Therefore, David Broder will endorse McCain as reliably as the sun will set in the West and Joe Klein will bash any Democrat that is less than steadfast in their commitment to empire. And Friedman will tell you that the world is flat and your job isn't worth a damn. It's a game, but it's not a foolproof game. Yeah, sometimes it takes a fluke (like Watergate) to give you a Jimmy Carter. And it's true that the Establishment can make life very difficult for any Carter, Clinton, Dean, or Obama/Edwards that gets strange ideas in their head. Assassination is not unknown in this countryThis, from another rather tepid rebuttal from our latest proggie friend, in which he endorses our argument except to note that the press really was mean to Bill Clinton. I do enjoy the Ollie Stone assassination non sequitur, as if that fate awaits Hillary. Hey, maybe she's got a secret memo that's going to end Vietnam!
Anyway, I'm interested in the excerpt above because of its, how-you-say, head-crushingly ahistorical conviction that Jimminy Carter represented some sort of break with practices of the American empire. Fortunately, Carter gave this great speech, from which I'll just give you the highlight:
Let our position be absolutely clear: An attempt by any outside force to gain control of the Persian Gulf region will be regarded as an assault on the vital interests of the United States of America, and such an assault will be repelled by any means necessary, including military force.Yeah, the good old days. An outsider, that Carter. A man at odds with his time.
8 comments:
I really don't get Booman's sense of triumph in the exchange. Clinton and Carter proved that it was a possible for an outsider to survive the "antibodies", pursue the same set of policies as their predecessors and even, at times, be more successful at it than they were. Therefore you are wrong and we need to keep trying to elect outsiders . . . ? If so, amen! I'll crank up the hosannas right away: Ralph Nader is the man for the Dem partisans. He's well outside and he's an überliberal to boot.
Boohoohooman will never get that sweet blogger job with the DNC if he keeps writing lackluster pwoggie prose like this.
I'm not sure what he's arguing for. But he doesn't seem to get that anti-Clintonism was personal, not political. At a certain point (because it wasn't always so) the political class just decided to dislike Clinton. And they attacked him explicitly on personal grounds.
So I read BooMan's followup and something struck me. The president is not the government. But Boo says that being anti clinton was the same as being anti government. I would point out that while the permanent press corp was being anti-clinton they were very pro Gingrich and his congress. Their Gingrich love dissapated when the government was shut down for a few days.
Quoth Bill Clinton: "You cannot claim to love your country while hating its government."
I always had the impression that Carter was a patsy for implementation of the dual Conservative movements in both America and Iran.
frederick, why not just go all the way and call the whole movement a phony opposition? I like to imagine there is a third StupidNEvil party pulling the strings behind the Stupid party and the Evil party (in case you're wondering, the Stupid party is always the one you sympathize most with).
david brooks is a real doozy today folks. its pretty fucking amazing if he's being completely straightforward .
Post a Comment