- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
>"In contrast, in 2000 I had high hopes for President Bush. I thought he could be a very good president."
Right there, his credibility is shot. Does he explain on what basis, other than possibly the "I'd like to have a beer with him" phenomenon, he formed this opinion?<
It's the "Well, we're all rational (white) gentlemen here and those factors we have in common trump everything else. Even if you advocate shooting black people if they just look 'wrong,' you treat me good, so you must basically be a good person. As well, truly civilized people have manners enough not to make a public fuss over things, so those people who make a fuss over being treated like crap obviously are not as enlightened or intelligent as we elite." Over on his NYT blog, Dick Cavett recently defended Imus returning to the airwaves with nearly that exact same logic. "Well, what he said about the Rutgersr team really wasn't so bad--and I know he's irreverent towards everybody anyway." People like him and Sunstein are the kind of accomodationists who give scum like Rove and Bush endless slack. They don't have to deal with the fallout from these guys' horrible policies. As well, they feel down deep that the common masses need to be held in check. They may not like everyone who has that power, but they are sure going to side with them. Better dictatorship than "anarchy" in their eyes.
