Because I promised and you seemed so darn curious...

there are probably a dozen or more congressmen, a couple of Senators and several prominent television commenters who would proudly proclaim their belief in every single tenet above, except the "inferior races", which several almost surely believe but can't admit (Buchanan, Inhofe, Jesse Helms, Ashcroft, Virgil Goode, Tancredo, Pat Robertson, Fred Barnes, Brit Hume, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, Ann Coulter, Laura Ingram, Phyllis Schlafly, Bay Buchanan, "Dr" James Dobson, Bob Novak, Jerry Boykin-- and that's just a partial list, off the top of my head).

Can you point to any prominent liberal politician commentator or even some terrible foul-mouthed blogger who even remotely fits, let's say one fourth, of your Archie Bunker ca 1974 caricature of liberals? (which you more or less admitted to be the case).
Because that's what this whole "comment war" about: Your building strawmen to criticize the left.

A most interesting list. I spent the last three days working with a man who told me that he is a life-long Republican, but was now ashamed to call himself one because of what the Republican party had become. Many of the items on your list define the Republican party's "base," and certainly describe its loudmouth spokespersons such as Hannity, Limbaugh, Coulter, etc. If you omitted the no passport crowd, the Jewish conspiracy crowd, the racist crowd, and modify your description of Israel's dominationist role (4 of your 16 points)you would essentially have the Republican party platforms in many, if not most, of the states in the U.S. This is not a healthy trend. What do you think?

I think this could accurately describe a number of conservative pundits, with TV contracts, book deals, radio programs. I think your earlier list described people far out of the mainstream.

If you think I am mistaken, Mr. Klein, I urge you to present counter-examples. because snide comments at the very end of your post do not an argument make, sir...

How could I forget Jeff Sessions? The Evil Elf From Alabama!

"but I'm sure, as with lefties, these guys simply don't exist, either."

And therein lies the problem, Joe. I could name a dozen, off the top of my head.

You think you need to expound some sort of balance, as if the political and ideological left-right divide in this country is balanced. But it's not.

You've already declared that you're not willing to name names publicly. But I hope you'll have the self-awareness to at least do so in the privacy of your own head. And if you do, perhaps you will admit to yourself (even if you won't admit to your readers) that you, too, can name a dozen or so prominent politicans and pundits who by and large share most of the characteristics of right-wing extremism, but that you cannot, even your own head, come up with three equally prominent politicans or pundits who share most of the characteristics of left-wing extremism.

And once you admit that to yourself, shape up, ok?

"I'm sure, as with lefties, these guys simply don't exist, either."

Are you now suggesting that Ann Coulter doesn't exist?

Poor senile man....

It will be fun over the next few days to watch this comment thread fill up with quotes (with links!) to prominent Republican elected officials, commentators and religious leaders espousing the right wing "extremist" views you outline above.

And these quotes will be from people we've heard of! Faces we recognize! Presidents! Senators! Rich and famous Fox News commentators! But none of the defenders of your list of left-wing extremist positions has been able to come up with many examples of people who hold those views.

Which proves what most of us in the comments section already know -- that right wing extremism is pervasive in the United States, and left wing extremism is pretty much limited to obsure college professors and quasi-anonymous bloggers.

So the question I'm so darn curious about is why do you seem bothered so much more by left wing extremism?

I believe that your observation that rightwing extremist "regularly uses harsh, vulgar, intolerant language to mock liberals." should also note that when they do so, they are not called to task for it, or in the extremely unlikely event they are, they claim they were merely joking, at which point all is forgiven and they are given a book deal and access to two hours per day TV news media coverage to pimp said book.

There may be 3 or 4 items in the list that relate to what is typically defined as right-wing extremism. I don't really understand the relevance of the remainder of the list.

In my mind the essential characteristics of right-wing extremism include opposition to constitutional democracy and human rights. These movements are ethnocentric, featuring overt racism and nationalism. They despise and reject Liberal principles such as individual liberty, freedom, and equality and the rights of freedom of speech, thought, conscience or religion. They reject the sovereignty of the People and the separation of power. Their preferred form of government is an authoritarian and totalitarian centralized system, ruled by a strong leader who heads up an anti-democratic one-party movement.

Right-wing extremists believe themselves to be persecuted by external and internal enemies. These imagined enemies tend to become scape goats that the extremists feel a need to strike out against violently. Foreign workers and those identified to be from inferior races are singled out as the internal enemy and scapegoated for causing all the nation's ills. Militaristic and expansionist foreign policies are justified in the name of striking back at perceived external enemies.

Calling Liberals names may make you an illiterate rube, but it doesn't necessarily make you an extremist.

With all due respect Mr. Klein, I would recommend that you read Kevin Drum's post on this debate:

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2007_03/010854.php

I think it's fair and balanced.

I would be interested to read your thoughts on it.

I understand that these are off the top of your head, but Derek has a point. There is a dangerous, violent, authoritarian, and reflexively anti-democratic streak to the post-9/11 right, and I really think it has become the centerpiece of rightist extremism. Your description is correct in important respects, and captures things that have been true of the right for some time. But the fringe dreams of brown shirts and treason trials these days, and they alarm me in a way they never have before. The comments in your last few threads contain numerous examples of this new, ugly strain.

I don't know if these folks fit all of your descriptors but they do fit most:

Huckabee
Tancredo
Mean Jean
Solis
Inohfe (or however you spell it!)
Santorum
The attendees at the recent Conservative conference.
Dobson and his followers.
Malkin
Hannity
Ingraham
Limbaugh
The people who listen to the above rightwing extremists
The Republican pollwatchers at my voting site in the last election.

Your post was Ok until the lasst sentence. You still aren't facing facts about the current Republican party.

Tom Tancredo, Richard Perle...

Washisname, Frum. he's a bastard.

Cheney
Mark Levin

Pat Robertson
George W Bush
Ann Coulter

Self-loathing, paranoid, pandering to Bill Maher non-sense.

That you're paid by a major American print publication for this myopic crap is beyond all reason - and a bad sign for innocent trees and electrons everywhere.

Ann Coulter attended the wrong event.

She should have appeared at the Baker & Taylor Spring Fling on Publisher's Row.

Glen Beck
QUESTION HILLARY
Sean Hannity
Grover Norquist

Dennis Miller
Michelle Malkin
30% of the entire state of Utah
The Spirit of Strom Thurmond

You know he's more entertaining when he is attacking liberals, although this is a good list.

Doug Feith.

