Saturday, October 11, 2003

Joshua Marshall on the great pushback Posted here Saturday, October 11, 2003 at 9:09:50 AM     From Talking Points memo The administration's great vulnerability now is its credibility -- whether it knows what it's doing or tells the truth about what it's doing. And on that count this new bundle of speeches offers a very target rich environment. -- Josh Marshall Comment: the tendency of reaction is to narrow the issues. Another way to look at it is, in what way is the Bush admin adapted to the real conditions of the world, the economy, political power, the media? If the economy was going to turn down in 2000 anyway, which I think is obvious, then those who became rich in the 80-1999 would shift towards protecting and harvesting wealth. If US policy from Vietnam on was just a form of late colonialism, then the increasing shift towards the military, including under Clinton, is just in the flow.   The right and left are both critical of "progress" and yet tied to it. The result is, "progress", which now means the extension of the market and managed democracy solution will prevail.   To "cure" the current situation requires a certain medical detachment: first, do no harm, second, take a systems view. But appreciate all the players for their courage and contribution to the unfolding drama. Then act. ********

Cheney Lashes Out at Critics of Policy on Iraq NYT Posted here Saturday, October 11, 2003 at 8:24:46 AM     By ERIC SCHMITT Published: October 11, 2003 ASHINGTON, Oct. 10 — Vice President Dick Cheney lashed out on Friday at critics of the Bush administration's Iraq policy, ridiculing their arguments against the war as naïve and dangerous in a speech that was a culmination of a campaign by the White House to regain support for the postwar effort. Comment: as things get tense, the administration will get more tense. The problem created by the administration is to have defined the war against terror as the defining aspect of the regime, with the exception of tax shifts in favor of the rich, which may be the main agenda. The problem this leaves for the rest of us is, should the US withdraw from Iraq? If not, what? I think the turn to the UN with massive US support for a policy the UN/NATO control, is the best, providing it would be combined with an approach towards fairness in agriculture and other trade issues, and shift American rhetoric towards international cooperation and social welfare beyond trickle down economics. The progressive side in the US is weakened by being divided between corporate tech economic market desires and fairness and pace desires. Lots to sort out. If the really good alternative is not achievable, then we have to face the fact that the us really faces the choice between pulling back, letting Iraq become an Islamic republic, and realizing that this weakness will lead to increasing anti-US sentiment and hard edged Islamic revival. As Spengler and others have pointed out, a late empire acting weak attracts responses from within and without, and the natural course is to move towards a Caesar who imposes peace inside and out, at very high cost. American Innocence is lost. What now? Being anti Bush is not enough to come to a coherent posture towrds the world, our own economy, and civil rights and responsibilities. the right as created a weak but workable alliance between corporatism and small town america. the progressive side ixxes the urban market culture and a desire for peace and civil liberties in a weaker combination. One can expect that the rural/corporate axis to hold, though I think tis trend hurts the economy deeply, and creates too much violene and resentment to work. All theplayers can be expected to fudge the issues. ********