Centralized NGOs behind the "end of progressive intellectual life"?

[anon_6hv78pr714xta]

The End of Progressive Intellectual Life

How the Foundation-NGO complex quashed innovative thinking and open debate, first on the American right and now on the center-left

www.tabletmag.com

An excerpt:

"n the third decade of the 21st century, intellectual life on the American center left is dead. Debate has been replaced by compulsory assent and ideas have been replaced by slogans that can be recited but not questioned: Black Lives Matter, Green Transition, Trans Women Are Women, 1619, Defund the Police. The space to the left-of-center that was once filled with magazines and organizations devoted to what Diana Trilling called the “life of significant contention” is now filled by the ritualized gobbledygook of foundation-funded, single-issue nonprofits like a pond choked by weeds. Having crowded out dissent and debate, the nonprofit industrial complex—Progressivism Inc.—taints the Democratic Party by association with its bizarre obsessions and contributes to Democratic electoral defeats, like the one that appears to be imminent this fall....

In the 1990s, you could be a progressive in good standing and argue against race-based affirmative action, in favor of race-neutral, universal social programs that would help African Americans disproportionately but not exclusively. Around 2000, however, multiple progressive outlets at the same time announced that “the debate about affirmative action is over.” Today race-neutral economic reform, of the kind championed by the democratic socialist and Black civil rights leader Bayard Rustin and the Marxist Adolph Reed, is stigmatized on the center left as “colorblind racism,” and progressives in the name of “equity” are required to support blatant and arguably illegal racial discrimination against non-Hispanic white Americans and “white-adjacent” Asian-Americans, for fear of being purged as heretics...

Unlike academics who recite the approved current center-left positions on all issues, genuine intellectuals, even if they happen to be employed by universities, are unpredictable. Often they are unpopular, because they criticize their own allies and appreciate what other schools of thought get right. They do not indulge in contrarianism for its own sake but tend to be controversial, because they put loyalty to what they consider to be truth above party or faction. Needless to say, such intellectual mavericks tend to perform quite poorly when it comes to the boot-licking, rote repetition of political slogans, acronym-juggling, groupthink, and “donor servicing” that constitute the forms of intellectual activity favored by big foundations and NGOs, whether of the right or of the left."

 

[JamieDimonsBalls]

Related

The New Homophobia

There is a frightening new version of homophobia pervading the U.S., disguised as, of all things, "LGBTQ" activism.

www.newsweek.com

 

[Lucy01]

I am not homophobic! I just don’t like lawyers!

 

[iuwclurker]

The End of Progressive Intellectual Life

How the Foundation-NGO complex quashed innovative thinking and open debate, first on the American right and now on the center-left

www.tabletmag.com

An excerpt:

Center left meaning the center of the Democratic Party? If that’s true then there is no more big tent.

 

[Spartans9312]

Progressivism 101. Everything to the right of Progressives is “conservatism” bordering on “fascism”. Stalinists in the 1920s called reform socialist (“Democratic Socialists”) social fascists. Same, same but different.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

The End of Progressive Intellectual Life

How the Foundation-NGO complex quashed innovative thinking and open debate, first on the American right and now on the center-left

www.tabletmag.com

An excerpt:

They keep saying center-left. Carville is Center-left and hates a lot of the woke movement. Center-left isn't what this person thinks unless progressive is their idea of center-left.

 

[anon_6hv78pr714xta]

They keep saying center-left. Carville is Center-left and hates a lot of the woke movement. Center-left isn't what this person thinks unless progressive is their idea of center-left.

I don't understand your last point. I also don't think Carville has much of a platform any more (maybe further evidence of the author's point?) and he's not what I consider an "intellectual."

 

[Marvin the Martian]

I don't understand your last point. I also don't think Carville has much of a platform any more (maybe further evidence of the author's point?) and he's not what I consider an "intellectual."

I am suggesting center-left (Obama, Bill Clinton, Manchin) isn't the issue. Are we suggest Obama is the same as AOC?

 

[CO. Hoosier]

The End of Progressive Intellectual Life

How the Foundation-NGO complex quashed innovative thinking and open debate, first on the American right and now on the center-left

www.tabletmag.com

An excerpt:

Foundations are not the only culprit. The rush to progressive lunacy comes from education, the world’s most power corporations, from the arts, and from government itself. It has now infected the SCOTUS, which I have always seen as the epitome of rational thought even though I don‘t always agree.

