George W. Bush: If Americans Do It Is Not Illegal by Taylor Marsh
22 April 2009 10:37 am by KRULLURK
http://www.taylormarsh.com/2009/04/22/george-w-bush-if-americans-do-it-is-not-immoral/
Powerful writing Taylor!, I hope Huff-Po picks this up.
This post was submitted by KRULLURK.
No tags for this post.
“Vilified, we stand resolved, because we know we are taking our country back to the high ground where the nation began”
Mere political posturing hardly rises to “taking our country back to the high ground where the nation began”.
No further comment.
PissedOffAmerican says:
22 April 2009 at 10:46 am
No further comment.
____
I’m giving 10-1 odds that’s not true
Dennis can’t help himself
Hey Krullurk, It’s posted at Huff Post, though with a different angle, as I do with any article I cross-post there.
ARE WE WILLING TO DIE FOR OUR COUNTRY?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/taylor-marsh/are-we-willing-to-die-for_b_189997.html
Taylor Marsh says:
22 April 2009 at 11:01 am
Hey Krullurk, It’s posted at Huff Post
I had a feeling it would be, thanks Taylor.
Great writing Taylor~
What I was thinking when I watched Morning Joe,particulary when Donnie Deutch was saying,” We all knew what was going down”, was that kind of thinking is what is at the core of the rot in our major institutions. Never reflect,never learn from past mistakes,never consider the broad picture…..just go for the buck or information or campaign contribution…now. Instant gradification for the individual,short term gain at all costs.
I wish I was smart enough to write a book tracing this thinking and it’s costs to our country from the Ford pardon of Nixon to now.
Taylor – thanks for putting into words what needs to be said. I’m one of those people who will not give up my soul and my core beliefs for something I find contrary to every thing I have been taught and accepted as truth. I have always loved the Benjamin Franklin quote and find that it is just as appropriate today as it was when he wrote it. Fantastic job!
Appreciate it, really.
At some point we will all have to decide what’s more important and whether we are willing to live under the “whatever it takes = torture” guidelines so many in the commentariat suggest.
Just take Peggy Noonan’s embarrassing statement on Sunday about walking on. It’s staggering that this is what is considered “serious” and “important” opinion today.
NO values from the “values set”!
Indeed. Not to mention rank cowardice.
Excellent post Taylor
Heya AG, and thanks.
Didn’t Noonan say something like – “somethings need to remain mysterious”? Absolutely awful.
Yes, and “keep walking.”
“Some things in life need to be mysterious,” Noonan said on Sunday about the release of the torture memos. “Sometimes you need to just keep walking. … It’s hard for me to look at a great nation issuing these documents and sending them out to the world and thinking, oh, much good will come of that.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/21/feingold-unloads-on-peggy_n_189473.html
Peggy needs to retire.
She does not want anything to upset her languid state of cozy clubbiness and absolute undeserved insider self confidence.
Whoa LL – that is a mouthful. Excellent.
Great article Taylor. You deserve to be a permanent journalist for Huffpo, at least.
Thanks kris….I think Noonon is nothing more than a Bull Shi* artist…and I have to say I am dissappointed in some of the Pulitzer awards this year. I don’t know all of them but what kind of courage in writing did Eugene Robinson have? The courage to speak for the village?
Lake Lady says:
22 April 2009 at 12:22 pm
__________
She always gave me “gag reflex.” I was disappointed in some of the Pulitzers given out and question Eugen Robinson’s writing but then maybe I’m not being objective.
We ask families to give up their loved ones to fight and die for our country and the politician’s can’t manage to work up enough personal political courage to face the truth?
They should take a lesson from the courage and convictions of our servicemen and women.
AliceP – you’d expect those that send our loved ones off to fight to at least tell them the truth as to why they’re going to war. That was a biggie for me – Bush sent our troops to Iraq based on a lie. At least Afghanistan I understood.
If a sizable group of people think a writer’s work is biased or slanted it would seem to me that it is!! When I think of the Pultizer I think of gutsy writing like Halberstam or Dana Priest.Speaking truth to power kind of writing. Seems like now that is relegated to the webs or non fiction books rarely is it seen in the MSM.
LL, you’re comparing apples and oranges. Dana Priest won her Pulitzer for beat reporting. Gene won his for commentary. You can’t judge by the same standards. Was his writing biased or slanted? Probably, but then again how could it not be? I thought Anne Appelbaum, Joan Walsh, Marie Cocco and innumerable others who escape my mind right now were all slanted and biased as well. That is precisely what an op-ed writer does: they filter the political goings-on through their own life experiences.
this gave me chills taylor, i read it three times, the hair on the back of my neck is standing up…powerful, and also very true
ogenec…sorry for the late response,I got busy doing other things.
