Speaking before the American Legion a few days ago, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld lashed out at critics of the Iraq war, comparing them to Nazi appeasers in the 1930s
Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said Tuesday the world faces a new type of fascism' and likened critics of the Bush administrations war strategy to those who tried to appease the Nazis in the 1930s. In unusually explicit terms, Rumsfeld portrayed the administrations critics as suffering from moral or intellectual confusion' about what threatens the nations security.
Rumsfeld's comments echo those made by the Vice President, who the day before said that "Some in our own country claim retreat from Iraq would satisfy the appetite of the terrorists and get them to leave us alone." It appears to be part of an election-year strategy by the White House to bully over 60% of Americans who oppose Bush's foreign policy into silence, while whipping the 35%-37% of Americans who still support the president into a frenzy.
Last night on Countdown, Keith Olbermann spoke up and struck back, with a commentary that recalled Edward R. Murrow at his finest.
The man who sees absolutes, where all other men see nuances and shades of meaning, is either a prophet, or a quack.
Donald H. Rumsfeld is not a prophet.
Mr. Rumsfelds remarkable speech to the American Legion yesterday demands the deep analysisand the sober contemplationof every American.
For it did not merely serve to impugn the morality or intelligence -- indeed, the loyalty -- of the majority of Americans who oppose the transient occupants of the highest offices in the land. Worse, still, it credits those same transient occupants -- our employees -- with a total omniscience; a total omniscience which neither common sense, nor this administrations track record at home or abroad, suggests they deserve.
Dissent and disagreement with government is the lifes blood of human freedom; and not merely because it is the first roadblock against the kind of tyranny the men Mr. Rumsfeld likes to think of as his troops still fight, this very evening, in Iraq.
It is also essential. Because just every once in awhile it is right and the power to which it speaks, is wrong.
[. . .]
[A]bout Mr. Rumsfelds other main assertion, that this country faces a "new type of fascism." As he was correct to remind us how a government that knew everything could get everything wrong, so too was he right when he said that - though probably not in the way he thought he meant it. This country faces a new type of fascism - indeed.
Quoting the commentary does not do it justice, so here's the clip form You Tube:
I try to catch Olbermann every night. The way he nails the bullshitters for their bullshit, so articulately and sharply, makes me happy that someone like him has a show at the same time O'Reilly does. It's hilarious to compare their two shows. Olbermann attacks the facts and details with a critical eye, while O'Reilly behaves like a spoiled blowhard and hack on a nightly basis.
Rumsfeld can spit all the propaganda to his brainwashed comrades, if he has a reason to try and change American foreign policy, then he should be talking to senators whose opinion fucking matters. They make the goddamn decisions.
I met Olbermann a few years ago doing a commercial for his show. He was kind of an asshole. I've become such a fan of his show since then, however, that I could care less. He's brilliant.
Chicken said:
I met Olbermann a few years ago doing a commercial for his show. He was kind of an asshole. I've become such a fan of his show since then, however, that I could care less. He's brilliant.
Yeah, I think he's allowed to be an asshole, you know?
7
undershaker
Milwaukee, WI
November 2004
AUG 31, 2006 07:11 PM
When I was a younger man, why, not even a man... When I was fourteen, fifteen, I remember Fox Network -- the over-the-air version, not FSN nor FNC -- having a short-lived magazine show, FrontPage. On said show, they featured a rotating cast of newspaper columnists reprising the Andy Rooney commentaries of Sixty Minutes. Now, two of these three or four I recall: Mike Lupica and Chris Matthews. And when FrontPage got axed, with Matthews moving, first, to CNBC, then to MSNBC, I followed. Over the years since, even as Matthews became enthralled by Bush's put-on machismo tejano and Reagan-lite optimism, I stayed tuned to Hardball. In the past year or two, but really, more like three, since I returned from Romania, I have migrated, little by little, to Countdown. Now, today, I opine: Olbermann is the leading newsman and opinion-maker of the day, and damn funny, when the lighter material calls for it.
Never thought I'd say that. Not of a sports-anchor, not even if his original MSNBC show (from '97?) was openly decent if not all that memorable -- save for his HOH monologue -- but, yes, I did.
Where do we go now?
I read the Atlantic, but more for the reviews and lifestyle pieces; the likes of Easterbrook and Hitchens, for all their bravura talk, bore me with their mealy-mouthed appeasement of those that wanted to destroy them when they were still unmarried hedonist idealists in their thirties. And I turn to a fired SportsCenter anchor as my source for news.
To think I used to be a paperboy, and loved the medium; loved the newsmedia, generally.
Chicken said:
I met Olbermann a few years ago doing a commercial for his show. He was kind of an asshole. I've become such a fan of his show since then, however, that I could care less. He's brilliant.
Yeah, I think he's allowed to be an asshole, you know?
He could be worse. He could be Mike Tirico, or Chris Berman.
"You're with me, leather, as I whisk you away for an adventure known as Mike Tirico Microphone Bukkake"....
I watched the movie "Good Night, And Good Luck", and I saw the parallel between that time and this. Im glad someone else noticed it too, and has the power to spread the message.
On a side note: I also expect Olbermann to be ejected from his position and subsequently "disappeared".
I really enjoyed his commentary ..... up until his conclusion during which he recited Edward Murrow. "...We must remember always that accusation is not proof....."
I don't disagree with his accusations and opinions about Rumsfield, but maybe he could have left that part out.
PAGE:
1 | 2 | 3
Comments
Machiavel
United Kingdom
September 2003
AUG 31, 2006 06:39 PM
Dead_Ringer
I'm lost
September 2004
AUG 31, 2006 06:46 PM
Noxeos
Fullerton, CA
February 2004
AUG 31, 2006 06:53 PM
bedheadchicken
Rutherford, NJ
March 2003
AUG 31, 2006 06:58 PM
Tornateaux
Fort Campbell, KY
August 2006
AUG 31, 2006 06:58 PM
Necia
San Francisco, CA
August 2005
AUG 31, 2006 07:10 PM
undershaker
Milwaukee, WI
November 2004
AUG 31, 2006 07:11 PM
It_Thing_Hard_On
Humptulips, WA
November 2003
AUG 31, 2006 07:16 PM
bairdduvessa
Centerville, MA
April 2005
AUG 31, 2006 07:16 PM
undershaker
Milwaukee, WI
November 2004
AUG 31, 2006 07:18 PM
Subrosa
San Francisco, CA
July 2004
AUG 31, 2006 07:26 PM
_Elichrusos
Australia
November 2004
AUG 31, 2006 07:34 PM
MschfMayhemSoap
Phoenix, AZ
April 2006
AUG 31, 2006 07:34 PM
Max16Characters
Korea, Republic Of
March 2003
AUG 31, 2006 08:16 PM
Gringo
Spokane, WA
May 2006
AUG 31, 2006 08:18 PM
PAGE:
1 | 2 | 3