I refuse to see this as a left/ right thing. The refusal to define a woman or teaching 4 year-old boys that having a penis doesn’t mean you are a boy is not politics. It’s lunacy. We need to invent a new continuum to fully assess what is going on,

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

They keep saying center-left. Carville is Center-left and hates a lot of the woke movement. Center-left isn't what this person thinks unless progressive is their idea of center-left.

I think Lind is using "center left" in two different ways. One the one hand, he's talking about the entire intellectual space left of the conservative movement - in this usage "center left" means "center and left." But at times, I think he's also referring to the traditional "center-left" as an intellectual space that's been crowded out and silenced by the progressive machine.

I think. Lind is a pretty solid writer, but this particular essay feels like maybe he hit publish a few edits too soon. So I might be missing some key points.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

I think Lind is using "center left" in two different ways. One the one hand, he's talking about the entire intellectual space left of the conservative movement - in this usage "center left" means "center and left." But at times, I think he's also referring to the traditional "center-left" as an intellectual space that's been crowded out and silenced by the progressive machine.

I think. Lind is a pretty solid writer, but this particular essay feels like maybe he hit publish a few edits too soon. So I might be missing some key points.

There might be something to the idea the parties enforce group think and as such Democrats tend to believe something or Republicans tend to believe something. I would find that more accurate.

 

[NPT]

I also don't think Carville has much of a platform any more (maybe further evidence of the author's point?) and he's not what I consider an "intellectual."

Maybe he's not an "intellectual" but I think he knows politics and what it takes to win and he see's the left destroying their chances to win with all the woke stuff.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

There might be something to the idea the parties enforce group think and as such Democrats tend to believe something or Republicans tend to believe something. I would find that more accurate.

“Group think” is a big problem throughout society, not just politics. Many people, especially the younger generations, strive to be different in terms of appearance and even In gender these days, but most of the same people search for the comfort of those who think alike. People don’t have the education, confidence, or even the skills to be different thinkers. Our educational system beats that out of people.

 

[anon_6hv78pr714xta]

I am suggesting center-left (Obama, Bill Clinton, Manchin) isn't the issue. Are we suggest Obama is the same as AOC?

No. I see your point.

But I think the author is talking about/concerned with people writing about ideas in the public domain more than electoral outcomes.

 

[anon_6hv78pr714xta]

“Group think” is a big problem throughout society, not just politics. Many people, especially the younger generations, strive to be different in terms of appearance and even In gender these days, but most of the same people search for the comfort of those who think alike. People don’t have the education, confidence, or even the skills to be different thinkers. Our educational system beats that out of people.

Let me push back just a bit on that and also play against my typical arguments here:

I’m conflicted by this whole topic despite my strong dislike and clarity about what I perceive as the wrongheaded direction of the far-left identity wing.

There is an element of indoctrination, groupthink, etc that’s been documented in all these articles being posted. I think that’s undeniable.

But at its core it could be described as two principles: (1) everyone should be respected (and loved) regardless of their situation in life (poor, mentally ill, gay, trans, black, brown, etc.) and (2) people shouldn’t be mean to each other and do what they can to help end any meanness.

Those are noble goals. One could say those are deep religious goals, too.

Where I think it runs off the rails is that (2) has somehow become the notion that when reality makes people feel bad, people are supposed to talk about reality differently (sometimes falsely) to make them feel better. (There is a second element about how far you have to go to not be mean that runs through the “ally” discussion).

These underlying broad goals have also been used by people trying to garner political power and also used as a cudgel on people working and thinking in a context where they should be focusing on the truth/reality or playing with concepts (comics, academics, writers, etc).

I hate and will push back against the excesses, illiberalism, and reality-denying aspects of this movement. But I wonder if those two underlying goals aren’t ones that a vast majority of people couldn’t get behind? I read a lot of the conservatives on this board, for example, as people who believe in those two things.

After writing all that, I wonder if I’m not just over complicating the notion of “their hearts are in the right place, but . . . “ What do you think?

 

[Marvin the Martian]

“Group think” is a big problem throughout society, not just politics. Many people, especially the younger generations, strive to be different in terms of appearance and even In gender these days, but most of the same people search for the comfort of those who think alike. People don’t have the education, confidence, or even the skills to be different thinkers. Our educational system beats that out of people.

Are you saying "all in all it's just another brick in the wall"?

