Garrison Keillor on the Republican Party

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda
Don`t need to read the article garrison keillor is not anybody significant...sorry....thats the truth!

I don't mind your ignorance. What I don't understand is your willingness to prove it so conclusively. :laugh:

Garrison Keillor has been "significant" for decades. He's at least "significant" enough that director, Robert Altman's movie about Keillor's radio show, "A Prairie Home Companion" has just been released nationwide and includes a few other "insigificant" names like Woody Harrelson, Tommy Lee Jones, Kevin Kline, Lindsay Lohan, Maya Rudolph, Meryl Streep, Lily Tomlin and more.

Can you tell us you're anywhere near that level of significance to anyone outside of your own immediate family and friends? :roll:

 

[Starbuck1975]

So he isn't saying anything to you? I know the leftist rants are old and tired but there is a reason why that is so, because this kind of political BS has been going on for far too long. Granted it isn't just a GOP thing.

I think it is more that his conclusions are way off the mark...case in point:

People who want to take a swing at San Francisco should think twice. Yes, the Irish coffee at Fisherman's Wharf is overpriced, and the bus tour of Haight-Ashbury is disappointing (Where are the hippies?), but the Bay Area is the cradle of the computer and software industry, which continues to create jobs for our children. The iPod was not developed by Baptists in Waco, Texas. There may be a reason for this. Creative people thrive in a climate of openness and tolerance, since some great ideas start out sounding ridiculous. Creativity is a key to economic progress. Authoritarianism is stifling. I don't believe that Mr. Hewlett and Mr. Packard were gay, but what's important is: In San Francisco, it doesn't matter so much. When the cultural Sturmbannfuhrers try to marshal everyone into straight lines, it has consequences for the economic future of this country.

So the author is correlating technological innovation and creativity to a climate of openness and tolerance. How does the author explain the technological innovation and superiority of the Nazi military machine, that emerged in the polar opposite culture to which the author promotes...or do some research into the Soviet reverse engineering of Allied bomber technologies after WW2, which existed in a climate where failure meant death in what was probably the most intolerant of recent cultures.

Or let's examine many of our socially progressive European peers, who continue to struggle and fall behind on the technological innovation front...having to import such expertise from less progressive societies.

Even in today's day and age, India and China are tech powerhouses that aren't exactly open, progressive societies.

Perhaps the software industry thrived in the Bay area not because of its progressive culture, but rather because it is a beautiful and desireable place to live.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

So he isn't saying anything to you? I know the leftist rants are old and tired but there is a reason why that is so, because this kind of political BS has been going on for far too long. Granted it isn't just a GOP thing.

I think it is more that his conclusions are way off the mark...case in point:

People who want to take a swing at San Francisco should think twice. Yes, the Irish coffee at Fisherman's Wharf is overpriced, and the bus tour of Haight-Ashbury is disappointing (Where are the hippies?), but the Bay Area is the cradle of the computer and software industry, which continues to create jobs for our children. The iPod was not developed by Baptists in Waco, Texas. There may be a reason for this. Creative people thrive in a climate of openness and tolerance, since some great ideas start out sounding ridiculous. Creativity is a key to economic progress. Authoritarianism is stifling. I don't believe that Mr. Hewlett and Mr. Packard were gay, but what's important is: In San Francisco, it doesn't matter so much. When the cultural Sturmbannfuhrers try to marshal everyone into straight lines, it has consequences for the economic future of this country.

So the author is correlating technological innovation and creativity to a climate of openness and tolerance. How does the author explain the technological innovation and superiority of the Nazi military machine, that emerged in the polar opposite culture to which the author promotes...or do some research into the Soviet reverse engineering of Allied bomber technologies after WW2, which existed in a climate where failure meant death in what was probably the most intolerant of recent cultures.

Or let's examine many of our socially progressive European peers, who continue to struggle and fall behind on the technological innovation front...having to import such expertise from less progressive societies.

Even in today's day and age, India and China are tech powerhouses that aren't exactly open, progressive societies.

