Sauron versus Aragorn?
Two interesting essays out today. In the Wall St. Journal, Alan Murray bemoans the demise of the Moderate.
Curiously, he concludes with this:
"In such a fiercely divided political environment -- and with red states holding the edge in electoral votes -- it isn't surprising that John Kerry finds himself caught up in endless temporizing. He's opposed to gay marriage but hasn't lifted a finger to stop it, and he can't seem to figure out what his position is on the Defense of Marriage Act. He supported Nafta, but now wants to re-evaluate. He supported the war but now opposes the war. He's trying to keep a fingerhold in the middle -- but that looks like a losing battle.
"So prepare for Armageddon -- Sauron versus Aragorn -- with both sides assuming they are the forces of light."
I think we know who's playing the Viggo Mortensen character in this fight.
And Joe Klein, writing in Time this week, comes to a similar -- I think -- conclusion:
"The real question here is a matter of proportion, the tendency of lurid cultural issues to crowd out the more important stuff. Even Iraq has settled into the dim middle distance. Few images from the war are as startling—as 'spontaneous'—as Justin Timberlake's ripping Janet Jackson's bodice. The violence of combat is sanitized into banality by squeamish editors. And there are no compelling images to convey the absence of weapons of mass destruction or how difficult it will be for an American Secretary of State to bring a credible argument for war to the United Nations anytime soon.
"Then again, voters in the early Democratic primaries, a perversely serious minority of the electorate, rejected the passionate Howard Dean in favor of John Kerry, a candidate nuanced to the point of paralysis. In the dictionary, passion is defined as 'suffering' first and then as 'emotion ... as opposed to reason.' Kerry isn't emotional, and he certainly isn't addicted to the explicit. In the year of The Passion, he stands as a quixotic reproach to the prevailing sensationalism, an unintentional rebel against our shock-a-minute culture."
"A losing battle." "Quixotic." With friends like these, who needs Mickey Maus.
It's tough, apparently, being on the right side of history.
Curiously, he concludes with this:
"In such a fiercely divided political environment -- and with red states holding the edge in electoral votes -- it isn't surprising that John Kerry finds himself caught up in endless temporizing. He's opposed to gay marriage but hasn't lifted a finger to stop it, and he can't seem to figure out what his position is on the Defense of Marriage Act. He supported Nafta, but now wants to re-evaluate. He supported the war but now opposes the war. He's trying to keep a fingerhold in the middle -- but that looks like a losing battle.
"So prepare for Armageddon -- Sauron versus Aragorn -- with both sides assuming they are the forces of light."
I think we know who's playing the Viggo Mortensen character in this fight.
And Joe Klein, writing in Time this week, comes to a similar -- I think -- conclusion:
"The real question here is a matter of proportion, the tendency of lurid cultural issues to crowd out the more important stuff. Even Iraq has settled into the dim middle distance. Few images from the war are as startling—as 'spontaneous'—as Justin Timberlake's ripping Janet Jackson's bodice. The violence of combat is sanitized into banality by squeamish editors. And there are no compelling images to convey the absence of weapons of mass destruction or how difficult it will be for an American Secretary of State to bring a credible argument for war to the United Nations anytime soon.
"Then again, voters in the early Democratic primaries, a perversely serious minority of the electorate, rejected the passionate Howard Dean in favor of John Kerry, a candidate nuanced to the point of paralysis. In the dictionary, passion is defined as 'suffering' first and then as 'emotion ... as opposed to reason.' Kerry isn't emotional, and he certainly isn't addicted to the explicit. In the year of The Passion, he stands as a quixotic reproach to the prevailing sensationalism, an unintentional rebel against our shock-a-minute culture."
"A losing battle." "Quixotic." With friends like these, who needs Mickey Maus.
It's tough, apparently, being on the right side of history.
posted by John at 7:26 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home