A long time ago we made education's sole purpose to be producing a workforce. You shouldn't take philosophy because it is useless. Same for art and music (both among first cut in a budget shortfall). All we should teach are the three R's.

But philosophy should be taught and kids should learn Plato, Locke, Rosseau. They should learn to debate free will vs determinism and realize that believing the other side does not mean one is the enemy.

We need to better train teachers in fostering classroom dissent. And we need to realize critical thinking is among the top skills required from schools, not just shut up and do what your supervisor tells you to do on prep for corporate work.

FWIW, corporations would do well to foster critical thinking. Be it McDonalds, Coke, Ford, or whomever, there is a dang good chance that there are people on the line every day with a better idea of how the job should be done. Corporations should seek that advice and actively investigate. I have told the Timothy Geithner ALCOA story several times, but he got it.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

Let me push back just a bit on that and also play against my typical arguments here:

I’m conflicted by this whole topic despite my strong dislike and clarity about what I perceive as the wrongheaded direction of the far-left identity wing.

There is an element of indoctrination, groupthink, etc that’s been documented in all these articles being posted. I think that’s undeniable.

But at its core it could be described as two principles: (1) everyone should be respected (and loved) regardless of their situation in life (poor, mentally ill, gay, trans, black, brown, etc.) and (2) people shouldn’t be mean to each other and do what they can to help end any meanness.

Those are noble goals. One could say those are deep religious goals, too.

Where I think it runs off the rails is that (2) has somehow become the notion that when reality makes people feel bad, people are supposed to talk about reality differently (sometimes falsely) to make them feel better. (There is a second element about how far you have to go to not be mean that runs through the “ally” discussion).

These underlying broad goals have also been used by people trying to garner political power and also used as a cudgel on people working and thinking in a context where they should be focusing on the truth/reality or playing with concepts (comics, academics, writers, etc).

I hate and will push back against the excesses, illiberalism, and reality-denying aspects of this movement. But I wonder if those two underlying goals aren’t ones that a vast majority of people couldn’t get behind? I read a lot of the conservatives on this board, for example, as people who believe in those two things.

After writing all that, I wonder if I’m not just over complicating the notion of “their hearts are in the right place, but . . . “ What do you think?

I think you and I are far closer than it usually sounds. Here are a couple paragraphs:

• 29% of transgender youth have been threatened or injured with a weapon on school property, compared to 7% of cisgender youth; transgender youth were more likely in 2019 to have been threatened or injured with a weapon on school property than reported in 2017
• 16% of gay and lesbian youth and 11% of bisexual youth have been threatened or injured with a weapon on school property, compared to 7% of straight youth

New CDC Data Shows LGBTQ Youth are More Likely to be Bullied Than…

CDC Releases National Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance Results

www.hrc.org

I don't deny that especially in perception but also in reality, much of the progressive focus is a problem. But the problem of what is acceptable to call a trans kid is very minor compared to a trans kid getting their head beat in.

We are told there is virtually no discrimination left in America, but when groups are asked they say they are being discriminated against. I cannot discount the possibility they are all getting together and lying in polls, but I wonder why so many completely discount the possibility they are telling the truth?

But in the "heart's are in the right place" thought, we haven't figured out how to stop the gay kid or trans kid from being beaten so we grasp at straws. If it is happening as reported by the CDC, then the idea discrimination is so 1999 is gone. What do we do to make that real?

 

[CO. Hoosier]

Let me push back just a bit on that and also play against my typical arguments here:

I’m conflicted by this whole topic despite my strong dislike and clarity about what I perceive as the wrongheaded direction of the far-left identity wing.

There is an element of indoctrination, groupthink, etc that’s been documented in all these articles being posted. I think that’s undeniable.

But at its core it could be described as two principles: (1) everyone should be respected (and loved) regardless of their situation in life (poor, mentally ill, gay, trans, black, brown, etc.) and (2) people shouldn’t be mean to each other and do what they can to help end any meanness.

Those are noble goals. One could say those are deep religious goals, too.

Where I think it runs off the rails is that (2) has somehow become the notion that when reality makes people feel bad, people are supposed to talk about reality differently (sometimes falsely) to make them feel better. (There is a second element about how far you have to go to not be mean that runs through the “ally” discussion).

These underlying broad goals have also been used by people trying to garner political power and also used as a cudgel on people working and thinking in a context where they should be focusing on the truth/reality or playing with concepts (comics, academics, writers, etc).

