As with John McCain, I don't like Ms. Cheney's polical views, but I applaud her courage as I applauded John McCain's courage and love of country. Both of these people personify the best in America. Country over party and the ability to stand up for their principles in face of cowardly attacks is inspiring.
No matter how strongly a person disagrees with another's political views, there never an excuse to threaten violence and bodiy harm. When I see threats of violence I see someone who is hearing the truth and they are afraid. Because a person has a small mind doesn't mean they can't dangerous. All of these threats should be reported to the FBI for further investigation and possible prosecution.
Maybe this isn't as difficult for me since most of half my family belonged to a now-extinct species called "liberal (sometimes moderate) Republicans". I don't agree with Liz Cheney's voting record but she's proved herself as a fine leader. I particularly admire her straight plain speaking of the truth. If only we heard more of this from both sides we wouldn't be in the mess we're in. Wyoming? Alan Simpson's state? Incredible. Who needs them. She has a national stage now. I hope she loses but I hope she runs. Her party needs her to pull it out of the Trump toilet -- I hope they see reason. And I think she's learning -- that's the sign of a real leader and a great person. She's already apologized to her sister for voting against marriage equality. I don't agree with her but I admire a Liz. We need more leaders who aspire to be like Liz on both sides.
Uh ... who is Don Winslow? I have never used Twitter and never heard of him. I haven't seen or heard anyone in party leadership say anything other than "I don't agree with Liz Cheney's policies but admire her patriotism and her position on the Insurrection."
Addressed to those here who end their laudatory posts with, "oh but I could *never* vote for Liz Cheney" then cite incompatible cultural issues,
A Serious Question: What more do you want from a politician? What more do you want of any US President? Or maybe which Democratic candidate do you have in mind, one better suited for the larger problem in this precarious time?
Liz Cheney has literally thrown her body, heart, and mind under the bus of OUR Constitution. She is risking everything any person can be expected to risk in order to protect *our* ability to vote and protect the historic peaceful transfer of power. She is giving, and will continue to give, her vision, power, and complete will-of-focus to this committee -- everyone there agrees she is the driving force.
Maybe, rather than focus on Cheney's and Kinzinger's culturally different wants and needs, points of view different from your own, why not take a look within yourselves and ask: What more do I want or expect from a leader of the Free World? A world that is on the very brink of collapse?
Or do we feel more comfortable *using* her and her steely might to accomplish this One Particular Problem at hand so we can, ho hum, toss her out in favor of some dreamy Camelot-type candidate who will pave the way to our shared vision of American Nirvana? As a long-time social progressive who has "seen the light" I say this with great respect to all of you.
I consider myself a progressive as does my Husband. We were just talking about how we would actually vote for Liz Cheney. Shocker. Yes, she's a hard core Conservative. However, she is putting Country over party and pledging allegiance to our Constitution. I have enormous respect for her. What if she ran? What if she put Country over party and following in President Biden's footsteps, tried to bring stability to the Country. A pipe dream, but she hasn't flinched. Maybe she could bring the Republican party back.
I consider myself a progressive as does my Husband. We were just talking about how we would actually vote for Liz Cheney. Shocker. Yes, she's a hard core Conservative. However, she is putting Country over party and pledging allegiance to our Constitution. I have enormous respect for her. What if she ran? What if she put Country over party and following in President Biden's footsteps, tried to bring stability to the Country. A pipe dream, but she hasn't flinched. Maybe she could bring the Republican party back.
We could use Democratic political leaders speaking out like Cheney and doing it often. Unfortunately, no one is doing much of this and I don’t get it. Huge disconnect between democratic voting base and democratic leaders.
I am not going to defend Don Winslow’s comments- but I do know who he is. He is a really good mystery writer, and I collected his Neil Carey books back in the day. I still have them, and will read them again, to see if he is still as good as I remember. I have not read his recent books, primarily set on the Mexican border, because how our country deals with immigration- on both sides- just breaks my heart. I grew up in a border city. We should have figured this out a long time ago. But all the different policies we have and haven’t had may have broken him, too. Another person’s ethics are not mine to choose.
Agree 100% about complacency. So now, my friend, please tell me when you decide who to vote for in 2024. Who is that Democratic candidate who will show us all the way to keep our fragile Democratic Republic intact enough that we can go back to bickering and throwing stones!
