Thoughts from Kansas

Last October, there was a brief period when smart people wondered whether wingnuttery had crashed and burned. Within 7 minutes, it was determined that wingnuttery had not reached a peak, and was likely to continue expanding indefinitely in its inanity.

And yet, post-election, I feel a great lack of wingnuttery to mock. This explains why I've written so many blog posts documenting the bigotry (and, since we're on a thesaurus kick: fanaticism, fiendishness, zealotry, mania, segregationism, puritanism, and narrow-mindedness) of Martin Cothran. I'm scraping the bottom of the barrel, spending greater time and effort to extract the same sort of wingnuttery that used to simply seep out of the ground.

Which explains why I was briefly gladdened to find Denyse O'Leary writing about Jonah Goldberg's crappy book. "Buy My Book" O'Leary writes:

This, from Jonah Goldberg's Liberal Fascism, is the explanation I have long been seeking: Why is there so much confusion around the concept of social Darwinism?

And yet, not that long before she found this compelling discussion of Herbert Spencer, Goldberg had posted to the National Review's blog:

Wanted: Herbert Spencer Expert [Jonah Goldberg]

I'm working on a chapter of the book which requires me to read a lot about and by Herbert Spencer. There's simply no way I can read all of it, nor do I really need to. But if there are any real experts on Spencer out there — regardless of ideological affiliation — I'd love to ask you a few questions in case I'm missing something.

In short, Goldberg didn't/doesn't know what he was talking about, and neither does O'Leary. This is hardly news, of course. It's still nice to be reminded.

Furthermore, the RNC has created "Republican for a Reason," a site which proclaims that "The Republican Party has always been … the Party of ideas," and then begs people to please, please, send them some ideas. I urge you to help them out.

I'm taken by this, from Densel G. of Belton, TX, who says:

I have been a staunch supporter of The Republican Party for 60 years and have worked in several campaigns but your are about to lose me. I do not want moderation. I do not want compromise.

Yes! That's good thinkin'. Voters overwhelmingly preferred the Democratic vision of America, so I encourage Republicans to move further into the fringe of political thought.

What I don't want to see are things like this, from Bill of Holland, PA:

For starters, how about disavowing some of the truly lunatic commentators and bloggers who make Republicans look like idiots? If you need to recruit reasonable people to the Republican cause, you aren't going to do it with a raving bunch of demented fools on talk radio, Fox TV and the blogosphere. The American public is smart enough to know a fool when it sees one!

Doesn't Bill know that wingnuts are our precious heritage as Americans, and one of our greatest exports to the world? How can he suggest regulating that industry out of existence? Drill, baby, drill!

H/T: Encefalus.