I hate and will push back against the excesses, illiberalism, and reality-denying aspects of this movement. But I wonder if those two underlying goals aren’t ones that a vast majority of people couldn’t get behind? I read a lot of the conservatives on this board, for example, as people who believe in those two things.

After writing all that, I wonder if I’m not just over complicating the notion of “their hearts are in the right place, but . . . “ What do you think?

Books have been written about this. Respecting, loving, and not being mean to others are universal goals. The implementation is the problem. For many, building communities of people where respect love and lack of meanness flourish means excluding, or in some cases obliterating, those who disagree. Many cultures have gotten past this, but many more people live by that credo today. This plays out as unthinkable violence as I write this in Ukraine.

While we don’t always visit violence on others here in the name of respect, love, and not being mean, we do stealth violence daily with bullying, shunning and the various flavors of cancel culture. (POTUS calling those who aren’t vaccinated killers). The saddest part of all is that this bizarre style of love and respect is part of elementary school education for many youngsters.

Maybe help is on the way. There are signs of an awakening to the destructive and exclusionary aspects of love and respect. Maybe “woke” will have a new meaning.

 

[Bulk VanderHuge]

People don’t have the education, confidence, or even the skills to be different thinkers. Our educational system beats that out of people.

Finally…acknowledgement of the “factory model school” that’s been the norm for over a century. I’ve mentioned it a few times.
The advent of “standardized” testing has slowed many reform ideas.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

A long time ago we made education's sole purpose to be producing a workforce.

Disagree. The workforce aspect to K-12 education is subordinate to college prep. But college prep and higher ed are focused on disciplines other than STEM. We have abandoned most of that and turned it over to foreign students.

 

[Bulk VanderHuge]

Disagree. The workforce aspect to K-12 education is subordinate to college prep. But college prep and higher ed are focused on disciplines other than STEM. We have abandoned most of that and turned it over to foreign students.

Only around 20 years ago, a change in focus was encouraged, and the notion of college or bust was implemented in schools...to the detriment of many students who were told their dreams of being a plumber were less worthy, and a college degree in electrical engineering/computer science would soon be required to become a car mechanic. Goodbye wood/metal shop and auto shop classes. We aren't going to fund them any more. And while we are at it, see ya art and music funding. Those aren't necessary. And, PE? 50 in a class sounds about right.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

I think you and I are far closer than it usually sounds. Here are a couple paragraphs:

• 29% of transgender youth have been threatened or injured with a weapon on school property, compared to 7% of cisgender youth; transgender youth were more likely in 2019 to have been threatened or injured with a weapon on school property than reported in 2017
• 16% of gay and lesbian youth and 11% of bisexual youth have been threatened or injured with a weapon on school property, compared to 7% of straight youth

New CDC Data Shows LGBTQ Youth are More Likely to be Bullied Than…

CDC Releases National Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance Results

www.hrc.org

I don't deny that especially in perception but also in reality, much of the progressive focus is a problem. But the problem of what is acceptable to call a trans kid is very minor compared to a trans kid getting their head beat in.

We are told there is virtually no discrimination left in America, but when groups are asked they say they are being discriminated against. I cannot discount the possibility they are all getting together and lying in polls, but I wonder why so many completely discount the possibility they are telling the truth?

But in the "heart's are in the right place" thought, we haven't figured out how to stop the gay kid or trans kid from being beaten so we grasp at straws. If it is happening as reported by the CDC, then the idea discrimination is so 1999 is gone. What do we do to make that real?

First of all, the CDC has shown itself to be just another part of Biden’s clearly stated “all of government” approach to advance his social justice agenda. If the CDC says anything other than commenting on communicable disease vectors, I don’t trust it.

Second, we need to stop with all this gender fluidity nonsense for young kids. Adolescents have enough problems with raging hormones, body image, and self harm issues without dumping on them questions about whether menstruation means you are a boy or a girl.

Kids who self report transgenderism has increased by 100 times* in recent years. That is not random. That is being taught.

*outside shooter will know what I did with that statistic.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

Disagree. The workforce aspect to K-12 education is subordinate to college prep. But college prep and higher ed are focused on disciplines other than STEM. We have abandoned most of that and turned it over to foreign students.