John Ashcroft
Alberto Gonzalez
Donald Rumsfeld
William Bennett
William Donohue
James Dobson

"Which proves what most of us in the comments section already know -- that right wing extremism is pervasive in the United States, and left wing extremism is pretty much limited to obsure college professors and quasi-anonymous bloggers."

That is basically true, but I don't take anywhere near the same conclusion from it that you seem to. My sense of the U.S. is that there is a sizable minority of voters (not just pundits and politicians) who have extreme right wing views. There is a much smaller minority who have extreme left wing views. Now what this translates to is an uphill battle for those of us on the left to gain electoral power, because we have to win over more of the center than they do (which is why Rove's "base strategy" worked--barely--for the GOP, but could never work for Democrats). And that's just what we did this last fall--we won over independents and other swing voters in droves--but we still didn't win a landslide of the popular vote.

So this is precisely why I always urge the Democrats to take a line that is more centrist than what I would personally prefer if I could wave a magic wand, because I know that half a loaf is far better than none.

-Alan

Why not add right wing beliefs about the media, beyond the notion that journalists conspire with Jews and Hollywood? (btw the fantasy of that nefarious cabal is sooo mid 1990s).

-journalists conspire with al Qaeda by reporting only bad news from Iraq
-believes journalists should be killed for their reporting
-specifically reporting on NSA wiretapping, CIA blacksites, and whatever stories Sy Hersch or Dana Priest breaks
-believe MSM journalists all secretly hate GW Bush
-believe journalists routinely photoshop images
-believe journalists invent sources to propagate narrative of things not going well in Iraq

also

-believes that "the separation of Chuch and State" has no authoritative place in the tradition of US politics

-thinks sex is a regulable political practice, whose regulations must be taught in sex ed (abstainance only!) and maintained through one's life course (hetero marriage only!)

To correct one point, Right extremists don't hate NGOs like Amnesty because they're a threat to US soverignty (though that's how they couch their complaints); they hate them because they don't think the US has the inalienable right to torture people.

But, I'm OK with this list in general. Well done, Joe: you're evidently far more familiar with Right doctrine than with the Left's.

Mr. Klein, I appreciate the work that you do. Please continue to do that work, and for the love of fortune, don't be afraid to confront the ugliest of the right when it reers its ugly head.

I'm tired of hearin' folks like Joe Klein mock those of faith and trash our great nation. My grandaddy fought and died for our nation to be free, the first free nation ever. We are the shining light to the world- why do you think everyone wants to come here? America is the land of hope and freedom. If it wasn't for our brave heroic military, we wouldn't be allowed to speak freely. I'm a believer in the Bible all my life and I ain't gonna stop now 'cus some big city elitist wants to mock my faith in the Lord. Oh, and if Joe Klein hates capitalism so much, let him go to Cuba and write his anti-US screeds. Capitalism and Reagan defeated the Soviets. This is America- if you don't love it, leave it.

My comment with links has been held in moderation, but in the meantime, it's going to be fun to see the list of elected GOP representatives, appointed GOP officials, and right-wing pundits who precisely fit the characteristics Joe has enumerated.

It's a really easy task. On the left? Not so much. That says all you need to know. Extremism on the right is institutionalised; extremism on the left is marginalised. And milquetoast centrism built on strawman denunciation of the left helps sustain this asymmetry.

Let's remember where this began: Joe accused Atrios of being an ideological extremist. And we're off on a wild, wild tangent.

But are TIME columnists Kristol and Krauthammer 'ideological extremists'? At least have the guts to give us a yes/no on that one.

"Joe: you're evidently far more familiar with Right doctrine than with the Left's."

This is a really good point.
The reason no one can find anyone who matches the left wing extremist list is that it's such a silly caricature. But even the most ridiculous items on the right wing extremist list have prominent figures who believe them.

John Yoo
Pat Riot
Newt Gingrich
G Gordon Liddy

Francis Coombs
Mickey Kaus
Everybody at the Corner
Sam Brownback

Is there really a left wing equivalent of Imhofe among mainstream politicians? I don't think so. Lieberman should reflect on the people he is getting into bed with:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/02/AR2007030201619.html

Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) got the crowd cheering early in the day. "I have been called -- my kids are all aware of this -- dumb, crazy man, science abuser, Holocaust denier, villain of the month, hate-filled, warmonger, Neanderthal, Genghis Khan and Attila the Hun," he announced. "And I can just tell you that I wear some of those titles proudly."

"Is there really a left wing equivalent of Imhofe among mainstream politicians?"

No. No, there is not.

Joe, we're havinbg a discussion here. Thoughts?

Back in the Eighties, I thought there was something ridiculous going on about how our political spectrum was being defined when I first saw "Crossfire" on CNN. "From the right" we had Pat Buchanan, whose views were slightly to the right of Mussolini, while "from the left" we had Tom Braden, an ex-CIA guy whose views were, to be charitable, maybe slightly to the left of Bob Dole.

If CNN had really wanted to present someone as far to the left as Buchanan was on the right, they certainly wouldn't have picked Braden or his successor, Michael Kinsley, who was a slight improvement but still maybe just a millimeter left of center. No, if they truly wanted to balance out Buchanan's right-wing extremism, they would've had to go all the way over on the left past the Democratic Party, even past the Green Party, to the Trotskyites of the Socialist Workers Party. Or maybe to the Maoists.

How many items on this list could NOT reasonably be said to describe Tom Delay, who was for years arguably the most powerful man in Washington, who was chosen by a majority of the ruling Republican party's legislators as their leader and representative?

By contrast, how many items on the "left wing extremist" list could reasonably be said to describe any Democrat elected to any office above city-council level in our lifetime?

"--believes in the Second Amendment to the Constituion, but has some “problems” with the First."

Aw, Joe, don't sell them short. They don't believe much in the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth or Eighth either...

...The call them the "Terrorists Bill of Rights"

Source: Little Green Facists, err, Footballs
http://tinyurl.com/2xll2q

Hanoi Jane Fonda
Tom Fonda-Hayden
The Berrigan Sisters
Abbie BULLSEYE Hoffman
Maddie Halfbright
BJ Clixon
Jimmy Crater
Al IGNORE MELTING MARS Gore...

Oh, sorry.

I thought this was the Meet The Dinosuarus MeetUppers thread.

Never mind.

