney ilk is just digging in their heels.

So yeah, "Lost Cause" is about right.

Re: Sanford, Arrogance, Etc.

Dr. Bluman — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 13:24:30 -0000

Shorter TNC:

Dear America - Republicans don't love you; they're just saying you're pretty so you'll go home with them.