Perhaps the software industry thrived in the Bay area not because of its progressive culture, but rather because it is a beautiful and desireable place to live.

You might have a point, but going the other way, it's also a good argument against the common stereotype that liberals are all a bunch of lazy, "culture of entitlement" losers who leave the real work to hard working conservatives.

In any case, I think there IS a link between liberalism and technological innovation, at least in this country. But not the way you might think. I'm not sure being liberal makes an area more innovative, but technology innovation tends to come from large cities with established high tech industries, and in this country, large cities are almost all left leaning.

Also, India and China are bad examples for you to make your point with. They are "tech powerhouses" alright, but they aren't exactly known for innovation or creativity. They are powerful players in the high tech industry because they have a lot of cheap, code-monkey style labor available. It's like an assembly line for high tech, the innovation isn't coming from that end of things (at least not quite yet...).

 

[RMich]

Actually, the point of Keillor's I was drawn to as original poster is that the Republicans are losing their reputation for competence. As Keillor said, it used to be that love them or hate them the Republicans were decent bean counters. That seems entirely out the window now.

To whit:
To see them produce a ninny and then follow him loyally into the swamp for five years is disconcerting, like seeing the Rolling Stones take up lite jazz. So here we are at an uneasy point in our history, mired in a costly war, a supine Congress granting absolute power to a president who seems to get smaller and dimmer, and the best the Republicans can offer is San Franciscophobia? This is beyond pitiful. This is violently stupid.

What part of this seems way off the mark to you? The slur on the Rolling Stones?

 

[Jhhnn]

The best part, wrt GWB and the Repubs-

" You might not have always liked Republicans, but you could count on them to manage the bank. They might be lousy tippers, act snooty, talk through their noses, wear spats and splash mud on you as they race their Pierce-Arrows through the village, but you knew they could do the math. To see them produce a ninny and then follow him loyally into the swamp for five years is disconcerting, like seeing the Rolling Stones take up lite jazz."

Heh. Maybe the Repubs have just been poseurs all along, their seeming competence just another one of their illusions...

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Don`t need to read the article garrison keillor is not anybody significant...sorry....thats the truth!

Ahhh - I see. Instead, we should listen to an adult man who names himself after an otherworldy sci-fi elf?

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Don`t need to read the article garrison keillor is not anybody significant...sorry....thats the truth!

Ahhh - I see. Instead, we should listen to an adult man who names himself after an otherworldy sci-fi elf?

well if thats the most significant retort you have then so be it....too funny!
Your very response says your listening to me.

Rofl...a fish icon.....hahahaaaaa

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda
well if thats the most significant retort you have then so be it....too funny!
Your very response says your listening to me.

Hmmm... I didn't see you replying to my reply to your post, let alone laughing about it. :laugh:

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

well if thats the most significant retort you have then so be it....too funny!
Your very response says your listening to me.

Rofl...a fish icon.....hahahaaaaa

Correction: make that an an adult man who names himself after an otherworldy sci-fi elf, doesn't know the difference between "your" and "you're," and rolls on the floor laughing at things that are not even marginally funny. Did your mother drop you on your head or something?

 

[RMich]

I like Keillor's diatribe for how heartfelt it is and for its vivid language. And, of course, because I fundamentally agree with it. I did a bit of googling; apparently this is not Keillor's first word on the subject. Here is an old column of his from before the '04 election. If you like W., you probably ought to save your time and pass over it. You know what it is going to say, and it won't please you.
http://www.inthesetimes.com/site/main/article/979/

Keillor and I are of the same generation, and what is striking to me (and to him) is the transformation of the Republican party into this carnivorous beast. Those of you younger than about 40 won't have any idea what we are talking about, unless it got covered in your American History class. I assure you, though, that the Republican party has not always been this way. Here is someone else who agrees, and he speaks with a greater authority than either Keillor or I do.
http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2004/09/30/election2004/19_46_269_29_04.txt

 

[Jhhnn]

Garrison Keillor is the Mark Twain/ Will Rogers/ Walt Whitman/ of our times- gifted and funny in ways that go right over the heads of priggish rightwing dittoheads...

