Sunday, April 25, 2004

In Which I Sow Further Seeds of Discontent Among The Shaky Coalition That is the Democratic Party 

All the intellectual, "moderate," blogging-type liberals always be hatin' on the leftist protester-types for making the Responsible, Princeton sweatshirt-wearing capital-L Liberal moderates look like a buncha dirty hippies with crude signs making reductive arguments. One such reductive argument many on-the-fence Liberals didn't care to hear was along the lines of "No Blood For Oil."

Surely, said the Liberals to the leftys, that's an Over-Simplification. This is a question of a post-Marxist ideology of Doing Dangerous Things in the Name of Freedom combined with a Cold War obsession with the Good/Bad dichotomy in dealing with the middle east.

Well, Josh Marshall highlights a phrase from the Feb. New Yorker showing that while you can dress it up in fancy-pants political philosophy, it was all about the goddam oil from Day One, if not before:
The top-secret document, written by a high-level N.S.C. official, concerned Cheney’s newly formed Energy Task Force. It directed the N.S.C. staff to coöperate fully with the Energy Task Force as it considered the “melding” of two seemingly unrelated areas of policy: “the review of operational policies towards rogue states,” such as Iraq, and “actions regarding the capture of new and existing oil and gas fields.”
(emphasis Josh's)

Still, of course, we can't attribute non-altruistic motives to supporters of the war, because that would make people feel bad about being responsible for this.

And we wouldn't want anyone to feel bad, would we?

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?Weblog Commenting and Trackback by HaloScan.com