From Ray Oliva, the distraught 70-year-old vet from Kelseyville, Calif., came this: "I wrote a letter to Senators Feinstein and Boxer a few years ago asking why I had to wear Hospital gowns that had holes in them and torn and why some of the Vets had to ask for beds that had good mattress instead of broken and old. Wheel chairs old and tired and the list goes on and on. I never did get a response." - WooPoo Post

(as sung to
You IS A Human Animal)...

You IS A Hoofie Liberal,
You IS A Very Special Breed,
Flame a faggot, you blame Bush,
Not your whining leftist push,
For jobs without some work
Which you can't heed.

You IS A Hoofie Liberal,
You IS A Very Special Breed,
Whether Chavez or George Lucas,
You'd prefer Saddam had nuked us,
Instead of ending any threat you
couldn't see.

You IS A Hoofie Liberal,
You IS A Very Special Breed,
Burn the flag, chew a pill,
You'll abort more children still
than the UN or EU will ever need.

You IS A Hoofie Liberal,
You IS A Very Special Breed,
Whether fat old chat time hack,
or just some hoe on mostly crack,
There's nothing you won't do to
not succeed.

You IS A Hoofie Liberal,
You IS A Very Special Breed,
Shrill and strident, you'll be true,
To all the things with which you've screwed,
FICA, unions, schools, and Medicrap indeed.

You IS A Hoofie Liberal,
You IS A Very Special Breed,
Young or Carter, fat or bland,
Old France thinks you're still grand,
Though Vermont is where you'll make your
final stand.

You IS A Hoofie Liberal,
You IS A Very Special Breed,
Uncle Teddy, Cousin Lerch,
Any pardon selling perch,
Be better than the nation you
besmirch.

You IS A Hoofie Liberal,
You IS A Very Special Breed,
When you speak, forests cry,
Booboo Boxer lets them fry,
Never mind the fuzzy critters that
all die.

You IS A Hoofie Liberal,
You IS A Very Special Breed,
To the center Hillary runs,
Never mind you don't like guns,
That never stopped you from
Basement Frank-N-Sex (sans nuns).

You IS A Hoofie Liberal,
You IS A Very Special Breed,
Diss the troops, hit a cop,
As long as cable you don't drop,
So skip the latest CBS numbers
flop.

You IS A Hoofie Liberal,
You IS A Very Special Breed,
Cindy Shiite or Martin Sheen,
There's no time for Listerine,
But boiling smelly Birkenstocks is
keen.

You IS A Hoofie Liberal,
You IS A Very Special Breed,
Suckled on the teet of state,
Your mantra daily MASTERBATE,
As cure for all ills foreign and
obscene...

OK, your turn, go.

Question Hillary, you wouldn't be able to stake out a well-reasoned position, or form a coherent sentence if you plagiarized it.

Conservatives are deciders.

Liberals are abiders.

Liberals would abide any terrorist, any basement pervert, any elected rapist - if they thought it would keep the kettle from boiling over near their own toes.

Conservatives?

Warts and all, they'll actually DO SOMETHING about a threat, before 3 more generations down the road get to handle the same Carter-created mess, over & over & over again.

What IS is.

"Some have compared me to Stalin, Mao, Pol pot, called me an America hater, capitalist hater, Corporation hater...and I wear those titles proudly!"

Imagine any elected Dem saying that.

"believes in a global conspiracy led by Jewish bankers, Hollywood executives and journalists.

--believes, despite the above, that Israel is absolutely wonderful, and that when it achieves full dominion over its Biblical lands—especially Judea and Samaria—a great battle will be fought and Jesus will descend from the clouds.

--only receives news from Fox or right-wing radio talk show hosts.

--believes Hillary Clinton is a dangerous radical."

These are ridiculous. But you'd have no trouble putting names to the rest.

It's been very amusing watching this evolution. First, you falsely label Duncan Black a leftist extremist. Then, trying to dig yourself out of that hole, you decide to define what you mean by a leftist extremist, which gets you in deeper, because those people (as Kevin pointed out) may have been around when Yippies were dumping sackfuls of dollars onto the NYSE but are no longer on the landscape. Then, as a kinda make-up call, you note that Ann Coulter, is a right wing extremist.

And now, funniest of all, you post a list of right wing extremist characteristics that one can easily put names to.

Here's Inhofe, a freakin' elected official:

"Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) got the crowd cheering early in the day. "I have been called -- my kids are all aware of this -- dumb, crazy man, science abuser, Holocaust denier, villain of the month, hate-filled, warmonger, Neanderthal, Genghis Khan and Attila the Hun," he announced. "And I can just tell you that I wear some of those titles proudly."

Now, what's interesting about this is that it may well be that there are leftist extremists out there we don't hear from, because the media won't let them speak. So the fact that Ann Coulter and Glen Beck are given public forums while the leftist extremists who may exist do not. Or it could be that they are afraid of saying what they really think, because of, say, what happened to Edwards' blogger hires.

All that demonstrates, of course, is the dominant role right wing extremists now have in media narratives and media access. It absolutely bizarre that a centrist governor like Howard Dean gets labeled some kind of liberal radical because *he was absolutely correct in every respect about the war in Iraq* when the Beltway Babblers were drinking the Bush Kool-Aid.

I would add to your list the following:

-- Believes torture is both effective and morally justified when done by the US

Just read the NRO Corner, Red State, Powerline, Rush etc.. for examples of how this is a widely held belief among the right. Comes from watching "24" too much and being unable to differentiate between fiction & reality.

"but I'm sure, as with lefties, these guys simply don't exist, either."

They sure do. Very visibly they do--many on television every day with a permanent meal ticket from Rupert Murdoch, Richard Mellon Scaife, and Exxon-Mobil and the like.

Paul Krugman:

http://www.pkarchive.org/column/080505.html

Klein's points about lefties and wingnuts are interesting.
One thing that should be clear regarding his reference to bussing and it's adverse effects.
The American sytem of apartheid would have continued unabated without activists on the left.
Centrists were missing in action during the civil rights battle. Was bussing an over-reaction? Yes. Would segregation have gone away if Centrists were in control? No. Centrists would have waited for the Right to concede, while Blacks continued to suffer. It took 30 years for Southern Baptists to concede that their support for segregation was wrong.
Similarly, in the current Constitutional assault and dereliction of duty (Katrina, Walter Reed, VA Hospitals, etc) by the Right, Centrists will hope in vain for compromise with people who have no intention of relinquishing power. Centrists will be missing in action in this battle.
Mr Klein ignores the big threat on the Right, but attacks non-existent shadows on the Left.
He refuses to recognize that among his Time columnist colleagues, there is NO representation of an entire segment of the US population. But he is good for making lists.