I am not familar with the writing of Cocco or Appelbaum but I thought Joan Walsh leaned over backwards to be fair. She may have preferred HRC but she did not slime Obama or try to misrepresent his motives.
ogenec says:
22 April 2009 at 12:44 pm That is precisely what an op-ed writer does: they filter the political goings-on through their own life experiences.
How true. But how about some fairness to the other side? And I guess commentary is different from objective news reporting, Ogenec, but that commentary was pretty much tilted toward one side, especially on MSNBC. I think Joan Walsh’s and Marie Cocco’s columns were in response to the bias (kind of like: which came first? the chicken or the egg?). But to be sure, they had their preferences, too. I’m not arguing the merits of Mr. Robinson’s writing, but I sure didn’t think he was very fair, and I don’t mean to single him out. The whole network was that way. It was pretty bad when I had to go to FOX news to get some type of objectivity (even if it wasn’t sincere). Ha ha.
I have the nagging suspicion that if we get any more into this, the fur will start flying all over again
So I’m trying to walk a tightrope here.
I can’t comment on Eugene’s appearances on MSNBC, as I usually get my news from C-Span. I do read his articles. And, boy, is that guy talented. Every time I read him, I’m inspired to improve my writing and vocabulary.
I understand how many of you found him to be unfair. I hope that you can return the favor, and understand that I felt the same way about Marie Cocco’s articles. She decried sexism in her famous article “Misogyny I Won’t Miss.” But just before she wrote that, she tauntingly told Obama to “win it like a man.” (As opposed, in her view, to having his supporters try to push Hillary out of the way.) Whatever the merits of her position may be — and, again, I’m sure many of you subscribe to her view of the primary — it is patently hypocritical to assail Obama’s manhood one day and then decry sexism the next.
Ruth Marcus is another example. I really like her, and I think she is a talented Op-Ed writer. But I was dismayed by an article that portrayed as craven Obama’s decision not to take public funding. Marcus said it had less to do with lofty ideals than his knowledge that he could raise more money that way. Which, to some extent, is true. But the whole MI and FL issue was the exact same thing: a curious mix of lofty principle and ruthless campaign strategy. Yet there was not a peep from Marcus about that. That made me think her analysis was a tad biased.
Lastly, I hate arguments like — “Obama’s supporters called Hillary a b***h. That’s sexist. How about if I called Obama a n****r?” To me, you’re not really trying to make an equivalency argument: you’re just looking for a semi-defensible way to call Obama the n-word. So I found this excerpt from Marie Cocco’s op-ed very distressing:
“Would the silence prevail if Obama’s likeness were put on a tap-dancing doll that was sold at airports? Would the media figures who dole out precious face time to these politicians be such pals if they’d compared Obama with a character in a blaxploitation film? And how would crude references to Obama’s sex organs play?”
In one paragraph, Cocco managed to insert all the stereotypes about black people. The only things missing were the watermelon and fried chicken.
I could go on, but I’ll just make myself mad. And I’m not trying to be that way. So I’ll just end where I started: yes, because of the gravity of the moment for him, Eugene was probably more partisan than he otherwise would have been. But that is equally true of the female writers I’ve named.
ogenec says:
22 April 2009 at 4:15 pm
Oh, Ogenec – let’s have at it! There goes the fur! Ha ha – only kidding. I see your points and I think they are fair ones. I am not aware of Ruth Marcus and I read most of Marie Cocco’s articles but I don’t remember the one you are referring to. Thanks for pointing them out to me. I understand your points. But there really were Hillary nutcrackers around and I remember Brian Williams interviewing Obama and actually having the nerve to ask him if he felt “emasculated” – can you imagine that? And that’s just the way many of those newsmen felt, let me tell you. Actually, I think Rep. Pence from Indiana felt that way today when he asked Hillary a question about Obama shaking a noted socialist’s hand (Chavez) and what did she think about it. Did you see it yet? You must. Djjl has a post up on it on another thread. What Marie Cocco said is painful, I know, and maybe some people used that argument to inflict pain but I am not one of those types. What I did understand was that there was a whole lot of rampant stereotyping of Hillary when her candidacy should have been respected like Obama’s was (at least by MSNBC). Even some magazine covers had her under a train on the train tracks or all bloodied up in battle, which I found offensive. That’s all I’m saying. As for Michigan and Florida, that was a bad situation from the start and should never have happenned in the first place. There should have been a better way like the Republicans do in that situation – penalize half the vote or whatever it is they do but still give the people the chance to vote. P.S. Your tightrope walking is good.
LOL, Lynette. Thanks! I’ve been practicing
Ha ha. Some of us Hillary supporters turned Obama supporters are probably making you cringe at times. You’re probably thinking “How the heck did I get involved with this bunch?!” You’re okay in my book. A sense of humor helps.
A sense of humor helps.
____________
Ain’t that the truth. I like that you can take a joke too.