September 05, 2004
From the desk of Mindles H. Dreck:Congratulations..
..to Kevin Drum on his Book Review of Arthur Schlesinger Jr.'s War and the American Presidency:
How does Schlesinger reach so many dire conclusions? It's hard to say. Take his chapter on ''Patriotism and Dissent in Wartime.'' It contains some instructive and readable historical anecdotes about wartime dissent. We learn that compulsory flag salutes were struck down by the Supreme Court at the height of World War II -- on Flag Day, no less -- and Schlesinger reminds us that two hyperpatriots, Theodore Roosevelt and Robert Taft, were in their day fervent believers in the duty to criticize the president during wartime (although Schlesinger might have noted that both Roosevelt and Taft were criticizing presidents of the opposite party).John Adams, Abraham Lincoln and a host of others are also trotted out to make Schlesinger's point clear: dissent during wartime has a long and honorable history in America. But the chapter has no punch line. When he gets to the present conflict, all Schlesinger can bring himself to say is: ''There were those in the second Iraq war who promoted the idea that patriotic Americans had a moral obligation to rally around the president. This idea, as we have seen, is valid neither in principle nor in practice.''
One of those mysterious patriotism-questioning people at work again. Schlesinger's Roosevelt-colored glasses have been a target here a few times.
Posted by Mindles H. Dreck at September 5, 2004 10:22 PM | TrackBack | Technorati inbound linksI dont see anything new here. I dont think the political history of dissent during times of war has anything to do with the rightness or wrongness of the current dissent with the war in Iraq. Im against the war, but Im all for your right to call me unpatriotic for my position. But then Im not a decorated war vet running for President, and its nothing new for those running to complain of attacks on their patriotism.
Posted by: Begbee on September 6, 2004 02:43 PMSounds like Schlesinger should stick to subject matter he's totally familiar with, like John F. Kennedy in "One Thousand Days." His conclusion on chapter 5 is too abstract or something.
Check out my wrap-up of both National Conventions I wrote yesterday on my blog.
Tom
Posted by: Tom on September 6, 2004 03:24 PMBut then Im not a decorated war vet running for President
And neither is your candidate, apparently.
Posted by: RMc on September 6, 2004 07:29 PMRMc, the Swiftvets stuff is getting old.
Don't you wish!
Posted by: RMc on September 7, 2004 05:35 AMThe Swiftys were full of sound and fury signifying absolutely nothing. They dont say Kerry didnt pull Rasmussen from the water, they claim that despite .30 caliber bullet holes in several of the Swift boats and the contemperainious quotes from Rassmussen, they werent under fire. The Swiftys dont disagree with Kerrys account of events that led to his silver star, except to smear Kerry by claiming he shot the VC in the back. When Kerry charged off that boat, to protect his squad, to go after that VC with an RPG, he had no clue what he was going to run into, but apparently that isnt heroic enough for the bitter old fools. As to Cambodia, JK was there as the Brinkly book proves, but the Swiftys are making an issue out of exactly when he was in Cambodia.
I suppose its time to examine Bob Doles medals, Bob Kerrys medals, John Mccains medals, etc.. Because if the US militaries vetting of medals got it wrong on multiple occasions with Kerry, we have to assume their incompetant.
Posted by: Begbee on September 7, 2004 10:53 AMThere is nothing wrong with dissent or patriotism and they are very often the same thing.
Either is better than pathological, cult of personality, boot-licking.
Posted by: j swift on September 7, 2004 05:14 PMOh...its you Begbee. For a second I thought I should pay attention to your comment.
Posted by: Richard Cook on September 10, 2004 05:23 PMR Cook if your implying Im J Swift you are completely wrong.
Posted by: Begbee on September 10, 2004 10:30 PMBegbee,
It's quite apparent that there is NOTHING, and I do mean NOTHING that would shake this crowd's messianic devotion to George W. Bush. No soldier body count is too high. No deficit is too lofty. No amount of children left behind will deter them. No soup line is too long. It's CULT like behavior, and it's not just liberals saying this. Hard core conservatives are infuriated over our sieve-like immigration policies, budget-busting spending, pyramid scheme tax cuts, and his NERO-like foreign policy disasters. The majority of the world has turned from supporters after 9/11 to hating us with a fervor that has crowds at sporting events chanting "Osama!" against us.
Yet after all of this, Americans who question Bush on ANYTHING are called "unpatriotic."
Well, let me turn to the Republican President and War hero, Teddy Roosevelt, for his opinion on the subject:
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president,
or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only
unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American
public."
--Cobra
Posted by: Cobra on September 11, 2004 06:16 PMComments are Closed.