Sunday, September 22, 2002

 
1984: 18 YEARS LATE?

There have been times in the past (particularly during Condit-mania) that I worried that blogger and pundit Josh Marshall was developing Beltway-itis, a horrible scourge that causes its victims to spew the mindless twaddle that masquerades as “conventional wisdom” in DC. Lately, though, Josh has been on a roll.

In recent months, Josh has made the most compelling arguments I’ve seen in favor of the violent overthrow of Saddam Hussein. However, the Shrub “Administration’s” Orwellian language corruption and mind-boggling dishonesty make Mr. Marshall a bit nervous.

On the use of the term “regime change,” Josh states:

“Like many phrases Orwell had at, 'regime change' is one that comes with the evasion and concealment prepackaged within it. We all know more or less what the phrase means: the violent otherthrow of one government and its replacement with another, chosen by the power which overthrew the first one, or, in other words, by us. So why not say so? Using an abstract and antiseptic phrase like 'regime change' for a process which is neither abstract or antiseptic is corrupting.

“You can imagine various instances where we might try the same stunt in our daily lives. The fifty-five year-old man who dumps his graying middle-aged wife for a busty, blonde, twenty-eight year-old ad-exec. This is 'spousal replacement.' And so forth.”


And earlier this week, Josh mirrored the thoughts of many of us who are very well aware that Saddam is a dishonest, dangerous SOB but who are also very well aware of the Shrub “Administration’s” dishonesty:

“But let me discuss with you for a moment what I find the most difficult about this debate. The more ardent supporters of regime change lie a lot. I really don't know how else to put it. I'm not talking about disagreements over interpretation. I mean people saying things they either know to be false or have no reason to believe are true. Perhaps the word 'lie' is a very slight exaggeration. Perhaps it's better to say they have a marked propensity to assert as fact points for which there is virtually or absolutely no evidence. How's that?”

Bravo to Josh for saying the unsayable, for questioning the unquestionable, for being politically incorrect during a time when the so-called “liberal media” tries to enforce right-wing political correctness!

Comments: Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?