Take your pick!
Your illustrations are all rather outlandish positions but I don't see, even in those statements, claims that dissent is unpatriotic.
I'm not making a real point other than to say both sides see any statements made by the other side as evil and worthy of censure.
That is increasingly true of the position of established figures in the Republican Party. Show me the same from established figures in the Democratic Party. I simply don't see the "evil" claim nor the "censure" claim. It's one thing to argue that your political opponents' positions are wrong, damage public interests, whatever. That's all fair game in American politics. It's quite another to argue their positions are "evil" and worthy of "censure".
On criticisms of Fox, that's what I've heard. That's fair game. However, I don't have any evidence that Gore or Clinton tried to "stifle" Fox. Do you?
As for Gore and Clinton having total control over the media, that simply was not the case. The Whitewater case was unearthed by the New York Times and pushed, relentlessly by them. Fox came into being during the C &G period. Right wing opinion journals like The Weekly Standard, National Review, etc. flourished. In fact, it's been my experience that opposition journals like these get more attention when the opposition is in control of the White House.
As for Pipes, I don't "detest" his "extreme" comments. I do think the republic, however, is ever so slightly damaged when an extreme element such as Pipes does not simply disagree with his political foes but calls them unpatriotic and, carelessly, increases the likelihood that crazies will go after them.
One more reaction. Someone posted the CampusWatch list of universities with large contributions from Saudi Arabia. Now that strikes me as excellent criticism from Pipes group. We should actually have more of that kind. There are a rather large number of American organizations, companies and consulting firms and universities, with such ties. If Pipes wishes to take a look at that, he should. Including whatever processes are in place to mute the ability of donors to have an impact on the organizations. Most universities have policies in place to put donors at a distance. It would be interesting to see if they do so in these cases. And if other organizations--companies, etc. do as well. |
