Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
Agreed, but that not the point that Fareed was trying to make. It was quite simply, that the GOP has offered little but to demonize Obama in the hope of stalling his Administration.
That liberals have used the analogy is moot. Two wrongs don't make a right. It's the context of the recent dialogue that's important when discussing his commentary.
-spence
|
So why do you show us that stupid, probably staged, photo?
Fareed not only went beyond merely calling Republicans obstructionists to Obama (which he never really did--that's just your throw-in). The only actual Republican politician he mentioned was Nixon. He painted ACTUAL UNNAMED Republican politicians as fools-by-proxy. He immediately excoriated a "right-wing netherworld" comprised of Michelle Malkin and Rush Limbaugh and a debate in
The National Review, and then proclaimed that today's discourse of American conservatism is: Obama is bad because he loves death panels and Hitler. As an editor of
Newsweek, either he KNOWS that actual Republican politicians have not discoursed Hitler and have discoursed every major topic, or he is too ignorant to be an editor of a major news journal. Does he, or you, know that there are 32 bills on health care reform submitted by House Republicans? Of course, when Republicans speak, as far as the media to which Zakaria pays heed, its like an insignificant little gust passing away. Because Republican views differ from the politically accepted norm of the select media, when they are given attention, they, naturally being different than Obama's, are considered obstructionism, or demonization to defeat him. IS THAT NOT WHAT YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO DO IF YOU DISAGREE? Is that not what the Dems did throughout much of Bushes terms? SUCCESSFULLY?
Much of Zakaria's article was about diplomacy, but he was very undiplomatic and sarcastic toward the right.
Threaded Mode