Jules Crittenden provides the obituary
To the extent that Zinn popularized a ground-up view of history, he deserves credit. History is made of ordinary people, and all that protest this, resist that is part of history. To the extent that he considered America a crime against humanity, and denied the legitimacy of the forces of history that, however flawed they may have been, shaped the greatest nation on Earth, he was as one commentator noted yesterday, not much of a historian. Probably should have gone to live in the Soviet Union, where the historical forces he seemed to prefer prevailed.
One of the great things about America is, how those two forces have balanced each other and moderated each other over the centuries, allowing us to have both equality, freedom, social mobility and prosperity, that is to say, to have our cake and eat it too. So if there have been horrible acts committed here historically our history torturous as our nation exited slavery and racial discrimination through protracted, bloody war and social strife, for example, to arrive at a place where a black man who is the descendant of slave owners and a black woman who is the descendant of slaves now occupy the White House we were spared the equally great if not greater soul-killing horrors of the French Revolution that led France into war, set France's industrial development back and impoverished her people for decades, or the communist subjugation and murder of millions upon millions of people in a vast swath of Europe and Asia from the Danube to the Pacific Ocean, under the guise of exactly the status quo-upending liberation values Zinn championed, only exploited to fullest extent by other crowd of powermongers.
Meanwhile, Zinn was heavily involved in providing aid and comfort to the enemy at a time when international communism was very much a threat to freedom everywhere, though I'm willing to take at face value, in the interest of historical reconciliation, that he simply had the best interests of the American people and open government in mind.
That war's over. Capitalism won, finally, at least to the extent that the global communist threat is gone and its remnants have devloved into naked kleptocracies even worse than the sort Zinn railed against.
Re Iraq, I'm happy to report Zinn was dead wrong. Democracy and peace have in fact, been shown to be attainable' in Iraq, and American soldiers are leaving with their heads high having helped the Iraqi people attain that. There are still challenges, suicide bombings by the insidious and deadly forces that seek chaos not just in Baghdad but in Kabul, Pakistan, Bali, London, Madrid and New York. In Iraq, a murderous despot on a par with all the historical villains Zinn hated so much and exceeding many of them in intent and execution of purposeful evil is no longer in business. Not thanks to any uprising of people so physically constrained and psychological traumatized as to be immobilized, but thanks to the liberating force of American arms, and the breathing space and support it provided, at such great cost.
Demands for representative government, one of the best of America's gifts to the world best taken with the other one, free enterprise have spread throughout the Middle East and even taken root as a result of the Iraq example. There's a popular force of history for you....
Posted by: Mike ||
01/29/2010 14:45 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Zinn has a lot of admirers and followers. I read web posts from them on the afternoon of 9/11.
#2
Zinn has a lot of admirers and followers.
The p.o. once mistakenly delivered his mail to my box. I do remember several letters with "state prison" as the return address.
The central fact of the speech was the contradiction at its heart. It repeatedly asserted that Washington is the answer to everything. At the same time it painted a picture of Washington as a sick and broken place. It was a speech that argued against itself: You need us to heal you. Don't trust us, we think of no one but ourselves.
The people are good but need guidancefrom Washington. The middle class is anxious, and its fears can be soothedby Washington. Washington can "make sure consumers . . . have the information they need to make financial decisions." Washington must "make investments," "create" jobs, increase "production" and "efficiency."
At the same time Washington is a place "where every day is Election Day," where all is a "perpetual campaign" and the great sport is to "embarrass your opponents" and lob "schoolyard taunts."
Why would anyone have faith in that thing to help anyone do anything?...
Posted by: Mike ||
01/29/2010 06:41 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Aaaarrrruuuggh! I meant this to be under Opinion-Politix. Sorry, mods!
Posted by: Mike ||
01/29/2010 8:04 Comments ||
Top||
#2
The One Onanist.
Posted by: ed ||
01/29/2010 8:47 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Peggy nails it again. Easily the sharpest commentator now on US politics.
