Frist's head should be mounted on a pike outside the AMA's headquarters, right beside Charles Krauthammer's. Hopefully, this autopsy will fatally wound Frist's presidential hopes.
Don't discount Zombie Frist '08.
Y'know, this whole thing reminds me of the bio professor (at my new employer!) who was refusing to write recommendations to anyone who wouldn't give a scientific answer to the question, "how did human life begin?" If you're willing to ignore scientific evidence to save your religio-political beliefs, mightn't you grow up into the sort of doctor who is willing to ignore medical evidence to save your religio-political beliefs? I'm getting to have a lot more sympathy to that prof.
What is Krauthammer's deal? I read his columns, and I get the distinct impression of a very intelligent man being very disengenuous. There is no confusion in his thinking -- he skates around logicial problem areas and tries to link everything to 911. Yet unlike others who do this, I get the impression that he sees the flaws in his own arguments, and acts to cover them up. Is he actually evil?
Hopefully, this autopsy will fatally wound Frist's presidential hopes.
Ha! When I first read that, I thought you hoped the head-piking would do the fatal wounding. Which it would, modulo zombies.
Are there objective external criteria to allow distinctions between someone who's (a) a flavor of Straussian who thinks political lying can serve the greater good; (b) bought; (c) evil?
I think that calling GWB a Straussian gives him way too much credit.
This Joan Didion article is worth reading. Part of the issue with the Schiavo case is that the facts were determined by a lower court before the parents had money or help for good lawyers. These legal facts were not reviewable, but the possiblity that the legally facts were not the actual facts was unsettling. Hopefully, the autopsy will clear away these doubts.
But, yes. Frist is an irresponsible fraud who has happily screwed himself out of any realistic possibility of running for president.
Joe D: I don't necessarily know what a Straussian is, so I can't expect the Prez does, either. But I'm sure he's comfortable with lying for the greater good.
(generally, I'd quibble with all three examples, but that would ruin the joke)
who bought Krauthammer, exactly? The Straussians are pretty scary, but most of them do not engage in the type of rhetoric that Krauthammer does -- the type that seems designed to resonate with the masses. Most of his columns consist of: (a) indentifying a policy that makes Bush look bad, (b) converting it somehow into a reminder that 911 really sucked.
Has he stated publicly that political lying can serve the greater good? For some reason -- I guess because he seems smart -- Krauthammer interests me more than your run of the mill Hannity-type blow-hard.
I knew that [Robert] Kagan and Kristol were Straussians, so I had a general idea what they were all about. But thanks.
As an aside, as someone whose work focuses almost exclusively on Latin America (and covers a lot of US Foreign Policy to the region), the map on the PNAC site is a depressing representation of what the region means to policy makers- placeholder for other issues.
I wasn't saying he was bought or a Straussian or evil; I was asking if there are objective criteria for distinguishing among the three. If there are not, then asking which is the case may be a futile question. (like, Does the squirrel go around the tree?)
There may be omitted further categories. We have, as Chico Marx might say, plenty of letters left.
clearly I didn't know enough about Strauss in asking my final question -- apparently all Straussians believe political lying can serve the greater good.
Every time I read about Strauss's teachings, I get chills. The ideas seems so very, very fascist.
Krauthammer interests me as a character. As such, it is meaningful to distingusih what personally motivates him. I understand that evil includes many varieties, that the bought and the unbought can both be called evil. Nevertheless, the particular kind of evil that he embodies interests me -- I don't think it is futile to speculate which kind.
what I should have said is: is Krauthammer's evil unexplainable -- evil without apparent motivation? I.e. -- is he Iago?
Ah, well, speculate away. I was saying, it's indeterminate and probably indeterminable what motivates him to do what he appears to be doing. But certainly, speculation can serve a valuable heuristic function. So go to it.
is he Iago?
No, I don't think so. Iago had iirc a purely destructive ambition, no wish to construct anything in the wake of destruction.
Krauthammer's mortal sin is not so much disingenuous political shilling (that's downright banal these days), but using his psychiatrist shingle to "diagnose" political opponents with this or that psychological disorder. If there exists a wheelchair-bound person more deserving of being rolled off a pier, I can't imagine who it would be.
And here I thought Steven Hawking was the obvious joke.
Actually, I think Larry Flynt is the obvious joke. I must say, I'm a little disappointed that I got not one "that's not really appropriate" after advocating 1) beheading a sitting senator and 2) rolling a paraplegic off a pier. At long last, have you no sense of decency?
Probably out doing chairity work.
I take this to mean you want ..
do not resuscitate
Holy Crap! I didn't realize the accuracy of Bill Frist's statements about Schiavo's likely medical condition depended upon my (or anyone else's commenting here) desires about anything. Shows what I know.
Krauthammer's a paraplegic?
I thought it was just his higher reasoning functions that were paralyzed.
Krauthammer's a paraplegic?
Yeah, he was paralyzed in a diving accident in the early '70s.