|
Edited on Wed Sep-06-06 02:46 PM by Pamela Troy
“Bin Laden says that al Qaeda intends to (launch) in his words, 'a media campaign… to create a wedge between the American people and their government.' This media campaign, bin Laden says, will send the American people a number of messages, including 'that their government bring them more losses, in finances and casualties.' And he goes on to say that 'they are being sacrificed… to serve… the big investors, especially the Jews.' Bin Laden says that by delivering these messages, al Qaeda "aims at creating pressure from the American people on the American government to stop their campaign against Afghanistan."
President George W. Bush, Capital Hilton Hotel 9/5/06
“…ultimately it will be to the President’s deep personal regret—that he has followed his Secretary of Defense down the path of trying to tie those loyal Americans who disagree with his policies—or even question their effectiveness or execution—to the Nazis of the past, and the al Qaeda of the present….”
…” And it becomes necessary to reach back into our history, for yet another quote, from yet another time and to ask it of Mr. Bush:
'Have you no sense of decency, sir?'" Keith Olbermann 9/5/06
Olbermann’s response to the President’s recent speech is courageous, articulate, and plainly deeply felt. But it begins with what I fear is an unwarranted note of optimism. The passage, with its reference to Bush eventually feeling “regret” expresses an assumption that the mainstream – even the superior mainstream media as exemplified by Keith Olbermann – has clung to for the past six years whenever some blatantly un-democratic attack on dissent is uttered by someone in the administration. It can be summed up in one simple sentence.
“THEY’LL BE SORRY!”
Believe me, I love the image of George W. Bush on TV, looking down at a bunch of papers and shuffling them nervously while someone says, with weary contempt, “Have you no decency, sir?” But this enduring article of faith that “they’ll be sorry” rests precariously on another article of faith -- that the administration doesn’t really mean all this stuff about equating dissent with disloyalty.
When, in the past six years of one scandal and disaster after another, has this administration shown any sign of regret? When, in the past six years, has this administration ever truly been called to account for the mayhem it has helped to create? When have they backtracked or apologized in any meaningful manner? Has anyone noticed any sign that the rhetoric from the mainstream right has been toned down because saying things like “you’re either with us or against us” or “Iraqi war critics are just like the Nazi appeasers of the past” have turned out to be “mistakes?”
And if it looks like they are going to lose their grip on the government in this upcoming election, or the next one in 2008, why should anyone imagine that the administration will backtrack, or shrink from, not just repeating, but acting on the meme they’ve steadily promoted for the past six years – that opponents to the administration are wittingly or unwittingly in league with terrorists?
Back in 2002, I posted to Democratic Underground a piece entitled “Just Kidding.” It cited various outrageous statements by Ann Coulter and David Horowitz, and made the following observation:
“Modern right-wing rhetoric becomes much less irrational if it's seen as the last gasp of the right's pretense of commitment to political freedom. Rather than self-destructing or imploding, it's quite possible that many conservatives are on the verge of moving from the covert to the overt rejection of this ideal.”
In the four years since, I’ve seen absolutely nothing that would alter this assessment.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