If he's not anybody significant, then I suppose we've just redefined the role of insightful humor in our world...

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
Garrison Keillor is the Mark Twain/ Will Rogers/ Walt Whitman/ of our times- gifted and funny in ways that go right over the heads of priggish rightwing dittoheads...

If he's not anybody significant, then I suppose we've just redefined the role of insightful humor in our world...

Yup, GK is a kind full blown genius full of loving gentleness and deep insightful charm. He is a truly great American.

 

[0roo0roo]

on how they've taken corruption and undermining democracy to a whole new level..
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5425307
Non-Fiction
'Fight Club Politics'

Listen to this story...

Fresh Air from WHYY, May 23, 2006 · Former Washington Post Congressional correspondent Juliet Eilperin says warlike tactics, manipulation and strategic takeovers have replaced compromise in the House. She drives home the point in her new book, Fight Club Politics: How Partisanship is Poisoning the U.S. House of Representatives.

 

[feralkid]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

They've been in control for a while now, and the best reason they can come up with to keep them around is that gay people want to get married, and Democrats are kind of gay. There is no substantive argument in their favor, it's all a bunch of name calling (you know, the thing you hate when the OTHER guys are doing it?) and focusing on stupid issues that really don't affect people, and focusing on the SAME stupid issues as last time around. Anybody who doubts Republicans are having trouble coming up with reasons to keep them around need only look at their repeat performance of "the gay people are coming to get you!" from two years ago.

See this is where I disagree...the NeoCon leadership of the Republican party may be grasping at straws, but we are also witnessing an increasing number of Republicans, particularly in the legislature, distancing themselves from the Bush Administration.

Regardless of what causes each respective party chooses to champion at the national level, local elections still come down to which candidate most appeals to local constituents.

The "gay" issue may be a ploy to motivate the conservative base, but leave it to a San Francisco columnist to focus entirely on the gay issue in his tired and predictable attack on Republicans.

Which article by which San Francisco columnist are you referring to?

😕

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

I like the fact that you see more and more of these types of editorials and articles everyday.

Easy to kick the President when he is down in the polls...where was the brave voice of dissent against the Bush Administration when he formulated the policies that got the nation into such a mess.

Right here, along with all the progressives and liberals, we never wanted him to have the chance to formulate anything, let alone our country's future. And it was easy to kick this moron on 9/11 too, I did, as did anyone else who saw through his rice paper thin sincerity and integrity.
Most people who don't like this jackass have not liked him from the begining, so you might want to check that out.

 

[RMich]

Originally posted by: feralkid

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

They've been in control for a while now, and the best reason they can come up with to keep them around is that gay people want to get married, and Democrats are kind of gay. There is no substantive argument in their favor, it's all a bunch of name calling (you know, the thing you hate when the OTHER guys are doing it?) and focusing on stupid issues that really don't affect people, and focusing on the SAME stupid issues as last time around. Anybody who doubts Republicans are having trouble coming up with reasons to keep them around need only look at their repeat performance of "the gay people are coming to get you!" from two years ago.

See this is where I disagree...the NeoCon leadership of the Republican party may be grasping at straws, but we are also witnessing an increasing number of Republicans, particularly in the legislature, distancing themselves from the Bush Administration.

Regardless of what causes each respective party chooses to champion at the national level, local elections still come down to which candidate most appeals to local constituents.

The "gay" issue may be a ploy to motivate the conservative base, but leave it to a San Francisco columnist to focus entirely on the gay issue in his tired and predictable attack on Republicans.

Which article by which San Francisco columnist are you referring to?

😕

It would appear this poster thinks Lake Wobegon is a suburb of Sausalito.:roll:

 

[jman19]

Originally posted by: feralkid

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

They've been in control for a while now, and the best reason they can come up with to keep them around is that gay people want to get married, and Democrats are kind of gay. There is no substantive argument in their favor, it's all a bunch of name calling (you know, the thing you hate when the OTHER guys are doing it?) and focusing on stupid issues that really don't affect people, and focusing on the SAME stupid issues as last time around. Anybody who doubts Republicans are having trouble coming up with reasons to keep them around need only look at their repeat performance of "the gay people are coming to get you!" from two years ago.

