Monday, March 17


Wow. What an insightful post. New discovery Anglachel's Journal speculates on the reason so many progressive bloggers are dripping with vitriol about Hillary and clinging to Obamamania:

It's all about Iraq and their own guilty consciences.

Josh Marshall, Matt Yglesias, Mark Kleiman, Kevin Drum, and any number of other high profile bloggers were all rah-rah war supporters when it first began. They had no real reason to support it besides wanting to kill people and get some revenge. They were reading the New York Times and Judith Miller and gulping the White House kool-aide as avidly as they gulp Obama's kool-aide today. C'mon, c'mon, c'mon, we gotta get Saddam! They swore by Colin Powell. If Powell said there was proof, well, by golly, that was good enough for them.
Anyway, Hillary acts with others to authorize force if Saddam does not comply with the terms of the UN deal for reasons that have to do with politics, rule of law, and trying to put limits on Bush, as well as being under enormous public pressure to kill some towel heads as revenge for 9/11. Like pressure from the Blogger Boyz, who were slobbering and bouncing up and down in anticipation of a glorious little war, bitching about the UN's attempt to slow things down, and really wanting to go get Saddam. Bush thumbs his nose at the COngress and the UN and orders an invasion anyway. The boyz all cheer.

Then the war goes tits over teakettle and they realize that they are on the losing side of the argument. They are guilty as hell for having brought their considerable intellectual talents to bear on promoting an unjustified war and they want to blame someone else for their bad judgment. I know, Hillary made me do it! She should have been a better mommy and kept me from indulging in my murderous desires! Bad Mommy! Bad!

I spoke out about the Iraq invasion for months before it actually occurred, and had to listen to the "What if Saddam has even an ounce of biological weapons he could use to poison our water system?" meme ad infinitum. The Sage and I would listen to Saddam's mouthpieces deny having WMD and say to one another, "The funny thing is that for once they're most likely telling the truth." Hans Blix and the U.N. inspectors were clearly not finding any evidence of WMD, and it seemed the simplest and most rational thing in the world to give them time to finish their job and report to the U.S. and the world their findings before invading Iraq and starting a Middle East conflagration. As a couple of 50-somethings who once protested the Vietnam War and witnessed just what a CF and quagmire it was, we're always on the side of verification and validation before military action. But we found ourselves, even among progressives/liberals, in a very small minority.

Even so, we haven't been angry with those who rushed to judgment, or arrogant about our own prescience. The only people we've blamed have been those who lied to the American people and the world to justify a military action they'd been itching to launch since before Bush/Cheney took office. And that's George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, Douglas Feith, Paul Wolfowitz et al.

Read the whole thing. You'll recognize many of those you know -- not just bloggers, but media figures and even friends and relatives -- in the description Anglachel paints. The motivations he/she ascribes to the Hillary-haters may be speculative, but they sure ring true.

Labels: ,


Post a Comment

<< Home