XPost: alt.activism, alt.politics.economics, alt.politics.usa   
   XPost: rec.arts.tv, alt.politics.radical-left   
   From: weberm@polaris.net   
      
   Several items that crossed our desk in the past 24 hours remind us of   
   that cliché about the definition of insanity. The first is a piece by   
   Jonathan Chait of New York magazine titled "The Ideological Fantasies of   
   Inequality Deniers." As The American's Jim Pethokoukis notes, this is a   
   familiar rhetorical trope:   
      
   	Liberals think there are lots of ideas that intelligent   
   	Americans just aren't supposed to challenge. If they do,   
   	they'll be labeled "deniers," intentionally raising a nasty   
   	comparison to Holocaust rejectionists. It's politics at its   
   	absolute lowest.   
      
   	Among the unchallengeable dogmata: the Obama stimulus created   
   	millions of jobs, Obamacare will save trillions of dollars,   
   	Dodd-Frank prevents future bank bailouts, and policy uncertainty   
   	isn't an issue hampering the recovery. And, of course, global   
   	warming poses an existential threat to civilization and   
   	humanity. Make that an "undeniable" threat.   
      
   We don't entirely agree with Pethokoukis; for one thing, politics can get   
   a lot lower. The "denier" trope is most familiar from global warmists,   
   but where has it gotten them? For years now they've been lamenting that   
   they can't seem to win the debate. Maybe it's precisely because they   
   can't resist invoking the specter of the Holocaust, a variant of the   
   argumentum ad Hitlerum that cannot succeed on account of Godwin's Law.   
      
   Fareed Zakaria, the CNN host who may or may not advise or have advised   
   the president on foreign policy in private, has some public advice for   
   him in a Washington Post column:   
      
   	Early in the 2008 presidential campaign, Barack Obama signaled   
   	that he was going to break with the Bush administration's   
   	Manichean foreign policy. The topic was Iran. He explained   
   	repeatedly that the Bush policy of simply pressuring Iran was   
   	not working and that he would be willing to talk to the   
   	country's leaders to find ways to reduce tensions and dangers.   
   	Two years into his presidency, Obama's Iran policy looks a lot   
   	like George W. Bush's--with some of the same problems that   
   	candidate Obama pointed out two years ago. . . .   
      
   	Obama should return to his original approach and test the   
   	Iranians to see if there is any room for dialogue and agreement.   
      
   The reason Obama abandoned that approach was that it failed--and of   
   course it failed. The entire identity of the Iranian regime centers on   
   its hatred for the "great Satan." In the course of making his argument,   
   Zakaria observes: "Within the context of Iranian politics, [Mahmoud]   
   Ahmadinejad is the pragmatist." It sounds laughable, but for all we know   
   it's true. And if it is true, it shows why Zakaria's recommendation is so   
   preposterous. For once, at least, Obama knows better.   
      
   Maybe for twice. The Puffington Host's Sam Stein reports that "months   
   into the president's run for a second term, mentions of [George W.] Bush   
   have all but disappeared." Say what you will about Obama, there is   
   increasing evidence of his sanity.   
      
      
      
   --   
   "If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the   
   21st century."   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)