Subject:
|
From the New Republic: A Argument for a New Liberalism
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 17 Dec 2004 21:16:29 GMT
|
Highlighted:
|
(details)
|
Viewed:
|
599 times
|
| |
|
|
Being against the war in Iraq does NOT mean being for Totalitarian Islam.
Or, why Kerry lost and why Michael Moore is still a weenie...
From The New Republic, specifically here:
"A Fighting Faith (AN ARGUMENT FOR A NEW LIBERALISM.) by Peter Beinart (editor
of TNR since 1999)
http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?pt=whKP5U%2BbbaxbirV9FQhQuh%3D%3D
"Moore views totalitarian Islam the way Wallace viewed communism: As a phantom,
a ruse employed by the only enemies that matter, those on the right. Saudi
extremists may have brought down the Twin Towers, but the real menace is the
Carlyle Group. Today, most liberals naïvely consider Moore a useful ally, a
bomb-thrower against a right-wing that deserves to be torched. What they do not
understand is that his real casualties are on the decent left. When Moore
opposes the war against the Taliban, he casts doubt upon the sincerity of
liberals who say they opposed the Iraq war because they wanted to win in
Afghanistan first. When Moore says terrorism should be no greater a national
concern than car accidents or pneumonia, he makes it harder for liberals to
claim that their belief in civil liberties does not imply a diminished vigilance
against Al Qaeda."
Moveon.org responded to this but it's only available to subscribers which I am
not.
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
4 Messages in This Thread:
   
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
