Not that it’s an earth-shaking announcement or anything, but I’ve decided to dedicate all my available hours in the rest of the month and February to meeting a big editorial deadline.
My silence does not connote agreement or disagreement with any of the world’s madness that’s sure to transpire! My best advice: keep your heads about you and hold onto hope.
I’ll be back in March. Wish me luck, please, with the “Second Edit” of my much neglected manuscript
G’night and good luck …
Readers will notice that my blog has undergone a facelift. OK, maybe it’s not “sexier.” But it’s a little less pastoral, a bit more edgy. That seems to fit better with its content. (And hey, what is “edgy” if not these times!) If you have a mind to, tell me what you think.
After a hiatus of more than a year, I’ll be posting more often, while continuing my other writing projects. I hope you will enjoy the result here. If you do, please become a subscriber. You’ll get an email notice when I put up a new post. I won’t overload your inbox, promise!
With the corporate mass media concentrated more and more in conservative hands, we need more outlets for liberal and progressive thought. I hope to not disappoint. You’re are a part of this too! I welcome your contributions.
The New York Times published on Saturday an indispensable account describing the elaborate process Obama used in making his decision on Afghanistan. Say what you will about the wisdom of the president’s decision, the Times pieced together a story that only “The Newspaper Of Record” could have done. It’s a fresh reminder that if blogs, tweeting, TV and even public radio (itself in financial trouble) are our only sources of information, we’ll be even in greater peril than we already are.
The Generals Manipulated The Young President
A disturbing aspect of the story–which neither the Times nor many others commentators made enough of–was the naked manipulation of the president by key generals. The newspaper reported, first and scant analysis, that General McChrystal’s report, seeking 40,000 new troops, was leaked by Bob Woodward. (Gee, how would that have happened?)
The article went on to recount how friction between the White House and the generals intensified on October 1, “When McChrystal was asked after a speech in London whether a narrower mission, like the one Mr. Biden proposed, would succeed. ‘The short answer is no,’ he said.”
Yes, and the long and short of it, general, is that you flat out violated the taboo on generals injecting themselves in governing. No one can tell me this was an accident. As one who toiled on the Defense Appropriations Committee for years, I can assure you, nothing like this happens by accident.
The Times tells us that Defense Secretary Robert Gates gave his top brass a good talking to, which, I presume, is meant to assuage us. Again, the Times: “[Gates] publicly scolded advisers who did not keep their advice to the president private.” As if a four-star general is an naif, ignorant of such fundamentals!
According to The Times, White House anger over these events “stunned . . . the military, who were . . . ‘bewildered by how over the top the reaction was from the White House,’ as one military official put it’.”
Over the top?
The only thing over the top here is the insubordination of military commanders who did not trust a president to make the “right” decision and decided to lead him by the nose to the one they thought was.