Mr Klein:

You have given us two lists. Now, how about a dozen names of those on boths sides of the divide who are currently in Congress, Think Tanks, the Church, The Administration, the Judiciary and the Media. We can then check their record to see if they fit your list.

Setting out markers is one thing: putting names to validate those markers will be helpful.

Until then we are laundry listing which is no help at all.

Looks like Joe just plagerized the mission statements from LGF and freerepublic.

"believes in the Second Amendment to the Constituion, but has some “problems” with the First."

The funniest part of this statement? It describes a current Supreme Court Justice.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/03/19/scalia.speech.ap/index.html

Does anyone know why Atrios chooses to post here under the moniker "QUESTION HILLARY"?

One other thing's been niggling at me. Joe eventually decided that he couldn't really call atrios an extremist, but "he sure is a purveyor of extreme and terminally smug rhetoric."

I suspect Joe didn't read a whole lot of wonkette when his internet editor was writing content for that blog.

This one's wrong:

"-believes that America is always, in every instance, the ultimate force of moral authority in the world."

It's not in every instance. It's only when a Republican is president that the US is the ultimate force of moral authority.

Under Clinton or Carter, not so much.

"I understand that these are off the top of your head, but Derek has a point. There is a dangerous, violent, authoritarian, and reflexively anti-democratic streak to the post-9/11 right, and I really think it has become the centerpiece of rightist extremism."

Besides the fact that we don't know what the baseline for right-wing extremists is, any more than the Left, because of the lack of specificity, I fail to see how the case is made here. I'm tempted to theorize that what we are seeing is the rise of the analog to pop psychology, which we might call, pop political science.

Sure there are some parallels with what is traditionally seen in political science as right-wing extremism. The Lou Dobbs lead Jihad against immigrants smacks of the enemy within attribute. We are certainly deluged with fear mongering rhetoric against the external enemy, but 9/11 did happen. Unfortunately, those who feel a need to strike out viciously at the external enemy picked the wrong target. Although I suppose it is possible to be an incompetent right-wing extremist.

While Mr. Klein provides an entertaining list it hardly qualifies as evidence of what makes a right-wing extremist. Love of an unfettered capitalism makes one more of a 19th century Liberal, than a one-party rule fascist.

Between this list and the one provided for the Left what we have is the list of straw men that the extremists in the self-proclaimed middle use to broadly brush those who they see as impure moderates. Hopefully, Mr. Klein will provide the list of attributes that make one a moderate extremist but I sense that one isn't coming.

This is sort of unfair too -- how many believe all the jewish banker conspiracy stuff for example?

But it's worth noting that most right-wing talk radio listeners and a good junk of Republicans congress believe at least half of the items you list. Can you name a single prominent Democrat who believes much of anything among what you hold as left-wing extremist views?

All in all, you have not done well with these lists.

I think there clearly are such things as both right wing and left wing extremists, but it's pretty clear they don't hold the same influence in society.

The poster "Question Hillary" tried to come up with a list of liberal extremists and included people like Al Gore, Bill Clinton, and Jimmy Carter. Our political arena has moved so far to the right that these people are seen as being far on the liberal edge of it.

Meanwhile, we have people tortued and locked up forever in Gitmo without trial, Karl Rove calling all liberals traitors, "the faith-based initiative" discriminating against everyone but fundy Christians, a president lying us into war, the K-street project, Tom Delay keeping labor rights in the Marianas Islands from getting voted on so his buddies there can force women into prostitution, and corporations writing their own regulations.

Why is liberal extremism important to any discussion today? Are we dangerously close to lapsing into communism? Is congress on the verge of passing a bill declaring heterosexual sex an act of rape, Andrea Dworkin style?

Maybe I'm a hypersensitive liberal, but it seems like someone trying to prove their moderate credentials by bagging on "liberal extremists" in todays political climate is mostly just worried about being labeled as a liberal himself.

Interesting that Question Hillary doesn't disagree with anything on that list, apparently because he embraces all of the lunatic ideas on it.

TomT: "This is sort of unfair too -- how many believe all the jewish banker conspiracy stuff for example?"

Try doing a google search for "Federal Reserve" and "Rothschild".

Why don't you name actual people who hold these beliefs, Joe? I'ts not that hard, actually-- I could do it off the top of my head. But as with your left-wing list (even though it's much more difficult to find real people who hold those ideas), if you don't actually name names, what's the point?

wow Joe! you've just described half the republican house and senate members - your point is not being made - you wanna' make a point? Blog! post a link to some truth you think we should be aware - to some great piece written by some journalist or blogger somewhere - opinion without fact to back it up is so msm - you're in the blogosphere now - enjoy! but for it to work for you, you gotta' be a mensch - you remeber how don't you Joe?

Dear Joke Line,

Nobody's really interested and nobody really cares.

Shouldn't the fact that it's easy to name people who are given time in the media on that list, but harder with the other tell you anything at all Joe?

Anything? You got nothing. Ok then.

Eliot Cohen goes on that list:

****On Friday, Condoleezza Rice announced that Eliot Cohen has been chosen to be the new Counselor of the State Department. It is not hyperbole to say that Cohen is as extremist a neoconservative and warmonger as it gets.

...In a 1998 essay in (fittingly enough) The New Republic, Cohen called for the U.S. to build up and modernize its military capabilities faster and more aggressively, and to "justify" that plan, he laid out his neoconservative vision of the role of the United States in the world:

[Another way to put it is that the United States needs an imperial strategy. Defense planners could never admit it openly, of course, and most would feel uncomfortable with the idea, but that is, in fact, what the United States at the end of the twentieth century is--a global empire.]
****

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/03/05/neoconservatism/index.html?source=rss

But darn those blog commenters!!!

****There are much more important topics to discuss -- like the anonymous commenters at Huffington Post and the bad words said by the bloggers hired for low-level positions by the Edwards campaign. Those are matters of the gravest importance meriting the most solemn condemnation and righteous outrage from all decent people. Those HuffPost commenters have uttered terrible thoughts, and that shows the anger, venom and hatred on the left, among liberals. It is cause for great alarm -- and for headlines.****

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/03/02/cpac/index.html?source=rss

1968 must've been a really traumatic year.

Joe Klein has 1968 disease*, David Broder will go to his grave infected w/o even realizing he had it.

