"Dicator Bush" - ex-neocon Sullivan lashes US administration in Murdoch paper - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 09-28-2008, 06:25 PM   #1
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 05:49 PM
"Dicator Bush" - ex-neocon Sullivan lashes US administration in Murdoch paper

Quote:
There is a core principle behind Anglo-American democracy as it has evolved in the past few centuries. Which is that you cannot rely on the judgment of one man or woman, unchecked by the law, or by parliament or Congress or the press, to govern a country. The reason is that human beings – all of us – are fallible. We get things wrong; our egos get the better of us; our self-interest blinds us; power corrupts us.

So America’s founding fathers set up a system of checks and balances to ensure that deliberation and debate would precede action. They made impulsive action very difficult because they believed that deliberation was essential to sound governance. And they also believed that any government’s actions should always be accountable, checkable, reversible and reasonable. This is why, in my judgment, the American constitution is such a conservative document: because it enshrines checks against absolute power, due process, deliberation and prudence at the core of democratic life.

This is the core conservatism that George W Bush and Dick Cheney, his vice-president, have systematically attacked for the past eight years – in favour of a de facto protectorate of one strong man. They believe it’s necessary to save us from terrorism. But they also believe the president of the United States is constrained by no law, no treaty and no constitution when he is defending the nation. Even when Congress has passed laws for presidential signature, Bush has attached provisos on many, saying he is not obliged to follow them when acting to defend the country. He has unilaterally suspended the Geneva conventions and unilaterally violated American law in sanctioning wire-tapping and torture. By any rational measure, he and Cheney have committed war crimes and their only defence is that they are above such laws and so incapable of committing any crimes in the defence of the nation.


Dictator Bush’s great illusion is exposed | Andrew Sullivan - Times Online


Some time ago, I spotted that elements of the Murdoch press were turning against Bushco. I think I was the only person on here to cotton on to this intriguing turn of events.
__________________

__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2008, 06:31 PM   #2
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 02:49 AM
When was Sullivan a neocon?
__________________

__________________
A_Wanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2008, 06:38 PM   #3
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 05:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by A_Wanderer View Post
When was Sullivan a neocon?
I had the impression he was pro-Bush during the first administration?

Anyway, the Zionist fanatic wing have carefully noted Sullivan's defection to normal (i.e., non-neocon or non-insane) conservatism, and responded accordingly - by their usual tactic of throwing around slanders -

Neocon Express: Gay Jew-Baiter Andrew Sullivan: Palin is being indoctrinated by Joe Lieberman and AIPAC as we speak
__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2008, 07:06 PM   #4
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,501
Local Time: 11:49 AM
Sullivan endorsed Bush in 2000, was quite happy about Afghanistan and fully supported the 2003 Iraq invasion. he's since rather dramatically self-castigated himself over Iraq and has become vehemently anti-Bush.

as an aside, he can't vote for anyone because he's of British origin, and since he has HIV, he is denied American citizenship despite living here for 25 years (though i think that law may have just changed).

also, and more important to the actual definition of a neocon, Sullivan studied with a "Straussian" professor at Harvard, Leo Strauss being credited as something of the original neocon.

here's a post Sullivan offered with some background:

Quote:
The power of Leo Strauss's students, and those who have in turn studied under them, upon the growth and direction of the Republican Party in Washington is a well-documented fact. His followers have been credited with providing American neoconservatism with its distinctive qualities: its emphasis upon crisis, its aversion to liberal tolerance, its rejection of pluralism, its insistence upon nationalistic superiority, its religiosity, and more.

However, far less is known about the degree to which these Straussian power brokers have misunderstood his teachings and distorted his legacy. Strauss actually had little to do with promoting a particular political party, nor any model of political 'crusade.'

For Strauss, being conservative implied, more crucially, that optimal political actions depend upon proceeding with a kind of thoughtfulness characterized by careful introspection and depth, as well as being deliberative, cautious, attentive to detail and non-impulsive. He was not known to teach adherence to one American political party or another. Strauss was more interested in examining the great political writings of the past and teaching his students a 'new' way to read important texts. He was well known for repeatedly appearing in front of his classes and venturing to minister to his own as well as to his students' ignorance by simply asking, 'What does this mean?'


Sullivan is an object of curiosity to me, since he's so open about himself on his blog, he's a prolific blogger, and i see him around town quite frequently.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2008, 07:16 PM   #5
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London/Sydney
Posts: 6,608
Local Time: 05:49 PM
Murdoch always swings where the money is. Whether that’s money from the consumer or money from the politicians, he’ll always try and back the winning horse, not the horse he really believes in. If there were some Obama plan that if elected would give Murdoch some significant business opportunity, you’d better believe his newspapers the world over would be falling over themselves to endorse. If Fox ratings fell through the floor and research suggested it was totally the dumbed down/conservative message, hosts like Hannity would be gone tomorrow. I noticed he dumped Bush sometime ago. His media is still, obviously, way to the right as a whole, but it definitely became “okay” to criticize Bush from maybe as far back as 2 years ago. Before then, no way. Maybe because he could tell it was a losing horse, maybe because there was something in the US that didn’t come to pass? Any loosening of media laws or something over there that Bush shot down?
__________________
Earnie Shavers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2008, 07:37 PM   #6
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 05:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Earnie Shavers View Post
Murdoch always swings where the money is. Whether that’s money from the consumer or money from the politicians, he’ll always try and back the winning horse, not the horse he really believes in. If there were some Obama plan that if elected would give Murdoch some significant business opportunity, you’d better believe his newspapers the world over would be falling over themselves to endorse. If Fox ratings fell through the floor and research suggested it was totally the dumbed down/conservative message, hosts like Hannity would be gone tomorrow. I noticed he dumped Bush sometime ago. His media is still, obviously, way to the right as a whole, but it definitely became “okay” to criticize Bush from maybe as far back as 2 years ago. Before then, no way. Maybe because he could tell it was a losing horse, maybe because there was something in the US that didn’t come to pass? Any loosening of media laws or something over there that Bush shot down?
I agree with your analyis. It was indeed around 2 years ago that I first noticed the shift.
__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2008, 10:36 PM   #7
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 08:49 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by A_Wanderer View Post
When was Sullivan a neocon?
2006

Quote:
What I Got Wrong About the War
By Andrew Sullivan Sunday, Mar. 05, 2006

In retrospect, neoconservatives (and I fully include myself) made three huge errors. The first was to overestimate the competence of government, especially in very tricky areas like WMD intelligence. The shock of 9/11 provoked an overestimation of the risks we faced.
What I Got Wrong About the War - TIME
__________________
deep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2008, 08:25 PM   #8
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,238
Local Time: 10:49 AM
I always enjoy when Sullivan is on Bill Maher's show. He's always refreshingly honest and fair.
__________________

__________________
Diemen is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:49 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com