So Charlie, on several occasion you’ve stipulated that Twitter isn’t real life but then you proceed to dedicate a lot of your newsletter’s real estate to highlight and comment on what’s being posted on said Twitter. Have you and the rest of the media ever considered that the fact that you all keep talking and writing about what’s happening on Twitter is what’s giving the people you disagree with all their power? And, as you can see, commenting on your favourite progressive whipping horses (such as Elias, Winslow, the Quad, any crazy liberal with an internet connection) isn’t changing their Twitter habits so, what’s the point? Why not try something new for awhile, like ignoring them?
What to do? Until the FOG was elected, you and your conservative cohorts were all in and were almost in lock step with Ms. Cheney’s voting record-Ron Johnson, the Supremes, Bush vs. Gore, Obama care,ad nauseam and so logical but no heart, definitely not my cup of tea. However, needs must and I find the Bulwark to provide points of view and facts not to be found anywhere else. I mean even Mother Jones refers to you. Cheers to Tim, he seems to be the only one of you doing the mea culpa! Given THE FACT that you’all laid the track for our current political situation, it is absolutely right that someone of the conservative persuasion should fall on the political grenade and I,for one, am totally in awe of Ms. Cheney’s and Mr. Kinzinger’s bravery!!! The Republican Party, as you know it, is dead and never coming back-they have joined the Know Nothings on the bus to nowhere. Which leaves you where? I hope that articles such as this will provide some type of ground for moving forward, especially now that it is so clear how dangerous our current situation is. Please keep up the good work.
Thanks Charlie. Im a Liberal who supports the majority of Progressive policies. I do NOT admire Don Winslow, nor do I pay him much attention (or Glenn Greenwald, et al). They have more in common with the extremist Right than they do with me. I just want to see POC, Women, LGBTQ etc to have equal rights to white men (both in theory and in PRACTICE, which we do not have)
The problem with extremists on both sides (or all sides, because there are some truly crazy-ass Libertarians and Indies as well), is all they really have is Outrage, Misinformation, Cruelty, and All the ISMS, and general assinineness... All of them, from Left AND Right are working to further destroy this nation, and are serving Putin's agenda.
Perhaps it's time to reframe and re"brand" all the parties. Because the conservative anti-Liz's are every bit as lost and ignorant as the prog/lib anti-Liz's. So to call either of them "conservatives", "republicans" or "progressive", "liberals", or democrats is incorrect.
They're basicallyy all the same. So I lump them together (along with 6 justices on scotus) as "Extremists who want to destroy our Republic by destroying our Democracy.
I'm pretty frightened. We MUST find a way for the followers of the Extremists to actually hear and learn the Truth. (Im not referring to Winslow and the Scotus who all actually know better, I'm talking about the poor people who listen to Fox Propaganda, and the utter jackassery of Winslow et al.
Charlie, how do you suggest we accomplish that? I'm thinking we have to have to have to regulate ALL kinds of Mass Comm... What do you think, Charlie?
I commend H. David Baer’s critique of national conservatism, which echoes some thoughts I’ve had, but with more erudition than I could muster.
One quotation that stood out to me was this, in which natcons declare that nationalism is “the only genuine alternative to universalist ideologies now seeking to impose a homogenizing, locality-destroying imperium over the entire globe.” Besides the question of what’s meant by “genuine,” I wondered: what is the agent that’s “seeking to impose” an “imperium”?
Framing ideology (or liberalism, by implication) as an active imperialistic force is the predicate for a moral equivalency in which the spread of (liberal) ideas and influences through the world, and their acceptance by people in various places, is no more defensible than the forcible subjugation through which the Russian nation was built and through which Putin endeavors to enlarge it today. Or maybe it’s worse, for those who still imagine that Putin is standing up for a traditional culture conceived as a wholly organic reflection of the spirit of a people, and who cast liberalism as “ideological,” i.e. artificial, and destructive of the natural or “pre-political” elements of culture.
So natcons believe that a sovereign people have the right to defend their “cultural heritage” in war. But what if a people want to defend the right to change their culture or make their society more liberal? Is that another matter?
The strangest thing is how the natcon disdain for “global rules-based liberal order” leads into a might-makes-right view of the world, far from solicitude for national and local cultures. I wonder if American natcons would be so hostile toward the rules-based international order if they didn’t live in a large country with a powerful military, surrounded by two oceans and two benign neighbors. Some of them acknowledge those advantages, but as a premise for isolationist indifference to the rest of the world
As with John McCain, I don't like Ms. Cheney's polical views, but I applaud her courage as I applauded John McCain's courage and love of country. Both of these people personify the best in America. Country over party and the ability to stand up for their principles in face of cowardly attacks is inspiring.
