Simon: "President Obama appeared at West Point, send 30,000 or more U.S. troops to Afghanistan by next fall. How would you characterize the speech?"With "liberals" like these who needs conservatives?
Schorr: "I would characterize it as being a statesmanlike speech trying to deal with two disparate problems. One of the problems is they need to send more troops to Afghanistan. The other problem is that that does not go down very well with a great many liberals in the Democratic Party [seriously, click on this link to see my Republican representative's stand on Afghanistan]. And what he's done in effect is to say here we come and there we go, 18 months later, hoping that he managed to get both groups. He may succeed, but not entirely.
Simon: "Of course the concern was raised by a number of people this week - in Congress, commentators - that if you a put time stamp on a commitment, it doesn't impress anybody and it allows the Taliban to say we'll just hold onto the ropes for 18 months, and for that matter, as some people suggested, it's hard to ask U.S. troops to risk their lives for that kind of exit."
Schorr: "Well, you're right. It's not really a very wise thing to do if you want to get the Taliban and al-Qaida out of there. You don't say just hang around, we'll be leaving in 18 months, it's not a very good idea. But he had a very sticky problem that what would work internationally would not work with public opinion at home, and he tried to straddle that.
Sunday, December 06, 2009
And From the Left
NPR's supposedly liberal, left-leaning Dan Schorr weighs in on Obama's escalation of the war and occupation of Afghanistan on Weekend Edition Saturday:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Wow, I didn't know people considered Schorr liberal or left-leaning. I thought he was the David Broder of NPR, mouthing centrist platitudes and coasting on his ancient Nixon "enemies list" cred. It's amazing what passes for "liberal" these days -- and amazing how many "liberals" are still so dazzled by Obama they can't muster the will to oppose these pointless wars.
It seems the concept of "liberal" has been successfully deconstructed (torn asunder) by the neo-liberal war profiteers who've simultaneously obliterated any sensible meaning to "conservative" by inserting the "pre-emptive war" (Bush) doctrine and adding extra helpings of anti-choice anti-privacy rhetoric and party platform posturing selling out to the evangelism of the money will follow the mortgage just as the rain once followed the plow (see Dust Bowl). Sensible voices like Justin Raimondo on the conservative side and Glenn Greenwald for the so-called liberals just can't get a grip in this greed-slimed media.
I meant, of course, in these greed-slimed media.
Some might say that liberals themselves have been responsible for debasing the label; Liberals Are Useless (by Chris Hedges)
"Liberals are a useless lot. They talk about peace and do nothing to challenge our permanent war economy. They claim to support the working class, and vote for candidates that glibly defend the North American Free Trade Agreement. They insist they believe in welfare, the right to organize, universal health care and a host of other socially progressive causes, and will not risk stepping out of the mainstream to fight for them. The only talent they seem to possess is the ability to write abject, cloying letters to Barack Obama—as if he reads them—asking the president to come back to his “true” self. This sterile moral posturing, which is not only useless but humiliating, has made America’s liberal class an object of public derision."
So I would recommend that we find liberal anti-war groups in our area and join them. Get others to follow you and join too. Make some noise--do some civil disobedience--let's put our money where our mouths are and make a difference. Obama won't do it for us, we must do it ourselves.
I thought he was the David Broder of NPR, mouthing centrist platitudes and coasting on his ancient Nixon "enemies list" cred.
Exactly!
I watched a movie called "The Chicago 10" and it opens with Cronkite describing the city of Chicago during democratic convention as 'a police state . . . there's just no other way to say it"
Can you imagine any anchor of any networrk having the courage to even think such a thing.
The same day i listened to Terry (GasBag) Gross swoon over the courage shown by the Smother's Brothers. She has learned well that self-censorship is so much more lucrative (160+k/year) so this display must have been quite inspiring for her.
edk
Post a Comment