Neocon columnist William Kristol wrote yet another inspiring op-ed this week, one that may be his most memorable ever. In it, he uses George Orwell's analysis of Rudyard Kipling – in which Orwell suggested that while Kipling was "morally insensitive and aesthetically disgusting" in his endorsement of British imperialism, he gained credibility because, as a member of the ruling class, Kipling had a "certain grip on reality," which forced him to "at least imagine what action and responsibility are like" – to suggest that Republicans are like Kipling because their dominance of the executive branch gives them a certain grip on reality while the Democrats are like the general opposition in that their only responsibility is to oppose those in power and not come up with any ideas of their own. Kristol's op-ed then veers off a cliff while trying to explain how House Democrats are irresponsibly opposing the FISA bill with retroactive immunity for the telecom companies that participated in the illegal wiretapping program started by President Bush while the responsible Republicans, because of that "certain grip on reality" that comes with having been in power so long, are being prevented from efficiently carrying out the duties of government. Yeah, I know what you're thinking – William Kristol's a comedy writer?!!? Apparently so:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/18/opinion/18kristol.html
First I want to address Kristol's new-found insights into Rudyard Kipling and the British & American Empires. Kristol's comparison of Republican presidential power to Rudyard Kipling's elitism is quite amusing. For once Kristol was on the right track, but as usual, he missed the mark. He argued that Republicans in power have that "certain grip on reality" – and presumably a better grip on how to govern – because of the responsibility of having resided in the White House for 28 of the past 40 years, much in the same way Rudyard Kipling had a firm grip on reality as a member of British Empire that ruled India for so long. Unfortunately, Mr. Kristol ended his comparison right there and used it as a springboard for a ridiculous, myth-based attack on the House Democrats, who (for once) failed to cater to the hyperbolized demands of the ever-petulant George II.
Let's see what this comparison would have looked like had Mr. Kristol not taken the easy way out and ended it so abruptly. Like Kipling, those in charge of the GOP are members of an elite, wealthy, powerful and mostly white party burdened with the responsibility of "protecting" its subjects. Only this wealthy and powerful party, like its British forerunner, has acted not in the best interests of its subjects, but instead acted in the best interests of itself. (And, my how this party has succeeded in acting on its own behalf: running up huge deficits while cutting taxes for the wealthiest few despite not having the proper funding to send our nation's fine but ill-equipped soldiers to fight an ill-conceived war based on lies and expired "evidence" that nets huge profits for companies owned by friends of the wealthy and powerful party in control – all the while hiring incompetent industry-protecting cronies to lead government agencies designed to protect the general public.) And when its subjects become understandably upset about their treatment, the party of wealth and power tries to retain control by any means necessary. Luckily for U.S citizens, we have a luxury the subjects of British rule did not have: an election every four years by which to recall our rulers, provided the results are not manipulated by a party as desperate to retain power now as it was desperate to gain power back in 2000. As long as the public can see through the ruling party's desperate attempts to retain power – in this case lying (yet again) to scare the votes out of its subjects – they will be able to rationally decide their own fate – a fate that most likely will not be advantageous to the ruling class.
It's no wonder Mr. Kristol – a prominent member of the elite, wealthy and powerful Republican ruling class – decided not to pursue his comparison to its logical end. In case you didn't notice, the Union Jack no longer flies over India.
Now let's move on to the second part of Kristol's exercise in daftness, wherein he criticizes the Democrats for putting the American people in jeopardy because of their baseless opposition to Bush's preferred FISA bill. Kristol, like the rest of the hyenas in the GOP elite, asserts without any kind of evience that if the government does not grant the telecom companies retroactive immunity, they will be "less likely" to lend their assistance in the future. This assertion is ridiculous and outrageously false, as is the rabid right's insistence that as of now we are not being protected because of the inaction of House Democrats.
For the record, Mr. Kristol: we are still being protected as of this moment because the current authorizations granted by the expired legislation allow the agencies to gather information until "the August, September time-frame," according to National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell in an NPR interview. Furthermore, according to Vice Adm. McConnell in that same interview, the "issue is liability protection for the private sector." In other words, even though President Bush knew intelligence gathering authorizations didn't expire until later this year, he allowed the authorizing legislation itself to expire in an effort to scare the public into believing we didn't have the authority to gather intelligence and protect the country while conveniently being able to falsely blame Democrats for allowing anti-terror tactics to be forbidden immediately. Why would President Bush do such a thing, besides his obviously authoritarian compulsion to frighten people into submitting to his will? It's because those annoying House Democrats believe in the Constitution and rule of law and, thus, oppose granting retroactive immunity to telecom companies that participated in the same illegal wiretapping program in which other telecom companies (such as Qwest and T-Mobile, who doubted the plan's legality) refused to participate. Because President Bush insists this retroactive immunity is imperative to any intelligence gathering bill even though it clearly isn't – like other industries, the telecom companies are required to work with the government when its request is legal – his perpetually promised veto of the FISA bill that does not include retroactive immunity stands as the true act that could potentially imperil our nation. Simply put, President Bush lied to the American people yet again in order to scare the cheese out of them while establishing a more authoritarian executive branch with fewer of the checks and balances that make the citizens of this country truly safe from its own government's malfeasance, something the Founding Fathers rightfully feared much more than the attacks of outside aggressors.