No matter how strongly a person disagrees with another's political views, there never an excuse to threaten violence and bodiy harm. When I see threats of violence I see someone who is hearing the truth and they are afraid. Because a person has a small mind doesn't mean they can't dangerous. All of these threats should be reported to the FBI for further investigation and possible prosecution.
Maybe this isn't as difficult for me since most of half my family belonged to a now-extinct species called "liberal (sometimes moderate) Republicans". I don't agree with Liz Cheney's voting record but she's proved herself as a fine leader. I particularly admire her straight plain speaking of the truth. If only we heard more of this from both sides we wouldn't be in the mess we're in. Wyoming? Alan Simpson's state? Incredible. Who needs them. She has a national stage now. I hope she loses but I hope she runs. Her party needs her to pull it out of the Trump toilet -- I hope they see reason. And I think she's learning -- that's the sign of a real leader and a great person. She's already apologized to her sister for voting against marriage equality. I don't agree with her but I admire a Liz. We need more leaders who aspire to be like Liz on both sides.
Uh ... who is Don Winslow? I have never used Twitter and never heard of him. I haven't seen or heard anyone in party leadership say anything other than "I don't agree with Liz Cheney's policies but admire her patriotism and her position on the Insurrection."
Addressed to those here who end their laudatory posts with, "oh but I could *never* vote for Liz Cheney" then cite incompatible cultural issues,
A Serious Question: What more do you want from a politician? What more do you want of any US President? Or maybe which Democratic candidate do you have in mind, one better suited for the larger problem in this precarious time?
Liz Cheney has literally thrown her body, heart, and mind under the bus of OUR Constitution. She is risking everything any person can be expected to risk in order to protect *our* ability to vote and protect the historic peaceful transfer of power. She is giving, and will continue to give, her vision, power, and complete will-of-focus to this committee -- everyone there agrees she is the driving force.
Maybe, rather than focus on Cheney's and Kinzinger's culturally different wants and needs, points of view different from your own, why not take a look within yourselves and ask: What more do I want or expect from a leader of the Free World? A world that is on the very brink of collapse?
Or do we feel more comfortable *using* her and her steely might to accomplish this One Particular Problem at hand so we can, ho hum, toss her out in favor of some dreamy Camelot-type candidate who will pave the way to our shared vision of American Nirvana? As a long-time social progressive who has "seen the light" I say this with great respect to all of you.
I consider myself a progressive as does my Husband. We were just talking about how we would actually vote for Liz Cheney. Shocker. Yes, she's a hard core Conservative. However, she is putting Country over party and pledging allegiance to our Constitution. I have enormous respect for her. What if she ran? What if she put Country over party and following in President Biden's footsteps, tried to bring stability to the Country. A pipe dream, but she hasn't flinched. Maybe she could bring the Republican party back.
I consider myself a progressive as does my Husband. We were just talking about how we would actually vote for Liz Cheney. Shocker. Yes, she's a hard core Conservative. However, she is putting Country over party and pledging allegiance to our Constitution. I have enormous respect for her. What if she ran? What if she put Country over party and following in President Biden's footsteps, tried to bring stability to the Country. A pipe dream, but she hasn't flinched. Maybe she could bring the Republican party back.
We could use Democratic political leaders speaking out like Cheney and doing it often. Unfortunately, no one is doing much of this and I don’t get it. Huge disconnect between democratic voting base and democratic leaders.
I am not going to defend Don Winslow’s comments- but I do know who he is. He is a really good mystery writer, and I collected his Neil Carey books back in the day. I still have them, and will read them again, to see if he is still as good as I remember. I have not read his recent books, primarily set on the Mexican border, because how our country deals with immigration- on both sides- just breaks my heart. I grew up in a border city. We should have figured this out a long time ago. But all the different policies we have and haven’t had may have broken him, too. Another person’s ethics are not mine to choose.
Agree 100% about complacency. So now, my friend, please tell me when you decide who to vote for in 2024. Who is that Democratic candidate who will show us all the way to keep our fragile Democratic Republic intact enough that we can go back to bickering and throwing stones!
I look forward to hearing who you would vote for. I really do. Please tell us all!
