Letters to the Editor
-
Quibble
Glenn said:
George Bush is tied irrevocably around the neck of the right-wing movement because they tied themselves to him when they thought doing so would be politically beneficial.
I hope it is irrevocable, but fear that it won't be.
-
No wonder the "conservatives" want to regulate the Internet
As I was reading this it struck me again just how hard it would be to have this information if it weren't for hardworking blog-writers like Glenn Greenwald. Would you ever read this fact summary at the WaPo, NYT, or WSJ? Or even, for that matter, Vanity Fair or Harpers?
Somerby is right. MSM journalists will NEVER call their own kind to account. But now I can print out this page and pin it up for all those smug types who insist they have the right of it not only now, but then.
-
@bethincary
This is GW truly represents people-it was never ABOUT you conservatives! It was about using you so that a core group of men can make money off of you.
Exactly! People for some reason think that just because the man on TV says he's looking out for you, you should take him at his word. Until Americans start thinking for themselves again and get the guts to call "BS" when a politician is feeding it to them, this country's not going to get better.
You and the entire conservative movement got hoodwinked by the "nerdy" Neocon crowd right under your own nose.
If I had been asked in 2000 to imagine what I thought the opposite of conservative values were, my answer would have been remarkably close to the current Neocon platform.
I don't care what people label me politically as anymore, I just want these crooked Nazi slimeballs out of office and away from my tax money and rights.
-
@Paul D
>>there are a lot of well meaning decent people who nevertheless self-identify as Conservatives and they're in dire need of some leadership at this point<<
I could say the same for the progressives in the country. Or at least for me, I won't lump everyone else in. This reminds me yet again of how the Dem party has allowed the right-wing Republicans to define the positions of debate.
-
Comment
Glenn - right on as always. Several points:
1. I think there is a legitimate argument over whether Bush was a true conservative. He clearly did not adhere to the traditional concept of the term, focused on smaller government, restrained spending, limited overseas involvement, etc, all of which are pretty much the opposite of Bush's record. However, many if not most of self-identified conservatives are much more aligned with the authoritarian version of conservatism as amply described in John Dean's book Conservatives without Conscience. This is a matter of deep psychological needs rather than fundamental values and principles.
2. It is fascinating reading the comments to Drehers column, most of which presumably come from self-identified conservatives. A lot of them just dont get it.
3. Much of the mischief caused by Bush was facilitated by a one-party Congress and a Republican dominated Supreme Court. This record should speak very loudly to the Dems as the upcoming election approaches. Government is fundamentally incapable of self-regulation. The only way it works is if each branch is looking over the other's shoulder at all times, and that simply does not happen when each is controlled by the same party. The Republicans made a spectacular mess of it, but the Dems are not immune either. We will have a Democratic president and a Democratic Congress in 2008, which should be a big warning to anyone who loves our country.
-
"shooter042" is clueless
Ask any of these you quote, whether they would have been better off with Kerry. To a man/woman they will laugh in your face.
Oh, we've already established that they're partisan eedjits. The "before" quotes demonstrate that.
Now they're back-stabbing eedjits, "every man for himself and the last one off is a rotten egg" types, as well.
Some 70% of the country knows now that we'd have been better off (far better off, in fact) without Dubya. Glenn's just pointing out that even the "28 percenters" are busy with the Dolchstoßlegende, and saving their own hides.
Cheers,
-
@shooter242
Apparently you are mistaking the shopping list for the next Republican presidential candidate for real concern. Ask any of these you quote, whether they would have been better off with Kerry. To a man/woman they will laugh in your face.
So... you are saying that these "conservatives" would prefer a MORE militaristic, authoritarian, unaccountable, imperial candidate than Bush?
Then they're not conservative in any meaningful sense (rather like you), they just use the word as a label for "their team."
It would be nice if you neocons could just have the sack to admit you want to live under Mussolini. This twisting of language you constantly engage in is so craven and dishonest, if you really believed anything you claim, you'd support different candidates than you do.
-
Will Whitman pull a Scooter?
Brilliant rhetorical analysis and perfect timing strategically - I love the pre-emptive aspect!
Mr. Greenwald should focus on very similar fraud and rehabilitation themes raised by the upcoming testimony of former EPA Administrator's Christine Todd Whitman before Congressman Nadler's Subcommittee regarding Whitman's false and misleading propaganda statements that the post 9/11 toxic air was safe to breath.
Will Whitman pull a Scooter Libby? Or will she name names?
From someone that closely followed Whitmna's anti-regulatory, corporate, voluntary compliance envrionmental policy model while she was NJ Governor, the main stream media's swallowing of the Whitman "as moderate" myth (i.e. as the envirornmental white hat fighting the Cheney and Card dark forces) this nacent fraud is especially painful.
-
I have to say, I'm ambivalent
On the one hand, the truth will out. No problem with that. But there has been a disturbing trend in modern society, on both the right and the left, in the center, and everywhere else, to confuse ideals with performance, to misrepresent myth as perverted science, and to constantly misbelieve that history can be written in the present.
These people are starting their break with Bush. We have decried and decried the practices and policies of this administration, but when it comes time to welcome the refugees, prisoners of war, defectors and asylees from the Bush army, well... all of a sudden the oh so pro-immigration and anti-racism liberals want pure-bred pedigree and a proven track record of being conscripts into the German army--unwilling servants to the Nazis, who never raised their arms in the crowd.
As with American history, and the American ideals, there are obvious gaps. Thomas Jefferson the man was a lot more compromised than Thomas Jefferson the hero of American liberty. That's as it should be, that's the difference between history and myth. And what these conservatives are trying to do is to come up with the new mythology, the one which repudiates George W. Bush. No, we shouldn't accept it as history. Yes, we should give them space to create their mythology, we need their support. Or have you forgotten that we won't get out of Iraq, let alone get rid of the raft of murderous policies and dangerous dismantlements without their support?
I've related this story before, but I had an art professor that used to tell us that the difference between Americans and other cultures was that our myths were of the future instead of the past. I was at Border's over the weekend, and the takeover of the Science Fiction section by what is called Fantasy is nearly complete. Our future has been assimilated, and what we have now is a lot of fairy tales and anti-science where the strange powers of the superheroes derive from ancient formulas known only to Druids and warlocks -- a mythology of the past.
It's devastating. Before you hold peoples feet to the fire, first decide what inside you wants them burned so badly.