Every time you hear the phrase 'anti-war left' or the 'dems have been seized by the McGovernites,' that person has been afflicted.

A lot of people were born between 1965-1985, they've grown up and matured politically.

People with 1968 disease don't realize there's an entire, mature, politically aware grown up population that thinks the Iraqi invasion was an ill-conceived, immoral, stupid piece of crap waste.

In fact, when people in this population that have that view get accused of being 'anti-war democrats' or 'mcgovernites' or whatever, they have no idea what these people with 1968 disease* are talking about.

1968 disease*: It means you view the democratic party through the prism of 1968 and the flower-power of the early 70s that followed. Democrats are either 'anti-war hippies who waved Vietnamese flags at the '68 convention' or they are 'strong on defense' Dems in the JFK mode.

So guys -- any chance that Klein will get the word? We pretty much destroyed his parity today and yesterday. So will he realize that there is no parity? Or will he cruise along as before?

Joe, keep an eye out for Democratic Senators advocating nationalizing all industries, establishing a top marginal tax rate of 100%, stripping religious organizations of their tax exemptions, banning the use of fossil fuels, and mandating the distribution of marijuana to school kids. When that happens, people may stop laughing at your delusion that the far left wing has any influence in the federal government. Meanwhile, as many have already pointed out, prominent Republican Senators regularly espouse most, if not all, of the "nonexistent" positions you've just enumerated. (Stay tuned to the blogosphere for a long and well-documented list of references..you won't have to wait long).

Keep the right-wing apologies flowing, Joe--you're the best entertainment value in town.

You can add my favorite to your list.

They believe that the Flintstones was a documentary.

Question Hillary neatly proves that right wingers live in a parallel universe where facts, truth, and reality don't exist.

"This is sort of unfair too -- how many believe all the jewish banker conspiracy stuff for example?"

Pat Robertson. Read his book. And he's still embraced, at least at election time (i.e., semi-permanently) by the GOP.

"This is sort of unfair too -- how many believe all the jewish banker conspiracy stuff for example?"

Pat Robertson. Read his book. And he's still embraced, at least at election time (i.e., semi-permanently) by the GOP.

And don't forget the Council of Conservative Citizens and their good friends: Bob Barr, Trent Lott, Guy Hunt, Jesse Helms and Haley Barbour.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Conservative_Citizens

Posted by John Emerson
March 5, 2007

So guys -- any chance that Klein will get the word? We pretty much destroyed his parity today and yesterday. So will he realize that there is no parity? Or will he cruise along as before?

He's stuck in a time warp and trapped by his arrogance.
At best, there may be a mild temporary shift, followed by a regression to the norm. He'll revert to his past learned behavior pattern

So hard to tell sometimes whether a POST operation has timed out. Sigh.

Hey, what about Lyndon LaRouche? He fits BOTH lists! Influential, not so much. But it does kinda show how useless the lists are without names to go with.

Mr. Klein,

Have you ever heard of Eliot Cohen?

Look into him...

Do you really think it's more important to worry about so-called 'leftists' who you can't name than men like Cohen who have real power?

Names, please. NAMES.

Listing names would require a firm stand and the last thing a "centrist" wants to do is let anyone pin them down. They prefer to take all sides and no side of any issue, at the same time, so as the wind blows they know which one of the stands to emphasize at any one moment.

**Posted by John Emerson
March 5, 2007
So guys -- any chance that Klein will get the word? We pretty much destroyed his parity today and yesterday. So will he realize that there is no parity? Or will he cruise along as before?**

Republicans love to tell the story about Pauline Kael, who in 1972--just yesterday in Joe "Boston Bussing" Klein's worldview-- couldn't believe her (Democratic) candidate had lost in a landslide, because everyone she knew had voted for him. I'm sure everyone Joe knows in the media considers his lists brilliantly insightful and a dead on analysis of the blogosphere.
Remember, this is a party, the High Broderists, who believe that George Bush is not an extremist, and that blowjobs are worse than lying the country into a war.

I hope you read Atrios posts--he is right.

Joe Klein--Remember, prominent leftist bloggers are not your enemies or extreme leftists strawmen. They think like you and have opinions like you--the difference is they are not afraid to say it the way it needs to be said. (Not talking about rudeness)

You however try to say it so that you dont get labeled as liberal bias--therefore it comes out wankery or dishonest.

Republican Presidential candidates have routinely disparaged other religions.

Pat Robertson publicaly proclaimed that a Hindu was unqualified to hold a Cabinet postion.

Duncan Hunter's South Carolina Chairman has publically stated 'screw the buddhists'

And how can we forget George Allen who hurled an epithet at the great grandson of the founders of the Indian independent movement

Here is David Broder's column of Nov 14, 20004---a year and a half after Bush started his war--explaining that George Bush is really a moderate, because Andy Card is from Massachussetts and John Ashcroft was replaced by Alberto "Torture Memo" Gonzalez.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A46794-2004Nov12.html

"TomT: "This is sort of unfair too -- how many believe all the jewish banker conspiracy stuff for example?"

Try doing a google search for "Federal Reserve" and "Rothschild". "

Yeah, but it's not a mainstream Republican belief. Most of the others are. I'd rather keep the list to things that a majority of Republican pundits and politician believe.

TomT: "Yeah, but it's not a mainstream Republican belief. "

It may not be main stream. But some of the writings/speaches from Rep. Ron Paul and Lew Rockwell get awefully close.

Of course some GOP operatives are pro-Islam. Who can forget the 1995 editorial in the Wall Street Journal endorsing the Taliban.

Perhaps Dinesh D'Szoua and Joe Klein missed this editorial written on 9/7/1995 where the foreign policy genisues at the WSJ wrote:

"True to their national traditions, though, the Taliban have invited their enemies to sit down for a talk. They believe that if foreign meddlers can be kept at bay this time, an exhausted Afghan nation may finally begin to come together. It is a post-Cold War coda to be hoped for. "

So guys -- any chance that Klein will get the word? We pretty much destroyed his parity today and yesterday. So will he realize that there is no parity? Or will he cruise along as before?

Um, simple answer to that one I'm afraid. But it's a good question nevertheless. It's quite clear that this "blog" is only an exercise in form, not substance. Too bad.

Might learn something Joe. Might actually improve your product considerably to get over the defensiveness and actually take some of these comments into consideration. Real people out here, trying to have a dialog with you, Joe.

