FlynnFiles is generating much buzz this week, particularly regarding my piece on the Jonestown cultists whose devotion to fantasy and contept for reality was so great that they killed themselves rather than their socialist ideas. Later today, in the third hour I am told, I will appear on The Savage Nation to discuss intellectual morons and other assorted poseurs. Tune in if you don't already. The Corner, MichaelSavage.com, and TakiMag linked to the Jonestown piece, Glenn Beck seized on it for a monologue, and the article appeared in full at FrontPageMag.com (read it here).

Congrats, Dan. I thought it was one of your better pieces.

Dan,

Looks more like Beck plagiarized it, although I suppose "seizing" is about the same. How hard would it have been to mention your essay?

I think he did:

GLENN: By the way, this information just beautifully laid out by Dan Flynn and we're going to include this in our newsletter today.

Dan, congrats on getting this level of national attention. Great news.

Have fun using your intellectual capacity to dismiss the academic achievements of others on the basis that they are 'posers', hypocrite. You wish you were not an intellectual because that is the flavor of the month for the republican party, but you have a history of using academic arguments to push your agenda. Two sides, same coin, empty argument. I guess the old adage 'it takes one to know one' really rings true on this one.

Congrats Dan. Onward and upward.

Savage will be interesting. He's been unhinged since O got elected and the Dems have decided to throw OUR money at everything but a cure for post nasal drip.

Can't say I blame him.

Your voice, in my mind, is hil-f'ing-larious.

"Dandy",

You've completely missed the point. Dan's critique has never been against the intellect, reasoned argument, historical study, and academic discourse.

Instead, his guns have been aimed at intellectualism and those "intellectuals" who look down their noses at regular Americans and traditional values that aren't nearly so "progressive" and "refined" as their own so highly tuned personas. Perhaps ironically, they often prefer style over substance, gravitating in politics toward those who not only share their general worldview but their degree of, um, "sophistication." For them the world resides in cosmopolitan cities like DC, NYC, and LA - and among those outside the cities who idolize them. Meanwhile, all others are abhorrent flak that should be either ignored or re-educated, but never countenanced.

And like all other dangerous ideologies, intellectualists possess what Thomas Sowell termed the “vision of the anointed.” If only they were in charge the world would be set right. No wisdom to be gained from historical example here, nor insight to be gained from understanding human action and human nature as it actually is. Oh no, their exalted ideals and ideas are so self-evidently correct it is nothing sort of a crime for anything like that silly ol’ antiquated Constitution, democratic preference, or community standards to stand in the way.

Has Savage every really been "hinged"?

Nope. But, sometimes, you've got to love his passion and his ability to present commentary in the way that most people listening feel.

To be honest, even when I agree with Savage he comes across to me as a hateful blowhard. Just saying.

I would agree. But that's his schtick I think.

I'd like to get some insight about his off air persona from Dan, if he's interested in passing that on.

EFL, 4:41 That's a good one!

Dandy mirrors the exchange in "Damm Intellecktuals".

Shame on you Dan Flynn for trying to pull down the Master Brains!! Resistance against the superior intellectual class is just a passing phase of Republicanism! (Doubtless, Dandy will find my paraphrase of him heinously wrong and unfair and fundamentally twisted, because his summation just feels right to him.)

Dandy, I FULLY claim to be an intellectual and I recognize Dan as one. But you have to explain to me the tie between BEING an intellectual and SIDING with a group of intellectuals, some of the of the pseudo variety. One requires critical thinking the other is an collective pattern for the sake of going along.

Homer,

I should have been more clear. To do the needful to avoid being a plagiarist Beck needed to:
a) mention that he was drawing upon Dan's essay at the beginning of his monologue;
b) either explicitly say he was quoting Dan or throw in things like "as Flynn notes" before completely appropriating to himself memorable lines like "Jones murdered more African-Americans than the KKK . . ." and
c) provide an actual link to Dan's blog post or his essay as published elsewhere online.

Point c is likely the fault of whomever he uses as a webmaster to post transcripts on his site, but in his monologue itself Beck clearly used Dan's very writing without attribution.