It should come as no surprise to anybody who's been paying attention to Mr. Kristol's written and oral commentary over the years that he would use lies, distortions and inaccuracies – intentionally or otherwise – to sway the public to agree with his point of view. How this "gentleman" receives a national platform in any outlet other than his own magazine is beyond my comprehension. Since newspapers such as the New York Times and Times-Picayune will not act responsibly and find an honest conservative commentator (assuming one actually exists) to print, our only hope is that readers take the responsibility upon themselves and ignore Mr. Kristol's dreck until he goes the way of Rudyard Kipling.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/18/opinion/18kristol.html
First I want to address Kristol's new-found insights into Rudyard Kipling and the British & American Empires. Kristol's comparison of Republican presidential power to Rudyard Kipling's elitism is quite amusing. For once Kristol was on the right track, but as usual, he missed the mark. He argued that Republicans in power have that "certain grip on reality" – and presumably a better grip on how to govern – because of the responsibility of having resided in the White House for 28 of the past 40 years, much in the same way Rudyard Kipling had a firm grip on reality as a member of British Empire that ruled India for so long. Unfortunately, Mr. Kristol ended his comparison right there and used it as a springboard for a ridiculous, myth-based attack on the House Democrats, who (for once) failed to cater to the hyperbolized demands of the ever-petulant George II.
Let's see what this comparison would have looked like had Mr. Kristol not taken the easy way out and ended it so abruptly. Like Kipling, those in charge of the GOP are members of an elite, wealthy, powerful and mostly white party burdened with the responsibility of "protecting" its subjects. Only this wealthy and powerful party, like its British forerunner, has acted not in the best interests of its subjects, but instead acted in the best interests of itself. (And, my how this party has succeeded in acting on its own behalf: running up huge deficits while cutting taxes for the wealthiest few despite not having the proper funding to send our nation's fine but ill-equipped soldiers to fight an ill-conceived war based on lies and expired "evidence" that nets huge profits for companies owned by friends of the wealthy and powerful party in control – all the while hiring incompetent industry-protecting cronies to lead government agencies designed to protect the general public.) And when its subjects become understandably upset about their treatment, the party of wealth and power tries to retain control by any means necessary. Luckily for U.S citizens, we have a luxury the subjects of British rule did not have: an election every four years by which to recall our rulers, provided the results are not manipulated by a party as desperate to retain power now as it was desperate to gain power back in 2000. As long as the public can see through the ruling party's desperate attempts to retain power – in this case lying (yet again) to scare the votes out of its subjects – they will be able to rationally decide their own fate – a fate that most likely will not be advantageous to the ruling class.
It's no wonder Mr. Kristol – a prominent member of the elite, wealthy and powerful Republican ruling class – decided not to pursue his comparison to its logical end. In case you didn't notice, the Union Jack no longer flies over India.
Now let's move on to the second part of Kristol's exercise in daftness, wherein he criticizes the Democrats for putting the American people in jeopardy because of their baseless opposition to Bush's preferred FISA bill. Kristol, like the rest of the hyenas in the GOP elite, asserts without any kind of evience that if the government does not grant the telecom companies retroactive immunity, they will be "less likely" to lend their assistance in the future. This assertion is ridiculous and outrageously false, as is the rabid right's insistence that as of now we are not being protected because of the inaction of House Democrats.
For the record, Mr. Kristol: we are still being protected as of this moment because the current authorizations granted by the expired legislation allow the agencies to gather information until "the August, September time-frame," according to National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell in an NPR interview. Furthermore, according to Vice Adm. McConnell in that same interview, the "issue is liability protection for the private sector." In other words, even though President Bush knew intelligence gathering authorizations didn't expire until later this year, he allowed the authorizing legislation itself to expire in an effort to scare the public into believing we didn't have the authority to gather intelligence and protect the country while conveniently being able to falsely blame Democrats for allowing anti-terror tactics to be forbidden immediately. Why would President Bush do such a thing, besides his obviously authoritarian compulsion to frighten people into submitting to his will? It's because those annoying House Democrats believe in the Constitution and rule of law and, thus, oppose granting retroactive immunity to telecom companies that participated in the same illegal wiretapping program in which other telecom companies (such as Qwest and T-Mobile, who doubted the plan's legality) refused to participate. Because President Bush insists this retroactive immunity is imperative to any intelligence gathering bill even though it clearly isn't – like other industries, the telecom companies are required to work with the government when its request is legal – his perpetually promised veto of the FISA bill that does not include retroactive immunity stands as the true act that could potentially imperil our nation. Simply put, President Bush lied to the American people yet again in order to scare the cheese out of them while establishing a more authoritarian executive branch with fewer of the checks and balances that make the citizens of this country truly safe from its own government's malfeasance, something the Founding Fathers rightfully feared much more than the attacks of outside aggressors.
It should come as no surprise to anybody who's been paying attention to Mr. Kristol's written and oral commentary over the years that he would use lies, distortions and inaccuracies – intentionally or otherwise – to sway the public to agree with his point of view. How this "gentleman" receives a national platform in any outlet other than his own magazine is beyond my comprehension. Since newspapers such as the New York Times and Times-Picayune will not act responsibly and find an honest conservative commentator (assuming one actually exists) to print, our only hope is that readers take the responsibility upon themselves and ignore Mr. Kristol's dreck until he goes the way of Rudyard Kipling.
No comments:
Post a Comment