I didn't find the speech conciliatory. Rather more of the same--the responsible thing to do is to do as we order you to do. Nor did I find it conciliatory toward opponents of the invasion. I thought the speech was as well written as any previous Bush speech and as well delivered. I thought it would give his numbers a pop. But it was remarkable for two things: his usual bit of advancing no evidence for his assertions--sort of these are mine and that's enough for my listeners--and his continuing unwillingness to admit that any serious problems exist. That will eventually lead to a loss of credibility.
Buchanan's view is hardly an "extreme lefist" view. Please. First, Buchanan has a very long, very consistent neoisolationist position. I completely disagree with it but there it is. And it's not an unknown right wing position. Second, the use of the "ist" on the end of these terms is always objectionable. It implies the holder of the view has no ability to think on her/his own.
As for Vietnam, it does none of us any good to redebate it. I don't think the term "cut and run" carries the conversation any distance. We didn't belong there in the first place. It was a civil war of nationalists (Ho) against former colonial elements. It was not capitalism against communism; it was not democracy versus dictatorship; it was nationalism against the remnants of colonial powers. And we joined the wrong side.
Finally, the notion, which you've typed before, that the dems would intend to cause harm in Iraq in order to advance their political fortunes is a standard Bush tactic. Just read a repeat of it in a column, forget the author, in the WSJ today. It's right up there with the charge they are anti-Hispanic because they kept Estrada out. Just objectionable political pr. Do what you can get away with. Never mind the damage done to the culture of democratic conversation.
As for the rambling, stream of consciousness apology, please. That's what I do. That's the name of the thread.
As for Lieberman, he's a goner. His positions are simply unacceptable to large enough portions of the dem party, thank heavens, for him to take a walk. |
