Lawrence Martin, writing for the Globe and Mail.
For the United States, the irony is considerable. It has long held claim to being one of the great democracies. But what, as the critics ask, is democratic about one country running, if not subjugating, a world of more than 200 nations?
This is the meglomania of the Internationalist who think that THEY speak for the rest of the world. For every country. For 200 nations.
You might rightly ask, "Is that for Zimbabwe, Sudan, South Africa, Ivory Coast, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Tibet, Columbia, and every nation that is racked with wars, nutcase dictators, French machinations, Marxist guerillas, or terrorists? If so, the Internationalists have a lot to answer for. Chances are, they won't answer. But they like to speak as if they are doing something meaningful besides propping up sleazy, corrupt governments. Is there any form of evil they wouldn't support if there was a buck in it for them? And they like Kerry.
But Mr. Kerry is running to the right of how he would govern. His heavily liberal record is that of an internationalist. A victory by him would signal a major attitudinal shift. As he makes ringingly clear, he wants to rebuild alliances, reinvigorate the concept of collective security and make America respected in the world again.
While Mr. Bush must be somewhat chastened by the "weapons of mass destruction" fiasco, by the Abu Ghraib prison scandal, and by the thousands of deaths his war has engendered, he would see victory as vindication. Other nations would recoil. They would fear more politics of confrontation, more polarization, more war. Hatred for America would escalate.
There would be no search for a new internationalism favoured by Canada and other nations because, as The Rise of the Vulcans makes clear, the Vulcans' underlying philosophy is that they need not reach accommodation with anyone.
We should listen to Canada, a nation so corrupt that they allow their citizens to wait in line weeks, months for life threatening emergencies while Liberals spend $1 BILLION on a gun registry? We should listen to hypocrites who call themselves "Peacekeepers" but make no peace but stand idly by, fingering their unfired guns, while 800,000 die in Rwanda? We should bow to a newspaper that is so indecent that they cannot reveal the depth of the corruption of the party they favor?
If you do not follow the Globe and Mail, you might think this is just a single column. It isn't. Anti-Americanism is a campaign, just as it is in Europe to rally support for socialist governments with corrupt socialists leaders.
The column was written because the high strung, hysteria-prone Lawrence is getting edgy about the election that only last month he thought was a shoe-in. And he and the Globe are furious at the American media.
This is by John Doyle (same paper, same date, Doyle is an Arts columnist, this was on page R2)
Kerry needed to appear on The Daily Show because the American media itself has become ridiculous and he needs the endorsement of the jokers, not political pundits. The cable news shows that Jon Stewart mocks have become absurdly partisan. The print press is going through a period of self-flagellation as newspaper after newspaper apologizes and backtracks on its initial coverage of the need to go to war with Iraq.
[ED note-Globe is still puzzled at NYTimes/WashPo mea culpas issued earlier this month and they don't like being kept out of the track. Neither does the Publisher and Editor. Bolding mine.]
There is no longer a mainstream media in the United States. Every outlet postures and preens. Comedy is now as important as political commentary. Only the jokers have integrity.
The last thing Kerry said, as he left The Daily Show, was a remark to Stewart. He said, "You do a great job." In that, Kerry was correct. It's sad, but true.
This is fury, pure and simple at the inability of the American media to control - dominate - the news. Means the blog world is doing something right, because it ain't from lack of trying on the part of our MSM.
No comments:
Post a Comment