So Charlie, on several occasion you’ve stipulated that Twitter isn’t real life but then you proceed to dedicate a lot of your newsletter’s real estate to highlight and comment on what’s being posted on said Twitter. Have you and the rest of the media ever considered that the fact that you all keep talking and writing about what’s happening on Twitter is what’s giving the people you disagree with all their power? And, as you can see, commenting on your favourite progressive whipping horses (such as Elias, Winslow, the Quad, any crazy liberal with an internet connection) isn’t changing their Twitter habits so, what’s the point? Why not try something new for awhile, like ignoring them?
I can admire a person for ring an American without agreeing with her political. I love Liz Cheney. She put her country first.
I’m a liberal and I love Liz Cheney. I can admire a person as an American without agreeing with her politically.
Dear sir
What to do? Until the FOG was elected, you and your conservative cohorts were all in and were almost in lock step with Ms. Cheney’s voting record-Ron Johnson, the Supremes, Bush vs. Gore, Obama care,ad nauseam and so logical but no heart, definitely not my cup of tea. However, needs must and I find the Bulwark to provide points of view and facts not to be found anywhere else. I mean even Mother Jones refers to you. Cheers to Tim, he seems to be the only one of you doing the mea culpa! Given THE FACT that you’all laid the track for our current political situation, it is absolutely right that someone of the conservative persuasion should fall on the political grenade and I,for one, am totally in awe of Ms. Cheney’s and Mr. Kinzinger’s bravery!!! The Republican Party, as you know it, is dead and never coming back-they have joined the Know Nothings on the bus to nowhere. Which leaves you where? I hope that articles such as this will provide some type of ground for moving forward, especially now that it is so clear how dangerous our current situation is. Please keep up the good work.
Thanks Charlie. Im a Liberal who supports the majority of Progressive policies. I do NOT admire Don Winslow, nor do I pay him much attention (or Glenn Greenwald, et al). They have more in common with the extremist Right than they do with me. I just want to see POC, Women, LGBTQ etc to have equal rights to white men (both in theory and in PRACTICE, which we do not have)
The problem with extremists on both sides (or all sides, because there are some truly crazy-ass Libertarians and Indies as well), is all they really have is Outrage, Misinformation, Cruelty, and All the ISMS, and general assinineness... All of them, from Left AND Right are working to further destroy this nation, and are serving Putin's agenda.
Perhaps it's time to reframe and re"brand" all the parties. Because the conservative anti-Liz's are every bit as lost and ignorant as the prog/lib anti-Liz's. So to call either of them "conservatives", "republicans" or "progressive", "liberals", or democrats is incorrect.
They're basicallyy all the same. So I lump them together (along with 6 justices on scotus) as "Extremists who want to destroy our Republic by destroying our Democracy.
I'm pretty frightened. We MUST find a way for the followers of the Extremists to actually hear and learn the Truth. (Im not referring to Winslow and the Scotus who all actually know better, I'm talking about the poor people who listen to Fox Propaganda, and the utter jackassery of Winslow et al.
Charlie, how do you suggest we accomplish that? I'm thinking we have to have to have to regulate ALL kinds of Mass Comm... What do you think, Charlie?
I commend H. David Baer’s critique of national conservatism, which echoes some thoughts I’ve had, but with more erudition than I could muster.
One quotation that stood out to me was this, in which natcons declare that nationalism is “the only genuine alternative to universalist ideologies now seeking to impose a homogenizing, locality-destroying imperium over the entire globe.” Besides the question of what’s meant by “genuine,” I wondered: what is the agent that’s “seeking to impose” an “imperium”?
Framing ideology (or liberalism, by implication) as an active imperialistic force is the predicate for a moral equivalency in which the spread of (liberal) ideas and influences through the world, and their acceptance by people in various places, is no more defensible than the forcible subjugation through which the Russian nation was built and through which Putin endeavors to enlarge it today. Or maybe it’s worse, for those who still imagine that Putin is standing up for a traditional culture conceived as a wholly organic reflection of the spirit of a people, and who cast liberalism as “ideological,” i.e. artificial, and destructive of the natural or “pre-political” elements of culture.
So natcons believe that a sovereign people have the right to defend their “cultural heritage” in war. But what if a people want to defend the right to change their culture or make their society more liberal? Is that another matter?
The strangest thing is how the natcon disdain for “global rules-based liberal order” leads into a might-makes-right view of the world, far from solicitude for national and local cultures. I wonder if American natcons would be so hostile toward the rules-based international order if they didn’t live in a large country with a powerful military, surrounded by two oceans and two benign neighbors. Some of them acknowledge those advantages, but as a premise for isolationist indifference to the rest of the world