Thursday, September 16, 2004

Tell It Betsy!

Here's Betsy's take on Dan Rather's descent into cloud cuckoo land. She says it better than I.

"In an interview with the New York Observer, Rather also uses the phrase "fundamental truth." This is 1960s babble that amounts to saying: I, as a liberal, can tell lies for the greater good; my surface dishonesty conveys a deeper truth. Rather is falling back on the Noble Lie -- the idea that the enlightened are entitled to heap fables upon the hoi polloi for the sake of preserving proper order.

The transcendent truth that mitigates Rather's faked-up memos is apparently that Bush missed a physical examination over three decades ago -- not exactly the justification for the Noble Lie Plato envisioned in The Republic. Why allegations about a missed physical and truncated National Guard service trouble Rather so deeply when Bill Clinton's draft-dodging did not is another question Rather isn't likely to answer. "

Read the rest. It seems that this is the new approach to everything the liberals believe. I see a grand unity here. Kitty Kelley's gossip is fine because it's a core truth. Wishful thinking that the UN and France might support a Kerry-led action into Iraq, despite all evidence to the contrary, is fine because it says something about a core truth about how we might wish to conduct foreign affairs. Post-modern literary criticism far removed from anything the author may have intended is fine because it expresses a core truth about what the reader feels about the book. Demagogic deceptions about outsourcing or Social Security are fine, because the core truth is that liberals care more about the unemployed and elderly. Lies about Christmas in Cambodia are fine because there is a core truth about intervention in Nicaragua that Kerry wanted to make.

We're in the postmodernist world now and truth is really just an elastic concept. Woe is us, if this is true. And, hey, it doesn't matter if it isn't, because it's my core truth.


Blogger TmjUtah said...

Wichita -

I am intrigued by just what the news story leads will be one week after the election; it's going to be Bush, I think. The only question is by how much.

What will the effect be on the surviving Democrats in D.C.? Will it be post-2002 all over again? Can they find someone further left than Pelosi to assign a leadership position as a 'centrist'?....or will they decide that it's time to stop whining and get back into governance as duty and not the endless quest for power?

I kind of hope the latter. Can you imagine the look on the face of the Iranian cabinet when Ted Kennedy goes on live TV to say "We can't concentrate on domestic pork until after we take out the axis of evil!"?

The bad guys will know that times are going to be really tough after that.

9:29 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home