"Oh no, their exalted ideals and ideas are so self-evidently correct it is nothing sort of a crime for anything like that silly ol’ antiquated Constitution, democratic preference, or community standards to stand in the way."

OK, I can understand your point and feel the same about groupthink and academic entitlement, but when that groupthink is pushed by data and not opinion it becomes an integral part of our culture (e.g. don't smoke while pregnant). Your argument reminds me however of Evangelical Christians pushing their agenda and Savior Bush into office, only to have him disregard the Constitution on so many measures, and ignore community standards such as unwarrented wire taps and the Constitution Restoration Act, yet they were SOOOO sure they were right.

How ideology makes smart people (the fervent religious) fall for stupid ideas (Bush is our Savior, global warming isn't real, the world is 20,000 years old).

Yes, Bush was an ideologue of the democratic nationalist variety (as seen esp. in his "make the world safe for democracy" war and nation building policy).

And, yes, very many evangelicals so exalted Bush that they refused to speak out against him since he could do no wrong. But in doing so they did exactly what Obama's legions of weeping fans are doing: idol worship. And *that* is decidedly unChristian, as it is disobedience to God and the same sin that ancient Israel committed in following their corrupt leaders in worshipping false gods in the high places.

Dandy, I suggest you read 18 USC § 1030(5)(A)(i-iii) before you attempt another spamming.

"How ideology makes smart people (the fervent religious) fall for stupid ideas (Bush is our Savior, global warming isn't real, the world is 20,000 years old)".

I'm still not sure how people can make statements like this. Do they really think that Conservatives are sitting in church praying to images of GW, speaking in tongues, shaking snakes and throwing darts at pictures of Al Gore?

If they do, they are either very dim or just not paying attention.

I suppose if it helps to capsulate your angst to make it easier for your tiny little mind to comprehend what you think is wrong with folks from another side of the political spectrum, that’s fine. But the same lame reasons are tedious and they are usually not correct.

If you’ve ever read what has been written here, I’m probably the only Bush defender. And even I don’t like him very much. And there really isn’t any such thing as Global Warming. Really. Trust the real data on this and not the trumped up scare tactics put out there by the Global Warming political and business communities. Religious beliefs aside, not sure if you’d find many people believing that the Earth is not older than that. But that’s why they call it ‘faith’.

But, hey – whatever makes you feel like you have a handle on things.

Incidentally, "Dandy," note that Dan did not exclude criticism of intellectual morons on the Right in his like-named book. For example, he skewered the Straussians and the Randians.

One more thing. If the O supporters REALLY think that the Messiah is going to part the seas and adjust the temperature of Earth, they will be very sadly disappointed.

Other than attempting to trash the Constitution and moving our country closer to what Belgium looks like, it will be much of the same.

So, that nasty old GW screwed with FISA so he and Cheney could sit around at night listening to sexy conversations about who's having affairs. Guess what? The nation's new hero O is going to continue doing the same.

Seriously. I find the most intellectually honest people to be Conservatives. There are few no mixed messages. Just facts. And if those facts point to one of their own (or one who pretends to be), they get much deserved criticism.

I don't see that with the cool aid drinking left. Ideology always trumps the truth.

"I'm still not sure how people can make statements like this."

You make statements like this all the time (see comment Posted by asdf at November 21, 2008 11:32 AM)... why are you so suprised?

"Do they really think that Conservatives are sitting in church praying to images of GW"

Do you really think Liberals are sitting around a pentagram praying to Obama?

"And there really isn’t any such thing as Global Warming. Really. Trust the real data on this and not the trumped up scare tactics "

Give me the 'real' data you are talking about. If your argument is that it is part of the natural cycle, then we are in the global warming part of the cycle. Find me some facts, and I will go bring some too. Put your money where your keyboard is.

Dandy wrote:
Do you really think Liberals are sitting around a pentagram praying to Obama?

Yes. These elitists vegged out in front of a television screen for the guy for 15 months because praying is for stupid people.

"Dandy, I suggest you read 18 USC § 1030(5)(A)(i-iii) before you attempt another spamming."

What the F are you blathering about 'Feds'?

"(i) knowingly causes the transmission of a program, information, code, or command, and as a result of such conduct, intentionally causes damage without authorization, to a protected computer;
(ii) intentionally accesses a protected computer without authorization, and as a result of such conduct, recklessly causes damage; or
(iii) intentionally accesses a protected computer without authorization, and as a result of such conduct, causes damage; and..."

Idiot.

A. My post was not spam, so what are you talking about?

B. The above code has nothing to do with spam.

Glad you confirmed that you read it.

"These elitists vegged out in front of a television screen for the guy for 15 months because praying is for stupid people."

Just keep believing that. Keep imagining that 'government-dependents' were just waiting for thier welfare check with their 16 year old grandmother selling crack cocaine waiting for Obama to send out their stimulus Escalade, and whatever other obtuse stereotypes you carry. Keep it up! Who needs intellectialism when you are voluntarily ignorant and satisfied.

Wait a minute now, all of the "scientists" back in the 70's predicted a Global Coolings crisis. Even said we need more CO2 in the air.

So, which is it? What funny "science" is going to be the next leftist boondoggle?

"Glad you confirmed that you read it."

Wow, power trip. Cool dude.

Dandy: Welcome! I just don't think you quite get where you are. Dan was not a Bush-worshipper. Also, the posters are not a collection of Bush-worshippers. There seem to be a variety of types of conservatives who post on this site regulularly, with a variety of religiosity or unreligiosity. Welcome to add your own two cents, especially if you think rejecting ideology is needed for good government. But you shouldn't assume that every conservative site on the web is a bunch of braindead religious Bushie stereotypes.

See, Dandy, that's where you people on the left try to get away with a whole lot more bombast then you'd ever let a rightie say to you.

Who said "Bush was God"? (He doesn't even play guitar!) If no-one said it, then it is a characterization. If it is a characterization, then we have to judge how accurate it is. Frankly, I can't tell the difference between it and the "obtuse stereotypes" you're mad at Lou for having.

It's really like the moronic mantra that after 9/11, nobody was allowed to say anything against for fear of having their patriotism questioned--which was usually just somebody speaking against what you said, and shifting the burden by questioning their fairness or civility, and throwing a distopian shadow on it for show.

I never called Dan or anyone on this board a Bush-worshipper. I was making an argument just as obtuse that Eric was describing and could relate to, rather than let him use the other as a shield.

And then he agreed that some people 'exalted' him. So, Sea King, someone has dramatically inflated the status of Bush to a 'god-like' level. Equally, I am sure that there exist people who feel Obama is 'their savior' as well, but like on both sides it is a negligible percentage. Why should we base giant generalizations on negligible things, or tolerate that type of argument coming from either side?

As well I think it equally ignorant to criticize me for making one reference about Evangelicals that were duped and unionized to put Bush into office, yet it is a blind eye for the tens of times ASDF calls Obama the Messiah or Hussein.

As for the Patriotism thing... people really did get upset at the antiwar movement and often said stuff like 'if you don't like it, well you can just get out.' so saying that it didn't happen or calling it moronic for criticizing being called unpatriotic is like disavowing the holocaust. It WAS real.

It is not that no one said anything for fear of having their patriotism questioned, it is that people did say things and their patriotism was questioned (which is disgusting).

I missed the Savage interview. Where can I listen to a recording?

ASDF,

I am still waiting on that 'real' data you were talking about. Read this over and try and bring something back with citations and numbers.

http://www.daviesand.com/Choices/Precautionary_Planning/New_Data/

notice that it never says that CO2 'causes' global warming. That is because real 'scientists' know that casual relationships are unknowable for the human intellect, rather we base ideas on statistics and the idea that 'x contributes to y'.

And before you comeback with some smart ass comment please be able to explain orbital forcing's contribution on climate.

Well Dandy or horse or angrymob or whatever handle you're going by these days, I will. Time will dictate.

