<html><head><style type="text/css"><!-- DIV {margin:0px;} --></style></head><body><div style="font-family:times new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:12pt"><DIV>I don't put much stock in the moral distinction between Bush & Obama. Moralism was Bush's political persona, while pragmatism is Obama's. They're both pragmatists in service of corporate interests.<BR></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><BR>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: 13px"><FONT size=2 face=Tahoma>
<HR SIZE=1>
<B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">From:</SPAN></B> C. G. Estabrook <galliher@illinois.edu><BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">To:</SPAN></B> Jenifer Cartwright <jencart13@yahoo.com><BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Cc:</SPAN></B> David Green <davegreen84@yahoo.com>; Peace Discuss <peace-discuss@lists.chambana.net><BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Sent:</SPAN></B> Tue, August 3, 2010 10:47:55 PM<BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Subject:</SPAN></B> Re: [Peace-discuss] Andrew Bacevich -- check this out!!<BR></FONT><BR>Bacevich' "mature" position - that apparently presented in his new book,<BR>"Washington Rules: America’s Path to Permanent War" - can't be called "middle of<BR>the road."<BR><BR>Michael Lind writes, "Although he is a traditionalist conservative, or<BR>'paleoconservative,' Bacevich has found his audience chiefly on the liberal left..."<BR><BR>Bacevich thinks, e.g., Obama more deserving of contempt
than Bush.<BR><BR>Also, why did the European powers "rethink the policy of endless war"? After <BR>they almost destroyed themselves twice in the 20th century, their populations <BR>insisted on a transnational social democratic arrangement. We haven't done that <BR>here, and as a result our government and business "community" have done a good <BR>deal to undermine the European model.<BR><BR><BR>On 8/3/10 1:25 AM, Jenifer Cartwright wrote:<BR>> One of MY main goals is to get US decision makers to rethink the policy of<BR>> endless war, much as the European powers have done. Andrew Bacevich -- middle<BR>> of the road ex army guy -- is getting far more media attention, and he's<BR>> being taken more seriously than somebody from the radical left, and his<BR>> message just may make a difference. I'm hoping it's a NYT Bestseller.<BR>> --Jenifer<BR>><BR>> --- On *Mon, 8/2/10, David Green /<<A
href="mailto:davegreen84@yahoo.com" ymailto="mailto:davegreen84@yahoo.com">davegreen84@yahoo.com</A>>/* wrote:<BR>><BR>><BR>> From: David Green <<A href="mailto:davegreen84@yahoo.com" ymailto="mailto:davegreen84@yahoo.com">davegreen84@yahoo.com</A>> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Andrew<BR>> Bacevich -- check this out!! To: "C. G. Estabrook" <<A href="mailto:galliher@illinois.edu" ymailto="mailto:galliher@illinois.edu">galliher@illinois.edu</A>>,<BR>> "Jenifer Cartwright" <<A href="mailto:jencart13@yahoo.com" ymailto="mailto:jencart13@yahoo.com">jencart13@yahoo.com</A>> Cc: "Peace Discuss"<BR>> <<A href="mailto:peace-discuss@lists.chambana.net" ymailto="mailto:peace-discuss@lists.chambana.net">peace-discuss@lists.chambana.net</A>> Date: Monday, August 2, 2010, 7:52 PM<BR>><BR>> The "progressive" left loves to be all over any apparent crack in the<BR>> establishment facade. Sometimes, it's worthwhile in
terms of an insider<BR>> perspective, cf., during the Bush Admin. But I think there's more than that<BR>> going on--the residual need for many on the left to show that they're not<BR>> really radical--that "respectable" people agree with them. And Bacevich has<BR>> found his niche there. He doesn't get any tough questions from Goodman,<BR>> except somewhat belatedly and pointlessly at the end. I'm not sure what<BR>> they're thinking interviewing this man in a softball match, or maybe I am<BR>> sure and want to cut Goodman some slack. DG<BR>><BR>><BR></DIV></DIV></div><br>
</body></html>