Watch as right-wing commentators Tucker Carlson and Ralph Peters go to war over who’s defending American values. Carlson suggests making common cause with Vladimir Putin; Peters says Carlson sounds like Charles Lindbergh defending Hitler in 1938; Carlson gets huffy and reminds Peters of his fervent support for the Iraq War; Peters blames Rumsfeld and the Bush administration.
This is the end game of 15 years of feverish “I’m a patriot and you’re an appeaser!” politics on the right. I generally try to turn the heat down in political debates, but I wish this lot many more such arguments. This crapulence was repulsive from the first moment it kicked off in the lead-up to the second Iraq War, and it is crapulent still.
Update: When The Hawks Cry II
Quite intriguing that, although he feinted in that direction, Peters didn’t say that invading Iraq was the right thing to do but was ruined by being done badly. (Churchill’s defence for every one of the screwups he initiated from Gallipoli to Narvik – which, from memory helped deliver him the Prime Ministership). After using that line he admitted also that he may have been wrong. I’m grateful for small mercies.
These people should be far more discriminating in their use of the word “terrorist”. Because the old lefty taunts absolutely applies to them – “just who are the real terrorists here?”.
The mainstream Washington establishment that these people are part of really is corrupt to its core. And nowhere more so than among its foreign policy “experts”, skilled in the practice of self-serving self-delusion.
crapulent?
Crapulent™
well that helped
Actually I am now astonished to find not only that “crapulent” is a real word, but that it relates to intemperance and gross excess, making my usage of it pretty much appropriate. I had though I was inventing it.
I’d heard it before, but thought it was informal.