But it's abundantly clear that his perceptions are impervious, that this is strictly a one-way conversation as far as he's concerned, and the "comments" section is just here for form's sake. There's absolutely no evidence in this lead post, or the last one, or the next one, that he's actually capable of acknowledging and responding to the genuine substantive comments here. Just a pro forma, but actually vacuous, reference to "you seemed so darned curious" in the post header. As if the need for a faux 'even handed' hesaidshesaid list about extremists on the other side was what any one called for.

We are crying out for him to see beyond that MSM "both sides are equally whatever" mindset. He responds by pretending we are demanding more of it.

A Joe Kline exhibits many, but not necessarily all, of the following attributes:

- Removes statements from context to prop weak ideas
- Kisses two asses at the same time but it’s easy when you have as many faces
- Misses the point; by design or accident a mystery
- Insists that he was always against the war he was not always against
- Is rather silly
- Has been pwned by Atrios on many occasions and makes it oh so clear that it drives him nuts

Hey Joe, seriously, vacation time.

"We are crying out for him to see beyond that MSM "both sides are equally whatever" mindset. He responds by pretending we are demanding more of it."

Yes, DrBB. You nailed it.

Mr. Klein,

I'd be curious to know where you plot on this graph with dual axes. Left/Right and Authoritarian/Libertarian.

http://www.politicalcompass.org/

The left/right political divide in American politics is really as meaningless a distinction as the difference between Anna Nicole’s left or right breastesses. It’s a distinction without a difference. The Authoritarian/Libertarian axis is a more relevant and dangerous distinction. And guess where most of your republican friends plot on that axis. Perhaps this explains why most small "l" libertarians are leaving the Republican party.

It is not the laughable Nolan Test which is weighted to make everyone join the American Libertarian Party, although I'd be willing to bet you took that Joke Hook Line and Sinker at one time or another.

Bait and Switch:
The Libertarian Reform PAC points out that the Nolan Chart has been used all along as part of a bait and switch scheme by the Libertarian party.

http://www.reformthelp.org/home/donate/lpAdJune.pdf

Not much difference between this list & the entire bush-Cheney admin list. Ditto for Faux, CNN, & much of the House & Senate.

Those are certainly far-right extremist views. Everyone is familiar with them, of course, since they are on AM radio coast-to-coast and frequently on television, not to mention in many leading news magazines.

(Hey, don't forget how Al Gore tried to steal the 2000 election and is trying to control your life with his "global warming" scam.)

Most of the things in your list can be found from the Republican leadership in Congress and in the White House, for that matter.

Now, let's see, could those people possibly be more of a threat to our democratic republic than some blogger somewhere? Hmmm....

(PS. zota, I like your work.)

Uh, Joe, sorry to tell you this, but people exhibiting many of these attributes comprise about 1/3 of the Congress, most of the executive branch, and probably three Supreme Court justices --- not to mention the glorious "think tanks" of DC.

Your attributes of left-wing extremists are exhibited by exactly ZERO members of Congress, the executive branch, and the Supreme Court. I think there might be one on the San Francisco City Council or the Harvard Faculty Senate, though. Maybe you could ask David Horowitz to help you find them.

They don't exist? Please, Joe.

I'll operationally define "right wing extremist" as having at least 1/2 the traits you describe. Therefore:

David Horowitz
Newt Gingrich
James Dobson
Rick Santorum
Trent Lott
Tom DeLay
Editors at Washington Times
Douglas Feith
Abram Shulsky
Douglas Feith
Pat Robertson
Howard Ahmanson
Jonathan Wells

Need I go on? If you object to my characterization, would you, in all seriousness describe Rick Santorum as a moderate? Or conservative? Or even ultra-conservative?

These are extremists, pure and simple.

tristero: "If you object to my characterization, would you, in all seriousness describe Rick Santorum as a moderate?"

A local ditto-head once described Rick as a Libertarian. And he was being serious.

Joe - You're being a pretty good sport in the slapfest that is blogging. I have some quiblles with both of your lists, but they're in the ballpark & you make your point.

The thing I don't think you seem to realize however is that your "Liberal" list probably applies mostly to all sorts of occasional commenters to say, Daily Kos, but that your RW list applies to probably 90% of the right blogs, 33% of Congress and 100% of the oval office.

1) those are two quite different groups in terms of power, yes?

2) does the second group really need the protection of prominent columnists/journalists like yourself?

You have been pwn3d, Joke Line.

So has Time. It's time for seppaku. To save face.

"believes that there are inferior religions."

Please explain how a person can live by the 1st Commandment and not subscribe to this belief?

"I think there might be one on the San Francisco City Council or the Harvard Faculty Senate, though. Maybe you could ask David Horowitz to help you find them."

Not even.

And Bernie Sanders is more in tune with most of America than you can know. Vermont is a very conservative state.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernie_Sanders

"Anon...Joe - You're being a pretty good sport in the slapfest that is blogging. I have some quiblles with both of your lists, but they're in the ballpark & you make your point."

The last time you were in a ballpark you were streaking around naked with a bunch of cops about to wrestle you to the ground. Pull your pants up. Nobody here wants to see that.

If Klein doesn't believe in naming names, maybe he can give us some numbers. I would love it if he went through he lefty extremist list and gave us the stats: How many elected officials does he think agree with most of these points? How many mainstream pundits? How many of the prominent bloggers? Then he should do the same with the righty extremist list. If he is honest with himself he should see some dramatically different numbers for his two lists.

Extreme ideological views being *in charge* (as opposed to writing anonymous, buried blog comments)is a classic Bush administration story:

****The letter said the Defense Department “systemically” tried to replace federal workers at Walter Reed with private companies for facilities management, patient care and guard duty – a process that began in 2000.

“But the push to privatize support services there accelerated under President Bush’s ‘competitive sourcing’ initiative, which was launched in 2002,” the letter states.

During the year between awarding the contract to IAP and when the company started, “skilled government workers apparently began leaving Walter Reed in droves,” the letter states. “The memorandum also indicates that officials at the highest levels of Walter Reed and the U.S. Army Medical Command were informed about the dangers of privatization, but appeared to do little to prevent them.”***

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2007/Bush_Administration_push_for_privatization_may_0303.html

See Katrina reconstruction, Iraq reconstruction, the treatment of the US intelligence community, the treatment of climate change studies at NASA, the politicization of EPA science, etc. etc. The pressure of ideological types on people just trying to do their jobs has been enormous and pervasive.

But some anonymous commenters on the Huffington Post said some bad things the other day buried in comments 96-102. That's what our press sees as newsworthy.

