It seems that Richad Posner in his blog with Gary Becker, is all concerned with the anti-intellectualism of the modern conservative movement.  Hat tip to Hawkins at Right Wing News for this one. Here is the excerpt and my reply

I sense intellectual deterioration of the once-vital conservative movement in the United States. As I shall explain, this may be a testament to its success.

Until the late 1960s (when I was in my late twenties), I was barely conscious of the existence of a conservative movement. It was obscure and marginal, symbolized by figures like Barry Goldwater (slaughtered by Lyndon Johnson in the 1964 presidential election), Ayn Rand, Russell Kirk, and William Buckley–figures who had no appeal for me. More powerful conservative thinkers, such as Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek, and other distinguished conservative economists, such as George Stigler, were on the scene, but were not well known outside the economics profession.

…By the end of the Clinton administration, I was content to celebrate the triumph of conservatism as I understood it, and had no desire for other than incremental changes in the economic and social structure of the United States. I saw no need for the estate tax to be abolished, marginal personal-income tax rates further reduced, the government shrunk, pragmatism in constitutional law jettisoned in favor of “originalism,” the rights of gun owners enlarged, our military posture strengthened, the rise of homosexual rights resisted, or the role of religion in the public sphere expanded. All these became causes embraced by the new conservatism that crested with the reelection of Bush in 2004.

My theme is the intellectual decline of conservatism, and it is notable that the policies of the new conservatism are powered largely by emotion and religion and have for the most part weak intellectual groundings. That the policies are weak in conception, have largely failed in execution, and are political flops is therefore unsurprising. The major blows to conservatism, culminating in the election and programs of Obama, have been fourfold: the failure of military force to achieve U.S. foreign policy objectives; the inanity of trying to substitute will for intellect, as in the denial of global warming, the use of religious criteria in the selection of public officials, the neglect of management and expertise in government; a continued preoccupation with abortion; and fiscal incontinence in the form of massive budget deficits, the Medicare drug plan, excessive foreign borrowing, and asset-price inflation.

By the fall of 2008, the face of the Republican Party had become Sarah Palin and Joe the Plumber. Conservative intellectuals had no party.

Well gee, where do I start.

Are you sure his name isn’t Richard Poseur? He might just be posing as a conservative, certainly he is posing as an intellectual.

I am sorry but when a big part of your argument is to lament that conservatives haven’t fallen for the Global warming myth like you have, then you have already lost any creditability you might have had.

Dismissing the desire for a public morality and moral order as simply “emotional” and “religious” is also not a sign of an intellectual heavyweight.

I have news for him, all of the old thinkers of the movement, Buckley, Friedman, even Goldwater were concerned about the downward slide of tradition and morality in our nation.

It is interesting that he even admits that in the 1990′s he didn’t want the size of government or taxes shrunk. That is not the position of any sort of conservative.

In short, you sir, are a tool, sorry if I am not intellectual enough for you.