Indiana University will gladly enroll you in music or art or maybe even basket weaving (I have not checked that degree). SATs and ACTs are no longer required. Public schools are standardized, you must pass X test to move on. I doubt there are music, art, philosophy, or basket weaving questions on the standardized tests.

We don't produce enough STEM majors. There are many reasons for that. But if we are short on STEM graduates, why would STEM graduates teach which tends to be a less financially rewarding occupation? So we don't get the best mathematicians into teaching at the secondary or post secondary level.

My wife was a math major, one of my best college friends was a math major. This was circa 1980. There were not a lot of Americans in their higher level classes. We are not good at selling STEM. A coworkers son was an outstanding math/science person, taking all the math he could in high school, doing very well in the math Olympics. In college he was a business major because the math told him that is where the big money is.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

First of all, the CDC has shown itself to be just another part of Biden’s clearly stated “all of government” approach to advance his social justice agenda. If the CDC says anything other than commenting on communicable disease vectors, I don’t trust it.

Man, Biden has amazing powers in forcing the CDC to issue that report in 2019. Maybe Joe has a time machine?

Kids who self report transgenderism has increased by 100 times* in recent years. That is not random. That is being taught.

Math is simple, it is not hard to go from one to two. Over the next five games the Reds might increase their win total 100% (currently 2 wins). That would be very hard for Toronto (currently 10 wins).

 

[CO. Hoosier]

Man, Biden has amazing powers in forcing the CDC to issue that report in 2019. Maybe Joe has a time machine?




Math is simple, it is not hard to go from one to two. Over the next five games the Reds might increase their win total 100% (currently 2 wins). That would be very hard for Toronto (currently 10 wins).

Good catch. The CDC has been going off the rails for several years. It used to be the gold standard for the technical aspects of commutable diseases. Through governmental mission creep it has gotten into all kinds of unrelated and mostly undefined issues. Remember the thread a few years ago I started about congress wanting the CDC to document gun violence? I think you defended that expanded mission, most democrats did.

 

[iuwclurker]

Let me push back just a bit on that and also play against my typical arguments here:

I’m conflicted by this whole topic despite my strong dislike and clarity about what I perceive as the wrongheaded direction of the far-left identity wing.

There is an element of indoctrination, groupthink, etc that’s been documented in all these articles being posted. I think that’s undeniable.

But at its core it could be described as two principles: (1) everyone should be respected (and loved) regardless of their situation in life (poor, mentally ill, gay, trans, black, brown, etc.) and (2) people shouldn’t be mean to each other and do what they can to help end any meanness.

Those are noble goals. One could say those are deep religious goals, too.

Where I think it runs off the rails is that (2) has somehow become the notion that when reality makes people feel bad, people are supposed to talk about reality differently (sometimes falsely) to make them feel better. (There is a second element about how far you have to go to not be mean that runs through the “ally” discussion).

These underlying broad goals have also been used by people trying to garner political power and also used as a cudgel on people working and thinking in a context where they should be focusing on the truth/reality or playing with concepts (comics, academics, writers, etc).

I hate and will push back against the excesses, illiberalism, and reality-denying aspects of this movement. But I wonder if those two underlying goals aren’t ones that a vast majority of people couldn’t get behind? I read a lot of the conservatives on this board, for example, as people who believe in those two things.

After writing all that, I wonder if I’m not just over complicating the notion of “their hearts are in the right place, but . . . “ What do you think?

Groupthink and shared agreement are not the same. The 10 Commandments were meant to foster not groupthink but civilized agreement. The same with your two noble goals.

Civilization separates us from the animals and is built on sharing common goals and principles. Progress is built on ingenuity and creativity applied to problems of survival. So how does groupthink enter the equation and stifle creativity and self-determinism?

One factor spawning groupthink is inherent in the political nature of our democracy. If opposing candidates don’t have significant differences they need to artificially create them. By reductio ad absurdum this devolves to artificially polar opposite parties seemingly with nothing in common.

Immigration is an interesting example in this article. Both Trump and Bernie Sanders seized the populist anti-immigrant position to gain widespread popularity with their constituents. In doing so both ran against their own party’s interests, Trump against big business and Sanders against the open borders theme of progressives. In both cases their position resonated with many voters because these voters were artificially convinced anti-immigrant was a position in their own interest.

Thinking for oneself does not necessarily mean being different or disagreeing. Far too many of us have been suckered into believing we share a little in common with the other party or another block of Americans.

