Monday, March 10, 2008

Nick asks "Isn't it wonderful he's black?"

Chris Bertram of Crooked Timber has a post up on Nick Cohen's Nick Cohen's latest.

I'll just add a few of the faults as I see them which Chris doesn't mention.


Die Welt gazed at his manly physique, listened to his honeyed words and dashed off a love letter.
"He shows what can happen if a republic is viewed not as an organizational chart of officials and a producer of party agendas, but as a living and common whole," it swooned. "Obama's goal appears to be to awaken ideals and enthusiasm for freedom, to change something and to steer politics onto a new track."

That looks like a political argument to me and it doesn't mention Obama's body.

Belittling opposing views

British journalists and politicians are as interested in Obama as politicians and journalists everywhere. However, although a few have lost their heads, there's no general mania.

Supporting a mainstream candidate in a democracy does not count as insanity. I think McCain has courted some very odd friends, but I don't think it true or necessary or politic to say that anyone who supports him is evidencing mania.

There's a word for this, but I'm not going to use it

Instead of hard thought about the future, there’s a tingling glowing feeling that under the leadership of a black politician -- and isn't it wonderful he's black? -- everything beastly about Bush's America will go, and the United States will turn into an eco-friendly, peace-loving nation, respectful of the views of foreign countries which won't risk their troops in the war against the Taliban or say a harsh word about Vladimir Putin.

You notice the colour of the man's skin; I look at the content of his character (and that goes for Farrakhan too). Dear me, has the House of Saud sent troops (not that it gives a shit about the lives of its subjects anyway) to the war against the Taliban? And is the White House any less respectful? No, and no, I believe are the correct answers.

More mindreading

Our political class would still like to see Clinton in the White House.

Some Tories do apparently (though I can't believe that they'd declare support for a candidate who hasn't won her party's nomination yet). So that's our political class spoken for.

Excuse me a moment while I do my Richard Littlejohn impression

I won't bore you with the details, just remind you that Britain is not a very democratic country.

If you don't like it here mate, you're welcome to fuck off.

Lastly, what the nice man at the end of this short video says. (It was good politics then, and it's good politics now.)

Update 4:39 pm. If any readers are in the dark about Pajamas Media you can find some useful information from Dennis the Peasant. Also from Dennis Atlas Juggs on Barack Obama. Next to Pammy, Nick is Einstein.


Blogger ejh said...

It's odd, because my chief gripe with the coverage of US elections is the almost complete absence of any discussion of policy (you'll see the word momentum mentioned more often, the sure sign of a vacuous article) but my main reason for preferring Obama to Clinton is character. I think she's manifestly a fraud and a political thug and I don't think he's either.

3/10/2008 10:54:00 AM  
Blogger donpaskini said...

It's not a very good article, but Nick should get credit for writing, "while [Bill Clinton's] attacks on the needy have inspired the Tories to propose bringing his welfare “reforms” to Britain."

Given the Conventional Wisdom on welfare reform, this must surely count as whatever the opposite of a Seal of Dacre is?

It also brought forward the hilarious response in the comments from 'MD':

"I have some very, very, far-left friends and read radical websites on occasion, and I have never, ever heard anyone characterize the '94 welfare reform as "attacks on the needy." Wow."

3/10/2008 11:58:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Nick is now working on the assumption that supporting the least right-wing candidate for the US Presidency and being less keen on bombing other countries than Ronald Reagan makes one anti-American.

Is that a Seal of Dacre or just common or garden losing the plot completely?

3/10/2008 01:14:00 PM  
Blogger ejh said...

Well this lot withdrew from Iraq so presumably those of us cheering this morning must be....

3/10/2008 01:38:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Was that an original article for Pajamas Media? Pajamas is essentially a Republican supporting site. It's CEO, ex-lefty mugged by 9-11 Roger Simon, supports McCain but likes to view himself as independent, despite recycling Republican party talking points with alarming regularity.

3/10/2008 01:50:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

By the way, Simon is also responsible for scripting the worst Woody Allen film ever, Scenes from a Mall.

3/10/2008 01:56:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Nick himself praised Obama a few weeks back:

"it is worth noting that a then relatively obscure senator from Illinois co-sponsored Levin’s Stop Tax Haven Abuse Act and said that ‘we need to crack down on individuals and businesses that abuse our laws, so that those who work hard and play by the rules aren’t disadvantaged’. His name was Barack Obama."

There isn't any point in looking for coherence or consistency in Nick's opinions these days. He just writes down whatever pops into his head, or at least copying things which just popped into the head of a "Harry's Place" contributor.

3/10/2008 04:10:00 PM  
Blogger ejh said...

They have heads?

3/10/2008 04:13:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Shouldn't somebody be addressing Kamm's eulogy in favour of rendition in CiF today, or that just more shooting fish in a barrel?

3/11/2008 11:17:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Blimey, what a puffed-up, arrogant little prick he is. Anyway, a few random jabs:

But there is no supranational sovereign authority that can effectively implement the body of international law.
There's an obvious answer to that, and we know some of the reasons it's not more effective. (And Weaselwang! on the insertion of "sovereign".)

What they would have advised if Osama bin Laden had unaccountably declined to turn himself in was never put to the test.
Did the Taliban not say they would extradite him if the Americans could present a prima facie case, pretty much in accordance with Afghan law? An offer which was not taken up.

There should be no rendition to autocracies whose word on the issue of torture is untrustworthy, such as Syria.
Brings the question of which autocracies can be taken at their word. Of course everyone knows the Syrians are bad eggs, but where do you draw the line, eh? Hmm?

3/11/2008 02:57:00 PM  
Blogger ejh said...

And of course it is not only autocracies whose word on torture is unreliable...

3/11/2008 03:06:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

There should be no rendition to autocracies whose word on the issue of torture is untrustworthy, such as Syria.

Err, haven't the US rendered some to Syria, precisely because they have a rather more relaxed view on torture ...

3/11/2008 03:39:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home