« My radio interview about the changing face of faith | Main | Bratz, Barbies, and bonobos »

December 08, 2006


Larson sounds like a nut. Kim was from the city, not familiar with backroads. He and his wife, together, made a tragic choice but he did all he could to save his family and deserves only credit. The far right amazes me. How do they get anyone to listen to them? Why do we have to put up with the likes of this or Limbaugh on the other news programs? I am sick of their ugly and nasty personalities. They better hope karma doesn't exist.

OK, Larson is crass for making copy of Kim's misfortunes. But what on earth does this topic have to do about Bush?

Idler, isn't it obvious? Larson never tires of speaking about personal responsibility--how people have to be held responsible for their decisions and not expect government to bail them out.

Larson has been harping on how James Kim should have known better than to drive up an unfamiliar road that he knew nothing about. He says that Kim should have been better prepared and known when to turn around when conditions got worse (they ran into snow).

Yet Larson doesn't similarly criticize Bush for driving the United States into a war based on false information. He doesn't fault Bush for failing to reverse course in Iraq when everybody but El Presidente (and maybe his dog) recognizes that he's into deep doo-doo.

Larson is a hypocrite, like most right-wing talk show hosts. They preach the importance of individual accountability for one's actions, but fail to insist on this when it comes to Republican elected officials.

But if Larson doesn't think Bush should change course, then there's no hypocrisy. Error you can argue, but not hypocrisy.

Idler, everyone agrees errors have been made in Iraq. Everyone. Lars isn't an idiot. He knows what is going on in Iraq. So he must be a hypocrite. Even Gordon Smith recognizes that the "path to victory" is a dead end.

Thus I stand by my indictment of Larson. He is a true right-wing believer who will stand by Bush until his Iraq policy crashes head on into the wall of reality. That disaster is a heck of a lot more serious, and less defensible, than John Kim's error of judgment.

and now it has come out that someone, probably who liked to go four-wheeling in snow, or was cutting wood or trees without permits, had cut the chain on the gate that would have made it obvious to stopped the Kims from proceeding. That 'someone,' who decided rules weren't meant to be obeyed by them 'should' be feeling really guilty about now... the accent is on should.

Brian, I think the best you could do is call attention to the irony of someone committed to an error on a larger scale while criticizing one on a smaller one. I think you indulge yourself in both a discreditable emotion and an incoherent thought when you seek to make it hypocrisy. You may reasonably deplore the cost Larson is willing to endorse without imagining that he's going to commit his credibility to something he believes must fail.

An ironic approach could have salvaged some commentary along these lines. But by seeking a bigger bang of indignation you've forced the issue into a Procrustean bed. If I can stress the metaphor a little, the concept is a bit of a stretch.

Idler, we seem to agree that Lars Larson is off-base. So it comes down to what word is used to describe his error. I still like "hypocrisy," because it sums up for me what is most objectionable about conservatives today.

My dictionary says that hypocrisy is the practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess--falseness.

Larson professes that he believes in personal responsibility. People need to be held accountable for their actions.

Yet he is wildly selective in how he applies this professed belief. This leads me to the reasonable conclusion that he doesn't really believe in what he claims to believe.

As I said before, there is zero room for disagreement that Bush and his cronies have made many wrong turns in Iraq. Many thousands have died as a result. Yet Larson refuses to hold his beloved Bush accountable for these errors.

Just James Kim. Conservatives used to have backbone and actually live their beliefs. If they believed in small government and fiscal responsibility, they didn't run up the national debt and budget deficits.

Larson epitomizes the new conservatism. Spout platitudes but don't act on them. So, yes, he's a hypocrite. You'll never convince me otherwise. And on this blog, I'm the decider.

I affirm your right to make up your own mind, Brian!

i think that this was just a wrong turn and nothing bad about his decision and bush has nothing to do with this

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

Strange Up Salem

Welcome to HinesSight

  • Salem Political Snark
    My local political rants are now made on this badass blog. Check it out. Dirty politics, outrageous actions, sleaze, backroom deals — we’re on it. 

  • Twitter with me
    Join Twitter and follow my tweets about whatever.
  • Church of the Churchless
    Visit my other weblog, Church of the Churchless, where the gospel of spiritual independence is preached.

  • Welcome to HinesSight. If this is your first visit, click on "About this site--start here" in the Categories section below.