It's time for comparison.

We can name prominent Republican politicans, pundits, and commentators who fit almost every example of "right-wing extemism" (as defined by Joe and just about anyone else). I think we've seen dozens of examples above of individuals who would agree with almost everything on the list, although I suspect Joe threw in a few extra examples to avoid having to tar the entire set of Republican presidential candidates, namely these three:

--doesn’t hold a passport...

--believes that there are inferior races.

--believes in a global conspiracy led by Jewish bankers, Hollywood executives and journalists.

But in general it's a good, if incomplete, list.

So, we let's compare the "left-wing extremism" list. Joe, can you name one prominent politican, pundit, or commentator who would agree with half of your list (let's not count Ted Rall, since he is so far from prominent)? Or do you believe that prominent democrats agree with your list, but won't admit to it in public? I could easily imagine that you've so internalized your left-wing-o-phobia to think that, say, Ted Kennedy and Russ Feingold really believe that all corporations are evil (to use your extremism list).

If you can't name any, maybe you should take your phobia of extremist lefties, hide it away in a vault in your mind, and close and lock the door. Because your fear of those to your left is as obvious as it is unnecessary.

"If Klein doesn't believe in naming names, maybe he can give us some numbers."

The MSM are too busy investigating whether Hillary and Obama faked a southern accent this weekend to look into things like that. It is much easier to paint with the broad brush and leave it to those falsely accused to prove otherwise.

I stopped reading Klein when my right-wing father-in-law started handing me his articles, telling me that he was a "decent liberal."

Lapdog. Gutless. I weep when I look at liberals today.

This list is to the left of the platform of the Texas Republican party

http://www.theocracywatch.org/texas_gop.htm

Joe -- did you just mess with Texas?

"This is sort of unfair too -- how many believe all the jewish banker conspiracy stuff for example?"

When the right, and I mean the prominent right, talks about George Soros it can be very weird. I have heard some very weird quotes from Fox News people on him.

Everyone else has already said it, but I agree so much I need to add my two cents.

There are dozens of people who fit this mould who are part of the the mainstream media (both print and on the teevee), Congress and the Executive Branch.

On the flip side, the "lefty" characteristics are at the fringes of both the progressive movement, the Democratic Party and the media.

Do you not understand this? Is there something here that needs to be explained?

By the way, re: "I don't name names" - you're a frickin' journalist! If you make an accusation you sure as hell should name names, otherwise you're just posturing.

JOE!

HEY, JOE!!

WILL YOU EVER ANSWER THE QUESTION, PLEASE?!?

We have patiently explained the error of your entire approach to writing and especially blogging. You're paranoid of a monster that doesn't exist.

Your right wing list represents many, many people NOW in power.

Your left wing list is a fantasy of wild radicalism - 30 years ago.

So, Joe, our point is - the right doesn't need you defending them. The pallid, weak, out-of-power, centrist, milquetoast CURRENT "left" does not need you attacking them as if they were an actual political force, or as if they were actually destroying the world, as those on the right literally are doing.

HAVE YOU GOT THAT YET, YOU BLOCKHEAD??!?!?

Please reply.

Please.

We're getting hoarse here.

Here's a dirty hippie employee of Colin Powell's State Department, who was a sissy and complained about the uber-ideological types that ran Iraq reconstruction:

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/1022-06.htm

Of course, commenters on blogs are really damn scary. Especially if they use any four letter words. They are much more scary than warm and fuzzy neocons like Eliot Cohen.

The problem I have with the MSM in general is that it is a brothel. The problem I have with you in particular is that you work there.

Dante reserved a place in hell for people who straddle the fence and try to be all things to all people.

So much for your equivocation and ersatz "even-handedness" in dealing with leftwing and rightwing extremists. You seem to make them both equally responsible for the state of the union and yet the right has controlled the government for most of the last generation, controls the media through corporate ownership and has highly intolerant a corporate wealth and religious armies behind it.

Continue to be "fair and balanced" Joe, and perhaps you too will be invited to be a Talking Head on Fox News.

Oh, by the way: Bernie Sanders. Yup, an actual socialist. In Congress. M'Kay. But "extremist"? Bernie? Give me a break.

A centrist extremist exhibits many, but not necessarily all, of the following attributes:

--believes that there is a one-to-one correspondence between left-wing extremists and right-wing extremists;
--denigrates the left, while kissing up to the right;
--believes that "conventional wisdom" is more important than truth;
--believes that partisanship is inherently evil;
--believes that if we could all just get along, we could solve all our problems;
--believes that naughty words negate credibility;
--believes that "people of faith" should get a free pass to influence politics as they see fit;
--is afraid to challenge influential blowhards;
--willing to pretend that corporatism doesn't exist;
--willing to further career by kissing up to anyone;
--wealthy and doesn't know anyone who isn't;
--creates straw men and charactures to denigrate non-centrists.

Joe,
We have named a lot of names on the right side that we think fit your description of extremists. I know you don't want to name names, but will you PLEASE name some names of LEFT wing extremists who you think fit your list.

If you choose names like Jane Fonda, we will scream. Please name names of left wing extremists who are currently serving in a power position in some way in the media or congress. Michael Moore? How is he employed by the media or congress? You get what I mean.

I don't think you'll be able to name more than a few. Actually I'm doubtful you'll be able to name any.

"believes that there are inferior religions."

It just occured to me that every religion that seeks converts considers all other religions inferior, by definition.

Extreme!!

"I'm sure, as with lefties, these guys simply don't exist, either."

It's not that such people don't exist on the left or the right. The problem is that you equated people who do NOT exhibit the "leftist" extremist characteristics (like Kos and Atrios) with "rightists" who do (like Anne Coulter).

The prominence of such types on the right is simply not matched on the left; Ward Churchill doesn't, and never will, have the same prominence or influence on the left as do right wingers like Coulter, or Eliot Cohen:

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/03/05/neoconservatism/index.html

Some acknowledgment of this rather obvious fact might help restore some of your credibility, Joe.

This is you moment of truth, Mr. Joe Klein. More than Primary Colors, more than you muted and confused positions before the Iraq war, how you respond to this will define who you are and how you'll be remembered.

C’mon, be nice.

JokeLine has got literally nothing left to sell but his flabby prose and his gassy, obsolete opinions. He is running along as fast as his stubby little legs can manage – desperately hopping up and down in print and on camera, pleading for attention – in a world that has long since left him behind.

The days when it took courage to stand in the Center are over. Hell, the days where there was a Center are over: Gingrich, Limbaugh, DeLay and Dobson took the Center down into the basement and put two in its head years ago.

Now, after the triangulating 90s, the Left is the new Center and the Right has disappeared completely over the horizon into Crazyville.

But of course JokeLine can’t pay for his rat terrier’s orthodontia slinging that particular truth to Mr. and Mrs. Wingnut. They desperately need to believe in the Great Dirty Hippy Conspiracy so they can continue to vote for their favorite imbeciles and racists and war criminals with a clear conscience.

So JokeLine spins up this lively and entire fictional Alternate Universe where a handful of communist leftovers and crackpots are actually a Vast and Terrible Menace every bit as powerful and intolerant as the armies of Coulters, Hannitys, Dobsons, Falwells, O'Reillys, DeLays, Tancredos, Cheneys, Limbaughs, etc ad infinitum that have taken over the Right.

And in his ridiculous, Centrist Harlequin Romance, JokeLine stands in the breach heroically alone -- shirt open, hair tousling in the wind – protecting sultry Liberty (her bodice ripped and lips bedewed with Broderian passion) from the slavering hordes on Left and the Right.

Seriously if Mr. Anonymous simply had the integrity to clearly label his efforts as the hack fiction that they are (and if the net effect wasn’t that JokeLine gives aid, comfort and journalistic cover fire to fascists and theocrats) his junk might actually be mildly entertaining.

More here: http://driftglass.blogspot.com/2007/03/jokeline-continues-to-prove.html

Joe, have you ever even read any of Atrios's posts? To label him as a purveyor of extreme rhetoric is complete hyperbole. Would you really compare him to Michelle "free of fact but full o'hate" Malkin or Ann Coulter who really and truly ARE extremists?

Your little list was a hoot but really didn't prove anything other than you don't get it. At all.

Posted by Porgy Tirebiter...

"A centrist extremist exhibits many, but not necessarily all, of the following attributes:

--believes that there is a one-to-one correspondence between left-wing extremists and right-wing extremists;
--denigrates the left, while kissing up to the right;
--believes that "conventional wisdom" is more important than truth;
--believes that partisanship is inherently evil;
--believes that if we could all just get along, we could solve all our problems;
--believes that naughty words negate credibility;
--believes that "people of faith" should get a free pass to influence politics as they see fit;
--is afraid to challenge influential blowhards;
--willing to pretend that corporatism doesn't exist;
--willing to further career by kissing up to anyone;
--wealthy and doesn't know anyone who isn't;
--creates straw men and charactures to denigrate non-centrists."

AMEN TO THAT, SISTER.

A Hermit:

"Ward Churchill doesn't, and never will, have the same prominence or influence on the left as do right wingers like Coulter"

My favorite part of the whole "Ward Churchill" thing was when the Right would hold him up as some kind of world famous Liberal thinker who was a major inspiration to the modern Progressive movement. And this proves that all Liberals are whack jobs.

And the Liberals responded back with "Ward who?".

If you really think this then you are capable of thinking that Jews murder Christian children because they need the blood to make matzoh. Klein--you live in a mythological world of your own creation. It's a fantasy world designed to shore up the romantic, heroic image you have conjured up for yourself. Here's another myth you may be familiar with: Narcissus.

These are, by and large, an excellent pair of lists, Joe.

Now let's try to use them.

How many members of Congress are "left-wing extremists"?

How many members of Congress are "right-wing extremists"?

How close are the positions of the Democratic Party to the positions you outline as left-wing extremism?

How close are the positions of the Republican Party to the positions you outline as right-wing extremism?

Assuming you believe both sorts of extremism are bad for the country (with which most of us would agree), which of the two sorts do you think is at this moment closer to mainstream Washington thought?

Which do you think you should spend your time warning against -- right-wing extremism or left-wing extremism?

If some influential blogger may or may not exhibit one or more attributes of left-wing extremism, is it necessary or prudent to scoff at him, if his primary raison d'etre is to warn against right-wing extremism?

"great battle will be fought and Jesus will descend from the clouds."

No no no.
The Believers will be taken up bodily to join Me in the clouds where we will reign in Glory over the ruins of the Earth and savour the eternally burning flesh of the unsaved, Amen.

Duh!!

Yeah, but Michael Moore is fat.

I'm reminded of the time that Nigel Richardson, writing on a now-defunct blog, remarked after finally seeing /Bowling for Columbine/:

"Moore gets angry because kids get shot, Coulter gets angry because liberals get to write for newspapers. Yeah, they're really both as bad as each other...."

But, getting down to the cheese, there's really no excuse for the fact that Joe Klien accused Atrios of being an ideological extremist despite the fact that he did not have any idea idea what Atrios' ideology IS.

stop hatin joe

Joe --

Now give a list of moderate characteristics.

That would be telling.

Please. Names would help. Generalities serve no purpose except to remove the possibility of dialogue.

Another name:

Lt. Gen. William G. "Jerry" Boykin, promoted to undersecretary of defense under Bush & charged with capturing Osama bin Laden (a task he has rather spectacularly failed to achieve) famously said he'd beat a Muslim opponent because, "I knew that my God was bigger than his. I knew that my God was a real God and his was an idol."

Ideological extremism:

****We know from Hurricane Katrina postmortems that one of the factors degrading FEMA’s effectiveness was the Bush administration’s relentless push to outsource and privatize disaster management, which demoralized government employees and drove away many of the agency’s most experienced professionals. It appears that the same thing has been happening to veterans’ care.

The redoubtable Henry Waxman, chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, points out that IAP Worldwide Services, a company run by two former Halliburton executives, received a large contract to run Walter Reed under suspicious circumstances: the Army reversed the results of an audit concluding that government employees could do the job more cheaply.

And Mr. Waxman, who will be holding a hearing on the issue today, appears to have solid evidence, including an internal Walter Reed memo from last year, that the prospect of privatization led to a FEMA-type exodus of skilled personnel.

What comes next? Francis J. Harvey, who as far as I can tell was the first defense contractor appointed secretary of the Army, has been forced out. But the parallels between what happened at Walter Reed and what happened to New Orleans — not to mention parallels with the mother of all scandals, the failed reconstruction of Iraq — tell us that the roots of the scandal run far deeper than the actions of a few bad men.****

(Paul Krugman)

http://welcome-to-pottersville.blogspot.com/2007/03/paul-krugman-valor-and-squalor.html