News analysis from The NY Times makes me ponder what exactly could be deemed as not news analysis in The NY Times.
In this piece Robin Toner analyzes the:
“striking change for a party that has, on many occasions over many years, seemed to be on the defensive on national security issues.”
Much of this defensiveness harks back to Vietnam and:
“the Republican advantage on those issues has been a defining feature of American politics. Many Democrats felt they needed to prove, again and again, that their party was tough enough to defend the nation’s interests — to fight the notion, often stoked by Republicans that Democrats were the party of George McGovern and the nuclear freeze.”
That is the basic gist of the analysis in that a possible new day is dawning for the Democrat party. I wonder as I read this “analysis” if the “stoking” by Republicans is more that the “stoking” was more representative of reality. The “stoking” of Republicans was more of a demonstration of how far astray the Democrats had become from what a defense policy that actually works in favor of the
I am reminded of commenting back and forth with someone at a site recently regarding the various votes, won or lost in the Democrats attempt at implementing a timeline of retreat. The commenter I was writing to finished of his last comment to me with (I paraphrase), ‘stick with your Republican sinking boat if you want….’ To which I ended my final comment back that ‘this isn’t and shouldn’t be about a parties boat sinking because it is ultimately not two boats we are in, but the same “sinking” boat as a nation that just might sink.’
The point of view of this “analysis” brings home to me the underlying reality that
Please give this Post/Blog a Vote -
|