Cross Country: More on Schlesinger, Iraq and Gore
More opinions pieces from other papers across the nation:
Schlesinger: The NY Post writes kind words about Arthur Schlesinger, who wrote a column for the newspaper from 1949 through the 1950s, even though there "came a point where he was unable to find an admiring word to say about any Republicans" ... the New York Sun links to a column Schlesinger wrote for its newspaper in which he claimed Alexander Hamilton, whose legacy has recently been claimed by conservatives, would have sided with today's liberals: He "ended his piece by calling on New Yorkers to applaud the Manhattan Institute for celebrating 'the father of big government in America.'"
Iraq: The San Francisco Chronicle argues that "Congress should not be timid about asserting its constitutional authority on matters of war," and urges lawmakers to repeal the 2002 resolution authorizing the invasion or Iraq ...the Baltimore Sun offers interpretations as to why the Bush administration has decided to hold talks on Iraq with Iran and Syria. Among them: "Some people in the administration are realizing that the options on Iraq are running out," and, "A lot of people in Washington are getting seriously worried about Afghanistan."
Gore: The Detroit Free Press offers some scattered thoughts on Al Gore, including: "If Al Gore lived in the woods, sans electricity and subsisting on berries and grub worms, (right) wingers would still find fault with him," and "He should take a cue from Jimmy Carter and stay out of politics; he'll do more good than harm as an activist than a politician."
The Christian Science Monitor, alarmed by the recent acceptance of nuclear energy as a way to offset global warming, argues that we need stronger safety regulations for nuclear power plants.
The Philadelphia Inquirer applauds plans to build a memorial to the slaves George Washington owned when he lived in Philadelphia.
By Rob Anderson |
March 2, 2007; 7:40 AM ET
Previous: Big Five: Another Intelligence Mishap? |
Next: "I Was Wrong" Watch
Posted by: Jeff-for-progress | March 5, 2007 07:11 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.
This flap over Gore is as absurd as the one over whether Obama is black enough. In both cases I smell a political agenda based on fear. Fear that Gore would be the strongest candidate the Democrats could put up in 2008 on one hand and fear that Obama might be able to wrest the nomination away from the political establishment on the other. Actually, Gore-Obama represent together a healthy turning of the page on the old politics behind this attack-- even if the ticket did not win in the general election it would be worthwhile to repudiate the reactionary elements in both parties that are attacking them. Or to turn Barry Goldwater on his head-- the defense of moderation in the face of the vice of extremism is a virtue.