But I'll give you the utilimate answer to all climate change questions that one may have (even though humans think they're so f'ing powerful that it must be something they're doing)....

The Sun.

That reminds me of the old/new saying: if you don't believe in God, you'll believe in anything.

That sums up Global Warming or Global Cooling or that Obama will save us. Anything and everything that requires the ultimate leap of suspended disbelief.

"Time will dictate."

Wow, wasn't that the same creedo that allowed Bush to destroy the world? and look what happened, lame duck.

The World was and has been moving along pretty well. There are and always have been problems. Believe or not some of them even happened without Bush.

But I'm still trying to figure our how bad things have been these last eight years. Until the results of past Democrat policies raised their ugly economic heads fairly recently, the overall standard of living in this country was pretty darn good. Unemployment was down, inflation was down, contrary to what the media and the libs were saying, there was no recession. Fuel, consumer goods, services, credit were all reasonable. And outside of having to pay for it and for those who had loved ones there, the War didn't necessarily impact peoples’ day to day.

So, how bad was it? And right now, how bad is it?

Let’s wait and see. But, the fraud savior hasn’t even been in inaugurated yet and he’s doing what he’s always done: voting present. Hiding out in Hyde Park and letting his band of liberal buffoons work to attempt to solve problems that they and their ilk created.

Until he didn’t give a $hite anymore, Bush at least worked to run the country. You can see already that the empty suit that you’ve voted in as President is incompetent and is more than happy to allow his minions run things.

You think the Bush years were bad. Get ready of four years of political and social chaos.

I know I'm a bit late on this.
Dandy, in relation to global cooling some simple searches produce interesting finds. If anything, the scientific community is confused on this point. Can the case not be where very smart people disagree?

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=10783

http://www.denisdutton.com/cooling_world.htm

http://www.usatoday.com/weather/news/2008-09-09-farmers-almanac_N.htm

And a detraction:
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008/05/global-cooling-wanna-bet/

Have fun!

"Bush at least worked to run the country..."

I think you mean to say, "Bush at least worked to ruin the country", but you wrote a funny typo.

Do you really believe that he made one decision, or was it actually a Cheney/Rove presidency while W. played with Legos and snorted cocaine? My money is on the latter. Bush is retarded and has less of a grip on the issues than Palin. Rove is a political genious and has been in control for the last 25 years.

"Get ready of four years of political and social chaos."

You are so funny, you should do stand-up. If Obama leaves office with more than a 25% approval rating (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,144315,00.html), you need to start voting democrat, come out of denial, and admit that you were a blind fool.

I always wondered who those idiots still supporting Bush were, and now I have my answer. You are the biggest idealogue if you still have faith in the republican party.

P.S. ASDF I am still waiting on your 'real' science. Put down the dianetics.

"Can the case not be where very smart people disagree?"

Absolutly, that is as I am sure you know quite popular in academic fields. True academia focuses on discerning valid indormation from invalid. I tend to believe that ice core samples don't lie. As the article I linked to said, there are other contribuiting factors aside from CO2 levels, but there is an obvious corelation.

As well, I believe the term 'global warming' is quite misleading because the catastrophic consequence could be massive global cooling or another ice age. Similar to the article I linked to, the Earth has measures of self correction, and is dynamic to the point that there are giant swings in climate.

The problem is that industrialization has been too rapid to accuratly monitor it's effects, and we have no proper model to compare to. We do know how the green house effect works on the small scale, but it is dangerous to extrapolate to a global interpretation with claims of absolute certainty.

My qualm with ASDF is that his decision to NOT believe nor change possibly affects the future of humanity. Whether we are right or wrong about warming is irrelevant, it is a question of morals to be selfish and comfortable with the wager on 'bad science' or to try and better the future of humans as a whole.

They will call me a socialist, which I am not, but it is their fascist tactics to quell the lower class.

Dandy, horse, angrymob, '.',

"Do you really believe that he made one decision, or was it actually a Cheney/Rove presidency while W. played with Legos and snorted cocaine?"

Wow. I'm done.