 

[Jg48]

I am suggesting center-left (Obama, Bill Clinton, Manchin) isn't the issue. Are we suggest Obama is the same as AOC?

You're listing three totally different types: Manchin (center), Clinton (left-center), Obama (left to far left). AOC (from another planet) is another type altogether).

 

[Marvin the Martian]

You're listing three totally different types: Manchin (center), Clinton (left-center), Obama (left to far left). AOC (from another planet) is another type altogether).

Obama was FAR from far left. If you know far left people they really do not like Obama at all.

Barack Obama Is Not My Hero

His politics have always been that of a cautious centrist.

progressive.org

 

[mcmurtry66]

Obama was FAR from far left. If you know far left people they really do not like Obama at all.

Barack Obama Is Not My Hero

His politics have always been that of a cautious centrist.

progressive.org

I agree with you. We expected Biden to be like Obama but he's been closer to AOC. What I would love to know is the true makeup of the Dem party today. Where do voters align

 

[Marvin the Martian]

I agree with you. We expected Biden to be like Obama but he's been closer to AOC. What I would love to know is the true makeup of the Dem party today. Where do voters align

The primary voters are further left than the party as a whole, as GOP primary voters are further right. The extremes are more dedicated than the moderates. They volunteer more, give more, and vote more. All that explains why we are so screwed

 

[mcmurtry66]

The primary voters are further left than the party as a whole, as GOP primary voters are further right. The extremes are more dedicated than the moderates. They volunteer more, give more, and vote more. All that explains why we are so screwed

I agree. I also don't understand why the media is so far left. I get why journalists are but why the lion's share of the left media is so far removed from reality that they make AOC a media darling instead of touting someone like Steve Bullock, a guy literally groomed for political life/governance

 

[Jg48]

Obama was FAR from far left. If you know far left people they really do not like Obama at all.

Barack Obama Is Not My Hero

His politics have always been that of a cautious centrist.

progressive.org

I’ll have to take your word on it. You‘re the expert on the “left”.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

I’ll have to take your word on it. You‘re the expert on the “left”.

True, you probably was one who thinks Lugar was a raging communist.

 

[Jg48]

True, you probably was one who thinks Lugar was a raging communist.

And, you'd be wrong.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

Obama was FAR from far left. If you know far left people they really do not like Obama at all.

Barack Obama Is Not My Hero

His politics have always been that of a cautious centrist.

progressive.org

At some point, far left and incompetent merge. Obama Iranian and Middle East policy, his Russia policy, his energy policy, his education policy, his Southern Border policy, and his DOJ’s policy about race and policing, were all stone cold incompetent. We are seeing the fruits of that play out in Biden’s administration.

 

[anon_6hv78pr714xta]

I agree. I also don't understand why the media is so far left. I get why journalists are but why the lion's share of the left media is so far removed from reality that they make AOC a media darling instead of touting someone like Steve Bullock, a guy literally groomed for political life/governance

That’s an easy explanation: because they make money now based on the number of people who read a story. AOC sells: she’s young, attractive, and knows how to say and what to say to get people talking—good and bad. In that way, she’s much like Trump.

One of the many ways the internet has influenced this is that publishers now know EXACTLY which stories people are reading, for how long, etc. Used to be you just knew how many papers you sold so the popular news could subsidize the hard, useful news. That model is dead, it appears.

 

[UncleMark]

You're listing three totally different types: Manchin (center), Clinton (left-center), Obama (left to far left). AOC (from another planet) is another type altogether).

Obama was FAR from far left. If you know far left people they really do not like Obama at all.

True, you probably was one who thinks Lugar was a raging communist.

At least Lugar was an American citizen.

 

[Circlejoe]

Good catch. The CDC has been going off the rails for several years. It used to be the gold standard for the technical aspects of commutable diseases. Through governmental mission creep it has gotten into all kinds of unrelated and mostly undefined issues. Remember the thread a few years ago I started about congress wanting the CDC to document gun violence? I think you defended that expanded mission, most democrats did.

“When I’m wrong, I say I’m wrong” 😎

 

[Bulk VanderHuge]

“When I’m wrong, I say I’m wrong” 😎

"When I'm wrong, I say you're still wrong."

 

[iuwclurker]

"When I'm wrong, I say you're still wrong."

Speaking of wrong, Smart French conservatives dumped Le TrumPen like a frog turd.