See this is where I disagree...the NeoCon leadership of the Republican party may be grasping at straws, but we are also witnessing an increasing number of Republicans, particularly in the legislature, distancing themselves from the Bush Administration.

Regardless of what causes each respective party chooses to champion at the national level, local elections still come down to which candidate most appeals to local constituents.

The "gay" issue may be a ploy to motivate the conservative base, but leave it to a San Francisco columnist to focus entirely on the gay issue in his tired and predictable attack on Republicans.

Which article by which San Francisco columnist are you referring to?

😕

I'm a bit confused as well. I could have sworn the article linked to was published in a Chicago newspaper by a man from Minnesota 😕

 

[zephyrprime]

Originally posted by: feralkid

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

They've been in control for a while now, and the best reason they can come up with to keep them around is that gay people want to get married, and Democrats are kind of gay. There is no substantive argument in their favor, it's all a bunch of name calling (you know, the thing you hate when the OTHER guys are doing it?) and focusing on stupid issues that really don't affect people, and focusing on the SAME stupid issues as last time around. Anybody who doubts Republicans are having trouble coming up with reasons to keep them around need only look at their repeat performance of "the gay people are coming to get you!" from two years ago.

See this is where I disagree...the NeoCon leadership of the Republican party may be grasping at straws, but we are also witnessing an increasing number of Republicans, particularly in the legislature, distancing themselves from the Bush Administration.

Regardless of what causes each respective party chooses to champion at the national level, local elections still come down to which candidate most appeals to local constituents.

The "gay" issue may be a ploy to motivate the conservative base, but leave it to a San Francisco columnist to focus entirely on the gay issue in his tired and predictable attack on Republicans.

Which article by which San Francisco columnist are you referring to?

😕

I guess he missed the part that this is actually a Minnesota columnist published in a chicago paper.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Which article by which San Francisco columnist are you referring to?

My bad...as the author was focusing so intently on San Fransisco in his article, I assumed he was from there...it is possible for an editorial author to write for a newspaper based in say Chicago but live somewhere else entirely.

Ironic that you all choose to attack my error in knowing the geographic location of the author, as opposed to my issues with the content of his article. Don't you guys always accuse us brainwashed conservatives of deflecting the issue?

Also, India and China are bad examples for you to make your point with. They are "tech powerhouses" alright, but they aren't exactly known for innovation or creativity. They are powerful players in the high tech industry because they have a lot of cheap, code-monkey style labor available. It's like an assembly line for high tech, the innovation isn't coming from that end of things (at least not quite yet...).

Perhaps China is not a great example, but India is certainly at the cutting edge of innovation, particularly in the realm of software. Also, as I pointed out earlier, the Soviets were quite innovative in their approaches and methods for reverse engineering NATO and American technologies throughout the Cold War.

Right here, along with all the progressives and liberals, we never wanted him to have the chance to formulate anything, let alone our country's future. And it was easy to kick this moron on 9/11 too, I did, as did anyone else who saw through his rice paper thin sincerity and integrity. Most people who don't like this jackass have not liked him from the begining, so you might want to check that out.

There will always be opposition to any leader with the populace, but the only way to have those voices heard is through the media or our elected representatives...that, or widespread protests. All were ineffective, misdirected or otherwise quiet as the Bush Administration formulated its strategy against Iraq.

Also it is not a question of not liking someone...that only goes so far in bringing about change. What this country needed was strategic vision and leadership from the opposition to provide a viable alternative to the Bush Administration's sabre rattling...one that would resonate with the America people such that it would cause this Administration to take notice.

 

[feralkid]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

Which article by which San Francisco columnist are you referring to?

