- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
rrheard
Let's be fair. I don't call him names. Don't let the ferocity of his response color my posts. -- omooex
Ah.... yes, but you are an emotionally & intellectually competent adult -- baiting someone who clearly doesn't rise to that level.
The most important part of Glenn's post, for me, as an American is not the part about the Mumbai attacks and not speculation about translated quotes from the Mumbai security personnel.
It's his critique of the commonplace revisionism in the New York Times. Revisionism in the American MSM is much more the sort of issue that we can focus on with some hope of affecting a change. There is every reason to highlight each instance of high-level backstroking on the issues that defined this passing decade.
Obama is clearly not going to boot all "insiders" to the curb; he needs competent personnel to run the ginormous Executive branch apparatus. But, instability in our current situation extends beyond the Presidency. Our "insider" elites are under significant pressure at this point. Some of them are too broke to easily remain "insiders" going forwards. As to (possibly) being too soiled by association with the outgoing regime..... that's a happened before, but it may be more severe this time.
Two Baby Boomer Presidents from (ostensibly) opposite sides of the fence have come and gone over the past 16 years, and this is the first time that the educated, Bowash elite has really felt change on a scale that our parents had to deal with. They are likely to be squirming in a most public fashion over the next few months.
It's not in our best interests to let them all slither into position without critique, and without notice.
