House of Eratosthenes

It’s official, TIME Magazine is a complete joke

Joe Klein has reviewed Bush 43’s memoir and is as shallow and clichéd as any leftist can be in it:

As I read on, trapped in the sketchy carelessness of this presidency, I was surprised by how angry I didn’t become. For me, at least, weariness has replaced anger. Bush’s was an exhausting presidency that will, I suspect, be remembered more for its waste — of time, lives, money, moral standing and economic strength — than for anything else. We have survived nearly a decade now since Sept. 11, and the cataclysmic events of that day have receded, not just in memory but in importance, compared with the global economic changes and Wall Street sociopathy that together challenge America’s future pre-eminence. We have not been successfully attacked since, a matter of luck and skill. We do have Bush to thank, in part, for that — but far too much testosterone was spent kicking irrelevant butts and landing, breathless with self-regard, on carrier decks to celebrate victories that were Pyrrhic at best. We struggle to recover from the thoughtless carnage of his tenure.

Sketchy carelessness, eh, Mr. Klein? Tell me please, I’d really like to know — where do you see TIME Magazine’s place in the grand scheme of things? Are you just pumping out glossy petroleum-based paper with any ol’ thing carelessly sketched upon it, to be aged a couple of years and then stacked on a coffee table in a medical office’s waiting room? You think that’s where the demand is in this age of the iPhone?

More photoshop jobs of our 43rd President holding books upside-down. How edifying. How educational. Boy, I really feel like I know what’s going on in the world now! I just got a window into the cobwebby mind of Joe Klein as he was reading a retired President’s autobiography.

Of course, some folks aren’t going to see anything wrong with this, because they happen to agree with Klein’s view of things. Ends justifying the means, or something. I cannot help but wonder what they’d think of Fox News photoshopping our current President…mmm…running around with a bucket over His head? It would be “fair and balanced,” wouldn’t it?

On a slightly different subject, I left a comment over at blogger friend Rick’s place about liberals and other anti-war zealots who don’t know, or care, about what country it was that we invaded — just “sovereign nation that did not attack us” and that’s all they have to say. Of course, my criticism isn’t quite so much about the not knowing. I cannot claim an encyclopedic knowledge of the details of Hussein’s regime. What really rankles me is the not caring. All this passion worked up about a decision having been made with which they do not agree, “blood-on-his-hands” and all that.

After all these years I am still thunderstruck by how under-prepared the average liberal is to discuss what Saddam Hussein really did. What he was trying to do, what he had been trying to do, what he got caught trying to do, what he was on record having done…and what this illustrated as far as what kind of a threat our nation was facing over there.

If we’re going to be passing value judgments on the wisdom or lack thereof of going into Iraq to take the old regime down, shouldn’t that stuff…y’know…kinda come up once in awhile? These are the people who fault Christine O’Donnell for not being able to name a Supreme Court decision off the top of her head. This is their one big topic upon which they like to opine most feverishly and most tediously. It’s even displaced the Florida “recount,” remember that?

And when you get to the details, without flocking to Google they generally can’t talk butkus about it.

It is really, really something. I think of it as a national embarrassment and national tragedy, I really do. A longing for peace, and a passion for peace, is a good thing, and a vision for greater understanding that leads to a lasting peace is a laudable goal. But there is so little follow-up that I have to conclude, for the most part, the lip-service toward “understanding” is exactly that and nothing more. Just lip-service. If there was more to it, they’d understand more than they do.

After all these years I am still thunderstruck by how under-prepared the average liberal is to discuss what Saddam Hussein really did.

I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again: if they grokked to concepts like “facts,” “evidence,” and “reason,” they wouldn’t be liberals. For instance: they love to claim that “the facts have a liberal bias.” Which is cute — I wonder what Daily Show writer came up with it? — but so obviously self-contradictory that anyone with a shred of self-awareness would cringe at the sound of his fellows using it. That they keep repeating it like a mantra tells you everything you need to know about their higher cognitive functions.
- Severian | 11/13/2010 @ 15:21
This is what you get when you’re steeped in talking-points, like a boiled teabag or something. This is what comes from years of watching the Daily Show, reading DailyKos, and masturbating to ‘The Boondocks’ comic strip.

You get divorced from reality; no, actually, it’s worse than that. You wind up completely unprepared even to defend your own side’s ideas, much less refute any of the opposition’s. Why? Because the left-wing news and entertainment sources seem to assume that everything they say, think, or believe is self-evident, irrefutable fact. They don’t bother to explain the position, because they simply assume everyone already agrees with them. That’s why Jon Stewart is able to get away with making snide comments (and playing video clips out-of-context) while his audience claps like a bunch of trained seals. Nobody ever challenges these peoples’ insulated little worldview. Most of them are smug, urban sophisticates who tsk-tsk with like-minded individuals over a four-dollar latte down at Starbucks.

A conservative co-worker made a point about a liberal co-worker that I found interesting. The conservative said, “I have noticed that whatever talking-points the Daily Show is prattling about, X comes into work the next day all worked-up about those talking points.” And after the next dose of Jon Stewart, X has forgotten his concern for whatever and has moved onto the next source of outrage….

Conservatives at least have Rush Limbaugh to explain things, and (gasp) he actually allows callers onto his show from the other side so he can wrestle with them. (I actually wish he’d do this more often; not only does the amen chorus get a little boring, but I also like listening to him tear them apart on the air.) Other right-leaning media figures do likewise. The only one who seems to aim straight for entertainment value is Ann Coulter, and she drives the Left absolutely batshit crazy….which is almost as good. Maybe better.
- cylarz | 11/15/2010 @ 01:13
Uh, Mr. Klein, did you really read the book? I know you are a paid professional writer, but from this posted excerpt, you sound like one of those one star “reviews” for political books on Amazon.com. You’ve seen them. They rant on and on about the idiocy and wrongheadedness of the author’s views, but they never address a single issue brought up in the book they are pretending to review. They think, much like you seem to be thinking, that they are demonstrating a brilliant intellect and engaging in clever repartee. The rest of us groan at the fact that they can’t see past their own b*llsh*t. One day, you may want to sit way up and take a look past yours.
- sonofsheldon | 11/16/2010 @ 17:59

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent

Items of Interest

Monthly Archives

What They Say

Links

TIME Reviews “Decision Point”Saturday, November 13th, 2010

TIME Reviews “Decision Point”
Saturday, November 13th, 2010