Letters to the Editor
-
It's the Right Thing to Do
After all the lies used to sell this war; after all the sickening war profiteering as detailed in 'Iraq for Sale', etc.; after 25,000 U.S. casualties and all the carnage and destruction whose true purpose is to allow this "war president" to bash the Dems, repeal the Constitution, and assume the powers of an absolute monarch (excuse me: "unitary executive"); cutting off all funding for this fiasco immediately, effective January 1, 2008, is the right thing to do.
-
Imperfect historical analogy
I'm not sure if this article works. Not that I disagree with the sentiment. I think Congress can and must end this war pronto. But if Mansfield and Albert were prepared to chicken out after years of a much deadlier war (for the Americans) and without either 9/11, anti-Moslem hatred, or the devisive issue of Israel muddying the waters, to expect this bunch to stand a fight is ridiculous. Perhaps 10-15% of the population see this thing as a clear issue of illegal war and Presidential usurpation. Right now, perhaps another 50-60% is simply tired of the incompetence and the sense that we have no plan to win. The Great American Pundit Machine is 99% chocolate and vanilla between "we must win" and "can we win", with the words "we have no right to win or kill one more Iraqi" never passing anyone's lips. And a hefty percentage of those who are fed up don't want to admit it was all wrong or that they were suckers for Bush's bullshit. So pushing to end this thing, and explaining why it must end, will open wounds and cause the pundits, who went along for years with this war, howl. The Democrats lack the will, even the inclination, to march into the fire and take whatever is dished out to end this war. And the people who would support them, they don't want to even know, no less be associated with. So I fear we will hear some sounds and from one or two voices a little fury, but it will signify nothing.
-
McGovern's dovishness was the least of his problems
Interesting chronology of events. The one thing that worries me is the time that was taken by those incremental moves by Congress. Bush needs a bigger push. The Democratic victory seems to have freed the Republicans from having to move in lockstep, which may make something substantive possible, which is one of the few reasons for hope.
As for McGovern--his dovishness, per se, wasn't the problem. He simply was a disaster as a national candidate. He began with some of the remains of the RFK organization and had a committed set of grassroots organizers that took over the rules for the '72 Democratic convention. McGovern did well because he ran agains the likes of Humphrey & Muskie in the primaries. People wanted something new (shades of Hillary Clinton's likely downfall in 2008).
McGovern, though, was characterizing as getting mnore applause at the beginning than at the end of his speeches. He had to backtrack on proposals such as his guaranteed national income and then there was the botched Eagleton nomination (for VP), which set mental health back decades. The idea of McGovern was always more attractive than the man and by Labor Day, the idea of McGovern was spoiled, too. Over time, he went from being someone different to being a newer, wimpier version of Humphrey. He really didn't define a way out of Vietnam and he never reminded people of his own heroic war effort (whereas Nixon played cards in a rear echelon post). McGovern was a primer on everything to avoid in a campaign. I was semi-glad that I was too young to vote for him. It was obvious that he was finished after the convention, in terms of his campaign and his poll numbers.
The Dems have to avoid fielding an ineffectual politician like McGovern in 2008 and I mean politician in the best sense of the word. In the meantime, the war can only end if people fight to end it, trot out generals, war heroes, etc. to end it and show the kind of determination that got us into this mess in the first place.
-
The Light at the end of the Tunnel
may be an oncoming locomotive.
While I really liked reading Perlstein's genuine historical accounting of the unraveling of Viet Nam and the parallels between it and the current madness in Iraq, I also must give James Levy, PhD, some points for his analysis of the lack of resolve both in Congress and among the pundits. However, there is, tonight, as I write this, a possible galvinizing force still lingering in the air like smoke after a bomb has gone off, that bomb being the remarkable speech given by Senator Jim Webb in response to the President's "timid" (commentator's word) address. Bush's was a rather weak speach, lacking the usual arrogance and self-assuredness and with some very carefully-weighed words, but the one issue everyone really came to hear about was Iraq, and on that one, although the President employed a much softer delivery, his words were numbingly the same.
In contrast, Webb's speech was clearly barely restrained rage and, as Katie Couric observed after, "He really tore into the President." It may just be me, but I seemed to pick up a sense of awe in those words, a look in Couric's eyes that I haven't seen often.
The Webb moment may be the inspiration the New Majority needs to stand and be counted. It also clearly impressed the talking heads. In this respect it resembled to a great degree the defining undoing of the Viet Nam war as recalled by Perlstein.
Where Johnson, Nixon, Kissinger, et al collapsed before a far more considerate bunch, we now must prepare to "meet on the ledge" and for a moment join in one great, communal shove. The blow has been delivered. The breaking point is at hand.
-
Democrats won't come out on top
I have to agree with the post above: this war in Iraq cannot be "won", and the right-wing in America will absolutely blame the left for "losing" the war.
-
Things are different now, only more so.
If Johnson's administration had enough arm-twisting power to get CBS to cut into G. Kennon's testimony lo those many years ago, think about how the mainstream media operate today. There was a time when the press was more or less independent, didn't rely for their paychecks...oh, hell, why belabor it. We all know the score. The big money runs the show.