The precipitous and ill-conceived nature of Attorney General Eric Holder's plan to try the 9/11 masterminds in Manhattan Federal Court appears to have dawned on President Obama. Yesterday, the White House ordered a search for another trial venue.
The right answer would be to convene a military tribunal at the one place fully outfitted for the occasion: Guantanamo Bay. Next best: a tribunal on a U.S. military base equipped with built-in security.
Don't hold your breaths. Neither is, at the moment, in the offing because of Obama's determination to bring worst-of-the-worst terrorists into civilian court. Which means that, following the dictates of the Constitution, the hunt for a venue will likely be confined to Manhattan, the Bronx, Westchester and five northern counties.
Such scouting is a fool's errand. There is no suitable place, and the concept of devoting as much as $1 billion over five years, as the NYPD estimates, to protect against enemy attacks is far beyond the pale of acceptability.
Whether the White House is acting in good faith or simply to placate local Democrats remains to be seen. What's clear is that the administration acted hastily after perversely standing ready to saddle taxpayers with a $200 million-a-year tab while refusing to adequately fund health care for the rescue and recovery workers sickened by the toxic aftermath of the attack. On this matter, too, the White House faced an uproar and scrambled to commit to doubling the piecemeal contribution, for only next year, from $75 million to $150 million. Which isn't good enough at all from a President who had vowed while campaigning to help the Forgotten Victims of 9/11.
If Obama believes the feds have the resources to stage a trial wherever, then the feds also have the wherewithal to pick up the health care bill. Obama needs only to switch Khalid Shaikh Mohammed to a military tribunal and then to direct the savings into programs for the 9/11 sick.
Failing such a reversal, Congress needs to take command. Long Island Rep. Pete King got the ball rolling with a bill barring the Justice Department from holding terror trials in civilian courts. That type of measure may be the only salvation. Mayor Bloomberg has come around to urging that the trial be taken somewhere else. And so have New York's duo of late-to-the-ramparts senators, Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand.
Imagine, too, the rude awakening suffered Wednesday by those two along with Reps. Carolyn Maloney, Jerry Nadler, Eliot Engel, Michael McMahon and 10 additional members of New York's congressional delegation. There they were, loyal Obama Democrats, who were sure their fellow loyal Obama Democrats would reverse the funding denials of the vanquished Bush administration. There they were, supporters of civilian terror trials.
And there they were, stiffed by Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, who said, nope, there would be no long-term funding because, you know, these are tough times. But there would be money to turn lower Manhattan into an armed camp for the duration - assuming Obama ponies up for the security rather than dumping the costs on the NYPD.
Gillibrand said she was stunned. McMahon said he was flabbergasted. Actually, they were betrayed and so were all those who were made ill by the malevolence of the very same man whose every right is being guaranteed. Now, Schumer, Gillibrand and the delegation have two tasks: Get the trial the hell out of here, and get the money.
#2
As the paper points out, some of the surprises in the case studies were not surprises at all to those with relevant knowledge but were nevertheless a tremendous shock to the larger community. The 1957 Sputnik launch was the classic example of this. Americans within the burgeoning missile and rocket industry knew that it could happen at any moment and the US itself was working on its own satellites. What they did not anticipate was the reaction of an uninformed public and media, or the political implications.
I will predict that the next great surprise will mirror that one, a Sputnik from Hell in the form of some kind of Chinese or Indian space spectacular. Both have stated the intention to develop such programs; or in China's case to expand theirs. The ponderous, bureaucratic processes of NASA do not necessarily apply everywhere and new participants do not have to repeat all the R&D of past efforts. There is a wealth of US and Soviet space experience to draw on.
Various message board posters heaped scorn on India's recent announcement that it would put a man (or woman) in space in a purely national program by 2016. They may not be laughing so hard in a few years.
The government has now confirmed what has always been clear: No one tried to wiretap or bug Senator Landrieu's office. Nor did we try to cut or shut down her phone lines. Reports to this effect over the past 48 hours are inaccurate and false.
