Comments on: Team of Strategists

By: cfukara

cfukara — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 05:18:52 +0000

davemc321 Says:
" ..I hope you all had much to be thankful for. .."
Mmh.
Iraq. Kids dead for nothing. For 'intellectual' fun? For the "ideology of hatred"?
Neither will Kissinger-Rumsfeld-Wolfowitz-*-William_Kristol live for ever.
That is something to be thankful for.

By: davemc321

davemc321 — Fri, 28 Nov 2008 03:26:01 +0000

sg...mea culpa. I posted an answer in the other thread. The shorter version is: I don't like national journalists to go on shows like Hewitts. It cheapens journalism. But what he said doesn't fall to the same level of Halprin's sycophanticy.

If/when Klein says something stupid, hit him for it. That doesn't necessarily negate what he gets right.

By: sgwhiteinfla

sgwhiteinfla — Fri, 28 Nov 2008 01:26:15 +0000

davemc321
.
I put a comment on the thread above this one about an instaputz post that takes Joe Klein to task. You might want to read it and be sure to keep clicking on the source links to get to the origin of a lot of the anti Joe Klein sentiment. One big clue is the instaputz post is about Joe Klein's repeated appearances on wing nut radio start Hugh Hewitts radio show.

By: davemc321

davemc321 — Fri, 28 Nov 2008 00:57:33 +0000

Oh. And I hope you all had much to be thankful for.

By: davemc321

davemc321 — Fri, 28 Nov 2008 00:56:30 +0000

Thanks jackacroyd. I should have been more specific. I have no pity for Friedman or Broder. Friedman grew tiresome long ago with his six-month timeframes and taxi conservations that only served to demonstrate how befogged he was on Bush's Iraq policies. And Broder is so stuck in the '70s he reminds me of those old men who hang around courthouses and tell you how really nifty things used to be. I was speaking more about rising tide of unforgiving sentiment against Joe Klein. People can hold whatever grudges they want against Klein or any journalist. But the "Oh yeah, well in 2001 you wrote" school of criticism strikes me as more than a little self-righteous. I have no idea if he's made adequate mea culpas about his Iraq views, but I think his coverage has reflected an increasingly sharp awareness of the lies and misdeeds of Bush, Cheney et al. He's not refiltering the Administration crap for public consumption, which is something Friedman and Broder still do. Or worse, completely misunderstood what's happened.

By: James, Los Angeles

James, Los Angeles — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 19:18:51 +0000

Meh. I miss preview.

By: James, Los Angeles

James, Los Angeles — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 19:11:17 +0000

Yet neither of them left the White House with a record of great achievements. What Carter??? Broder is more ignorant and senile every single day. Has he completely spaced out theCamp David Accords ? That was one of the great achievements of the post WWII era. . Reagan didn't do sh!t compared to Carter and Clinton, except precipitate the S&L crisis, the BCCI scandal, Iran-Contra. Raised taxes, financed dirty wars in Central and South America, propped up Pinochet, ignored the AIDS crisis when intervention may have averted much death and disaster. His administration was a human rights disgrace and a domestic policy disaster and a foreign policy disaster. . When? O'When? Will someone send Broder out to the glue farm? .

By: jayackroyd

jayackroyd — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 16:12:56 +0000

Yet neither of them left the White House with a record of great achievements.
.
It's crap like this that has me shaking my head when I read Broder. Clinton accomplished plenty. Likening him to Carter is ridiculous. He was one of only three post-war presidents who served out two full terms, solved a fiscal issue no other president had ever solved, and governed over the longest post war expansion, while playing a key role in what may have been the last war in Europe at a minimal loss of American lives.
.
Reagan's list of accomplishments is much shorter.
.
As for his confusion about the economy, it's very simple. People promised to provide money they didn't have.

By: Paul-no not that one

Paul-no not that one — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 15:34:34 +0000

I posted this the other day, but for those that missed it and are interested, here is a different view of the Team of Rivals that I found helpful for context beyond the Doris Goodwin stuff.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/20/opinion/20oakes.html?ref=opinion

By: sgwhiteinfla

sgwhiteinfla — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 14:33:33 +0000

Joe Klein . Georgia's former Ambassador to Russia says that Georgia started the war with Russia by attacking South Ossetia and it was because President Mikhail Saakashvili seemed to think he had George Bush's tacit support for such military action against South Ossetia. Now what do you think gave him THAT idea? lol Another story that the MSM won't cover I am sure. Time to move on and all of that.