Just received this from Professor Churchill:
Josh Horowitz and I went head to head on Booktv last weekend. I thought you might be interested.
Here is the link. . .
http://www.c-spanarchives.org/library/index.php?main_page=product_video_info&products_id=287623-1
4 comments:
There's a video going around that shows a hippy ditz speaking before the Santa Cruz City Council. He speech is so peppered with "uhm" and "uh", "you know" and "like" that it's actually painful to watch.
Josh Horowitz has much the same delivery. Perhaps he knows his message is flawed.
While I agree with OldFart that Horowitz' delivery was pretty poor, I was also disapointed in Churchill's lukewarm defense of insurrectionism. He, of all people, ought to know (and say aloud) that 'insurrection' is the purpose of the 2nd amendment.
rexxhead, when I read the book I never did feel he was more than an honest historian of the subject. I haven't gotten the video to play for me yet, but I wasn't surprised that your report his heart doesn't seem to be in it.
Then again, as a historian, perhaps he more than many of us truly understands just what that step would mean.
I notice that Horowitz is all "I think" and "I feel", where Churchill sites specific statements by statesmen of the time. Note how right after Churchill quoted Madison on resisting the Alien and Sedition act, Horowitz is right back saying that Madison only gave lip service to insurrection and really wanted strong government control.
Post a Comment