As an investigative journalist, my goal is to expose corruption and lack of concern for citizens by government and other institutions, as I did last year when our investigations revealed the massive corruption and fraud perpetrated by ACORN. For decades, investigative journalists have used a variety of tactics to try to dig out and reveal the truth.
I learned from a number of sources that many of Senator Landrieu's constituents were having trouble getting through to her office to tell her that they didn't want her taking millions of federal dollars in exchange for her vote on the healthcare bill. When asked about this, Senator Landrieu's explanation was that, Our lines have been jammed for weeks.' I decided to investigate why a representative of the people would be out of touch with her constituents for weeks' because her phones were broken. In investigating this matter, we decided to visit Senator Landrieu's district office the people's office to ask the staff if their phones were working.
On reflection, I could have used a different approach to this investigation, particularly given the sensitivities that people understandably have about security in a federal building. The sole intent of our investigation was to determine whether or not Senator Landrieu was purposely trying to avoid constituents who were calling to register their views to her as their Senator. We video taped the entire visit, the government has those tapes, and I'm eager for them to be released because they refute the false claims being repeated by much of the mainstream media.
It has been amazing to witness the journalistic malpractice committed by many of the organizations covering this story. MSNBC falsely claimed that I violated a non-existent gag order.' The Associated Press incorrectly reported that I broke in' to an office which is open to the public. The Washington Post has now had to print corrections in two stories on me. And these are just a few examples of inaccurate and false reporting. The public will judge whether reporters who can't get their facts straight have the credibility to question my integrity as a journalist.
Sarah Palin's response to the State of the Union address.
While I don't wish to speak too harshly about President Obama's state of the union address, we live in challenging times that call for candor. I call them as I see them, and I hope my frank assessment will be taken as an honest effort to move this conversation forward.
Last night, the president spoke of the "credibility gap" between the public's expectations of their leaders and what those leaders actually deliver. "Credibility gap" is a good way to describe the chasm between rhetoric and reality in the president's address. The contradictions seemed endless.
#3
Are common sense and rational decision making beyond this fellow? As we continue to watch Barry's quite obvious anger and frustration, one must wonder if his elitism, vanity and ego will permit him to continue as president for another three years, or will he soon be checking into the Hotel Zum Türken with Bo?
#4
In his address last night, the president once again revealed that there's a fundamental disconnect between what the American people expect from their government, and what he wants to deliver.
In an interview, two days before the SOTU address, President Obama stated the following:
You know, there is a tendency in Washington to believe our job description, of elected officials, is to get re-elected. That's not our job description. Our job description is to solve problems and to help people.
Now, compare that with the congressional oath of office.
I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.
#5
"Are common sense and rational decision making beyond this fellow?"
Well, yeah.
Silly B.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
01/29/2010 9:14 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Good point Barb. Someone sent me the following just this morning:
"The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the presidency. It will be easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails us. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their president."
anon
#8
Sometimes I think the problem rests with all of us who voted for the WoT to begin with. It gave the stupid people the impression that they could continue in their stupidity, and they could sit in their parents' basement and come up with elaborate theories that it's really a plot by Dick Cheney, or pretend that you have to melt steel to get it to fail... _and nothing would happen to them_.
#9
It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their president. That's the major flaw in government by consent of the governed. Forms of government not based on consent of the governed usually wind up being run by a small minority of fools. Communications, free speech & a free press are the antidotes for foolishness.
#10
They are antidotes only if we demand them. If we're willing to accept amusement instead of news, and echo hype instead of thinking for ourselves, foolishness is the mildest affliction awaiting us.
Posted by: James ||
01/29/2010 22:45 Comments ||
Top||
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
The precipitous and ill-conceived nature of Attorney General Eric Holder's plan to try the 9/11 masterminds in Manhattan Federal Court appears to have dawned on President Obama. Yesterday, the White House ordered a search for another trial venue.
