dragging out the scapegoats

[Murthy Yenamandra]

Terrance writes:
> Jerky wrote:
> > Speaking of scapegoats...  would you mind elucidating exactly how "these
> > problems" can be attributed to Clinton? I've heard dozens of right-wing
> > demagogues repeat this accusation over the last week, without any real details.
> The devil is in the details. We can argue about what the Republicans
> did, the impeachment, the Lewinsky matter, the press...and of course
> Clinton had successes too, but this article is, I believe, a fair and
> balanced assessment of Clinton's problems, mistakes, in the second term.
> 
> http://www.biu.ac.il/SOC/besa/meria/whatis.html

This is a link to the home page of the journal, but the specific article
Terrance refers to is (I believe):

    http://www.biu.ac.il/SOC/besa/meria/journal/1999/issue1/jv3n1a5.html

Whether it is a fair and balanced assessment is something everyone needs
to make up their own mind on, but I wouldn't characterize it as saying
that they are problems attributable solely to the clinton administration
(or that the clinton foreign policy was significantly worse than what
came before). I think people overestimate the foreign policy changes
between US administrations - there might be in rhetoric, but in practice
the differences are minimal. I think it's also unfair to say that the
left points at only Bush I and II and not at Clinton - not unless your
definition of the left counts only the DLC.  

> > [Jerky:] As for Chomsky: Yeah.  He stepped over the line.

He has as much (or little) credibility now as ten days ago, depending on
your politics, but I don't see where or how he crossed the line now and
into what.

Murthy

-- 
Murthy Yenamandra                  mailto:yenamand at cs.umn.edu
"I strive to be brief, but I become obscure." - Horace