My bad...as the author was focusing so intently on San Fransisco in his article, I assumed he was from there...it is possible for an editorial author to write for a newspaper based in say Chicago but live somewhere else entirely.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Hello? Perhaps you should read the article.

The author was focusing on San Francisco because the Subject is Nancy Pelosi, from San Francisco, and the fact that The Republicans are making an issue of it.


Then you yourself use it as a perjorative.

Unbelievable...

 

[RMich]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

Which article by which San Francisco columnist are you referring to?

My bad...as the author was focusing so intently on San Fransisco in his article, I assumed he was from there...it is possible for an editorial author to write for a newspaper based in say Chicago but live somewhere else entirely.

The author DOES live somewhere else entirely. Minnesota. Not to put too fine a point on it (because I agree it is unimportant in the cosmic scheme) but the author is actually famous, mostly for BEING FROM MINNESOTA. Your comment was analogous to a Democratic troll denouncing something Tom DeLay said and then saying "just what you'd expect from a New Englander."

 

[Starbuck1975]

Hello? Perhaps you should read the article. The author was focusing on San Francisco because the Subject is Nancy Pelosi, from San Francisco, and the fact that The Republicans are making an issue of it. Then you yourself use it as a perjorative. Unbelievable...

I readily admitted my mistake, which does happen from time to time for all of us...what is unbelievable is that some of you are making such a big stink about it.

The author DOES live somewhere else entirely. Minnesota. Not to put too fine a point on it (because I agree it is unimportant in the cosmic scheme) but the author is actually famous, mostly for BEING FROM MINNESOTA. Your comment was analogous to a Democratic troll denouncing something Tom DeLay said and then saying "just what you'd expect from a New Englander."

This is the first article I have read from Garrison Keillor, and I was not familiar with his background...it is very much unimportant in the grand scheme of things.

 

[feralkid]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

Hello? Perhaps you should read the article. The author was focusing on San Francisco because the Subject is Nancy Pelosi, from San Francisco, and the fact that The Republicans are making an issue of it. Then you yourself use it as a perjorative. Unbelievable...

I readily admitted my mistake, which does happen from time to time for all of us...what is unbelievable is that some of you are making such a big stink about it.

The author DOES live somewhere else entirely. Minnesota. Not to put too fine a point on it (because I agree it is unimportant in the cosmic scheme) but the author is actually famous, mostly for BEING FROM MINNESOTA. Your comment was analogous to a Democratic troll denouncing something Tom DeLay said and then saying "just what you'd expect from a New Englander."

This is the first article I have read from Garrison Keillor, and I was not familiar with his background...it is very much unimportant in the grand scheme of things.

It is to YOU; someone who is admittedly ignorant of the author.

How utterly lame.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda
Don`t need to read the article garrison keillor is not anybody significant...sorry....thats the truth!

I don't mind your ignorance. What I don't understand is your willingness to prove it so conclusively. :laugh:

Garrison Keillor has been "significant" for decades. He's at least "significant" enough that director, Robert Altman's movie about Keillor's radio show, "A Prairie Home Companion" has just been released nationwide and includes a few other "insigificant" names like Woody Harrelson, Tommy Lee Jones, Kevin Kline, Lindsay Lohan, Maya Rudolph, Meryl Streep, Lily Tomlin and more.

Can you tell us you're anywhere near that level of significance to anyone outside of your own immediate family and friends? :roll:

Harvey you have no clue....you are living in the past. Keillor in todays world has no following amongst anybody!
Keillor is old news!

 

[RMich]

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda
Harvey you have no clue....you are living in the past. Keillor in todays world has no following amongst anybody!
Keillor is old news!

Your comment about Keillor comes close to capturing MY opinion of the Republican party. It doesn't stand for anything NOW beyond unbridled greed and gratuitous gay bashing. Not fiscal sanity, not the constitution, not individual rights, and certainly not character. Which is, as I read it, Keillor's point. It is old news. Its husk is going to dry up and blow away. Many individual Republicans still stand for some or all of the virtues that used to define the party, but the party itself seems to be interested in nothing except perpetuating itself.