Pajamas Media’s worldview

Looking around the conservative Web for responses to the U.S. attack on Libya, I found Roger Simon at “Pajamas Media.” His piece consists largely of anti-Obama cracks, such as, “Hillary Clinton now assumes the presidency,” and “Obama was a blip, his vaunted verbal facility from the ‘08 presidential election now seeming a distant memory from a particularly bland and pompous advertising campaign.” So much of the conservative media is like this, consisting of endless personal ire and disgust at Obama, and is unreadable for that reason.

Roger Simon, founder and
editor of Pajamas Media

However, Simon’s anger at Obama is not just personal. It stems from the fact that Obama took too long to act against Kaddafi. Here is his reasoning:

I know there are some extreme libertarians [LA replies: That’s me—an extreme libertarian!] who think Libya is none of our business—that we, and the international community, should stay out and let the locals blow each other to smithereens until the next dictator takes the throne or the old one keeps it and locks his enemies in torture chambers. Attractive and consoling as that idea may be, the world is nowhere near that simple. We live on a tiny globe that is shrinking by the moment for a myriad of reasons from instant communications to limited energy to a global economy. The bloodshed in Benghazi affects the refineries of Texas just as the tsunami at Fukushima rocks the boatyards of Crescent City. And those are only a couple of the most obvious instances this week.

We’re all in this together. Sorry.

And I have to tell you one other thing. Remember this: We’re Americans. Good is what we are supposed to do.

We’re all in this together. We’re all one world, run under American auspices. If Simon’s thinking were applied consistently, America the Good would literally have to take over and govern every nation on earth. And that, it seems, is what the “conservatives” really mean by American Exceptionalism.

- end of initial entry -

Ray G. writes:

I read that Roger Simon piece last night and it made me pause. “Extreme libertarians”? Come on. Now truth be told, I’m somewhat of a “hawk” on national security/foreign policy/defense matters but this constant running around the world, helping everyone (mostly Muslims) is getting old.

I think we have to admit to seeing our political leaders as well as those of other nations, all moving the people of the world into something very close to global government (dare I say one world government). National sovereignty matters very little anymore (see lack of immigration enforcement and the borders). Everyone must be allowed to immigrate any and everywhere, displacing the historic, traditional population.

The future is here.

Jim C. writes:

As I’ve pointed out a million times, Simon, like you and me, can’t stand the fact that Obama gamed the system through affirmative action and sloppy reporting. I believe that Simon’s characterization of Obama is shared by a plurality of Americans, which is why Obama has a snowball’s chance in hell of winning the election.

Obama has become a laughingstock.

LA replies:

Doesn’t matter. It’s unbearable to read the constant venting about how Obama is so awful, Obama is so awful, Obama is so awful, Obama is so awful, Obama is so awful, Obama is so awful, Obama is so awful, Obama is so awful, Obama is so awful, Obama is so awful, Obama is so awful. It’s a kind of sickness. There are plenty of issues to talk about, including, obviously, Obama’s role in them. But the obsessive focus on Obama’s personal inadequacies is absolutely useless and uninteresting and a complete waste of energy.

You don’t see that at VFR.

N. writes:

Let us not forget that Roger Simon, screenwriter, was firmly on the left until Sept. 11, 2001. He still supports many leftist causes, notably homosexual “marriage.”

He cofounded “Little Green Footballs” with Charles Johnson.

So what we see is a leftist who was shaken up mightily, but whose worldview clearly remains on the left. In a sense, very abstractly, these world democracy crusaders are modern-day Woodrow Wilson types; they desire to carry “democracy” everywhere, by force if need be.

There isn’t a conservative thing about Simon, not really. He doesn’t want to conserve the Constitution, or the traditional United States. He doesn’t want to conserve Western Civilization so much as he wants the current liberal orgy to go on without serious threat.

It is notable that many of the “conservatives” who have joined up in the last 10 to 15 years are of this mold: leftist on domestic policy, Wilsonian on foreign policy.

If there were an actual conservative magazine, as “National Review” was 25 years ago, a lively debate could be had over this topic. Well, we’ll just have to have that debate at VFR.

Simon’s Wiki bio is here.

LA replies:

And look at that hat. Would any kind of conservative wear a hat like that?

Disclosure: I frequently wear a fedora myself. But it’s nothing like the floppy hipster fedora Simon is wearing. Once upon a time, every man in America wore a fedora.

March 21

Dan G. writes:

Interestingly, if you look at the discussion thread that follows Simon’s article, you will find that even most of his readers disagree with him on Libya.

LA replies:

I don’t know what you mean. I just looked through about half of the 173 comments, and it’s nothing but Obama bashing—Obama is so awful, so wicked, impeach him, hate him, Obama is so awful, so wicked, impeach him, hate him …

This is sick. The conservative commentariat and readership are incapable of discussing issues because they’re all Obama obsessives.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at March 20, 2011 01:18 PM | Send