Legit gripes on Iraq

I saw this article featured prominently on Belgravia Dispatch and was floored by it. It got me thinkin. The hard-core punditry from the right has collectively reflected the President's tendency to admit no wrong. While I can understand the political expediency of those decisions from Bush's perspective, it makes those pundits look like a bunch of chump, kiss-asses.

Their reasons become rationalizations and bad ideas are allowed to fester, divide, and multiply. Bad ideas should be allowed to fail in the hope that good ideas will flourish and take their place. The failure to be critical is a prime incubator for bad ideas. Now this isn't all of those on the right, just those who kowtow. Those for whom, every idea unleashed by the Republican Party is a good one. They know who they are.

Even granting that the Administration is to be lauded for enacting bold policy in the face of terrorism, bad ideas on this stage are unacceptable. Why are those who have checked off on bad ideas continuing to do so? They should be canned - forthwith! Instead they've been given medals. (By the way, most of the above also follows for the left, but they have had a dearth of compelling ideas lately, so they don't get to lead discussion)

These posts on Eliot Cohen and http://seekerblog.com/archives/20050705/wolfowitz-the-exit-interviews/ show men who are very serious thinkers, who advocated for the War in Iraq and who now have reservations about how it has unfolded. In particular, Wolfowitz comes off not as the weird, comb licking zealot he's been made out to be, but as a smart, though somewhat aloof, cookie. It is my hope that their critiques shake things up a bit and get us on the right track.

P.S. If you need any more to piss you off, check this out.

No comments: