Sesame Street of the Religious Right?
One of the sleezy-est journalists in history and a classic comedy voice...why can't we all just get along? :)
Are you ready to lose your breakfast? This will do it!
NYT columnist David Brooks on our visionary president:
"A leader's first job is to project authority, and George Bush certainly does that. In a 90-minute interview with a few columnists in the Oval Office on Tuesday, Bush swallowed up the room, crouching forward to energetically make a point or spreading his arms wide to illustrate the scope of his ideas -- always projecting confidence and intensity.
"He opened the session by declaring, 'Let me just first tell you that I've never been more convinced that the decisions I made are the right decisions,' and he grew more self-assured from there. I interview politicians for a living, and every time I brush against Bush I'm reminded that this guy is different. There's none of that hunger for approval that is common to the breed. This is the most inner-directed man on the globe.
The other striking feature of his conversation is that he possesses an unusual perception of time. Washington, and modern life in general, encourages people to think in the short term. But Bush, who stands aloof, thinks in long durations . . . All of which prepares him to think about the war on terror as a generations-long struggle."
Something to think about:
What kind of visionary would envision the use of torture and fail to see the moral logic of the relatationship between means and end?
What kind of visionary would fail to see (and admit) the huge blunder that is now Iraq?
What kind of visionary would not have forseen the re-emergence of the Taliban in Afganistan?
What kind of visionary would not have forseen the strategic strengthening of Iran with the emergence of a Shiite dominated Iraq?
What kind of visionary could not see the support of Hezbolla by a Shiite dominated Iraq?
What kind of visionary would not forsee the suffering and misery of the Iraqi people by creating Iraq as a "flypaper" for terrorists? (Whose flypaper is it now?)
Answer: a deluded "visionary" with a severe deficiency of intellectual integrity.
More notes from the intellectual underground:
I commend C. Powell, L. Graham, and the rest for finally standing up and speaking out.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
hi ja,
Here's the last part of your response:
I am also intrigued by Amaddinejad's explanation/defense of his remarks
about the holocaust. His point does not seem so far fetched if true.
60 million lives lost total; what makes the jewish lives lost any more
important than anyone elses in WWII? I do not mean to belittle the
trajedy but does he not have a point? Sensitive or insensitive as it
is.
He also asked why the Palestinians should be displaced for the Jews?
The questions he asks are poinant? I am relatively ignorant of all these
mid east issues but if there is a chance to resolve any of these conflicts
the answers certainly do not rest in the hands of GW.
Joe
Joe... I'm not a mid-east expert either, but my sense of one of the main issues for mideast cultures, Arab, Persian, Muslim, is the status of Israel and the effect of the Israel lobby on US policy in the middle east. I am of the minority opinion in this country that it was wrong for the United Nations to create the state of Israel without the consensus of Palestinians and the other countries in region. The reasons for that imperialistic move are numerous, but I do believe there were several factors involved: first, I do believe there is and was a significant degree of racism and cultural prejudice against Arabs and Islam in 1945, that continues today, that began in the ideologies of the Crusades. There was also the factor of guilt. Intelligent and historically conscious Christians are well aware of the Anti-semiticism in much of Christian story-telling that laid the foundation for the Holocaust...true today as well...evidence...the anti-semitic currents of popular films like "The Passion of the Christ". There was also a political strategic element in giving America strategic cover and base for controlling oil resources in the region. Undeniably true today as well. Middle Easterners are well aware of these history-politcal-religious factors--not to mention the ideologies informing the "Crusades"--and this informs their understanding of the Holocaust, and the prejudices for Israel and against Muslims in American culture and politics.
Of course, anyone with a sense of history has to sympathize with the Jewish-Israel predicament. They have been persecuted throughout their history, ironically, more my Christian cultures than Muslim. And now that Israel is a state, one has to support their existence. I do think however, that it would be best for Israel to create a viable state for Palestine, which they have been unable to do. Unfortunately, until we get this jihadist out of office, George Bush, there isn't much chance of making any progress on these issues.
I'm not sure what to make of Amaddinejad. Unfortunately, Iran has a very tenuous history with the US, not the least of which is our support of Saddam in the 8 year war that killed more than 1 million Iranians. And they are sitting in the drivers seat now. We did them a huge favor by getting rid of Saddam and the Taliban. And I doubt they are going to let us leave Iraq without some more humiliation...be prepared for an incident that compells us into a war with Iran within the next two years....Bush is looking for a way out of his defeat in Iraq and the only road to success in Iraq is through Tehran. As irrational as it sounds, remember, GW is on a crusade. There is no doubt in my mind he believes he is an instrument of God, and with that delusion anything is possiblel...especially when you have the post powerful military force in history.
I believe the biggest mistake we've made is allowing Bush and his neo-cons to define our responce to 911 as a "war against terror". It's a redulous concept when you think it though. It's the equivalent of declaring war on totalitarianism when we were attacked by Japan at pearl harbor. Al Queda declared war on us and was responsible for 911. Know were are at war with Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and another other insurgency that uses terrrorist tactics. I have no doubt this was a conscious political strategy to guaratee political advantage here in America. American political terrorism. The use of fear to win votes...
I think Hillary and Obama would be an interesting duo, although I think they will loose. America's "heartland" is still too racist, sexist, and conservative to elect and woman and a black man as leaders. As for McCain, I don't think he would have the support of the Christian jihadists, the Republican base, but he might be an interesting choice if we could get a Democratic Senate and House to compliment his conservatism.
Post a Comment