Letters to the Editor
-
Supposed historian Friedman knows zip about history
The one thing that the political leadership-corproate powerhouses- punditocracy that took us into Iraq, botched everything, squandered our human and financial resources, trashed our Constitution and ruined our reputation and economy, cannot ever, ever admit is that it was all a mistake, a catastrophe they brought on. That will never happen. They will keep us in Iraq forever and a week rather than admit that and see their maniacal visions exposed and their house of cards tumble. And to do this, they will readily compound the felonies by launching ten wars, cause the Middle East to explode, and see a great depression onset here at home if need be.
Although these columns in the Times today seem too crazed to even merit addressing seriously, they are worth noting since they are actually intended as part of the necessary process of preventing a Democrat either from entering the White House, or at least from taking an end-the-war or no-new-war posture. Thus the columns are more than a slam on the named individuals, they are an attempt to trivialize the most likely Democratic nominees, or to pressure them into espousing Republican talking points and drowning their own candidacies as a result. This is, of course, just a miniscule prelude to the coming attractions from the Republicans, who amidst a gathering deep recession, endless war, gloom and malaise, and evidence of their own downfall, will pull out all the stops. New wars, non-stop crises to keep people terrorized, insane proclamations, campaigns of lies, eager media slavishness, and many more things beyond belief must be expected.
I suppose the world's most perceptive interpretor of history, Tom Friedman, would claim he was being tongue in cheek with what was clearly his most brilliant comment ever made - his recommendation to select a vice presidential candidate from the other party (or even a part of one's own party) that fundamentally disagrees with the views of the presidential candidate. After all, look how great it worked out for Lincoln, who accepted a man who fundamentally disagreed with his post-war policies, Andrew Johnson, as his VP. Reconstruction sure was a success. Or William Henry Harrison, who took a man with whom he had nothing in concord, John Tyler. And that fellow, with his enemy lists and Nixonian texture, set quite a precedent. Those guys, Johnson and Tyler, sure did a great job of carrying on the legacies of Lincoln and Harrison. So let's do it again with Obama/Cheney. Nice thinking, Tom.
-
I beg to differ
Having said that, Friedman, just like so many neocons, has always been the Jewish pudgy dork...
However odious his opinions and myopic his commentary, Tom Friedman has a well chiseled, muscular and well-proportioned body. His body is the envy of all his friends, and he's often asked at parties to strip down and pose like a discus thrower.
So cast your poisonous aspersions elsewhere, Cleopatra!
-
Lead Story on the Front Page of Sunday's NYTimes
According to information leaked by some of the former and current members of the the Bush Administration, sometimes even the Bush Administration members can act like grownups, and try to make the best of a horrible situation:
http://nytimes.com/2007/11/18/washington/18nuke.html
U.S. Secretly Aids Pakistan in Guarding Nuclear Arms
By DAVID E. SANGER and WILLIAM J. BROAD
Published: November 18, 2007WASHINGTON, Nov. 17 — Over the past six years, the Bush administration has spent almost $100 million on a highly classified program to help Gen. Pervez Musharraf, Pakistan’s president, secure his country’s nuclear weapons, according to current and former senior administration officials.
[...] A raft of equipment — from helicopters to night-vision goggles to nuclear detection equipment — was given to Pakistan to help secure its nuclear material, its warheads, and the laboratories that were the site of the worst known case of nuclear proliferation in the atomic age.
While American officials say that they believe the arsenal is safe at the moment, and that they take at face value Pakistani assurances that security is vastly improved, in many cases the Pakistani government has been reluctant to show American officials how or where the gear is actually used.
That is because the Pakistanis do not want to reveal the locations of their weapons or the amount or type of new bomb-grade fuel the country is now producing.
[...] The New York Times has known details of the secret program for more than three years, based on interviews with a range of American officials and nuclear experts, some of whom were concerned that Pakistan’s arsenal remained vulnerable. The newspaper agreed to delay publication of the article after considering a request from the Bush administration, which argued that premature disclosure could hurt the effort to secure the weapons.
[...] Early this week, the White House withdrew its request that publication be withheld, though it was unwilling to discuss details of the program.
Wow, some relatively sane tactics by (some parts of) the Bush Administration.
. . . and, meanwhile, on the third of the three op-ed pages of Sunday's Times . . .
(as noted in Glenn's Update II)
http://nytimes.com/2007/11/18/opinion/18kagan.htmlPakistan’s Collapse, Our Problem
By FREDERICK W. KAGAN and MICHAEL O’HANLON
Published: November 18, 2007[...] So, if we got a large number of troops into the country, what would they do? The most likely directive would be to help Pakistan’s military and security forces hold the country’s center — primarily the region around the capital, Islamabad, and the populous areas like Punjab Province to its south. [...]
- - Frederick W. Kagan is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. Michael O’Hanlon is a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution.
Okay, now it's official.
You can be appointed and re-appointed as a "fellow" at the so-called "liberal" Brookings Institution even if you're clearly more deranged than the Bush-Cheney Administration.
-
You said it Glenn!
"Deranged neoconservative militarism isn't the solution to nuclear proliferation; it's a cause."
BRAVO!! TOUCHE!!
As for Dowd, as I commented on a DailyKos diary, one gets the impression Dowd is oblivious to how much more revealing her writing is about her struggles with her own dark side, "shadow" than it is insightful about any candidate that she really ought to seek professional help. Can anyone recommend a good psychotherapist for her?