you'd almost think that somewhere out there in the happy valley that conservatives live in when they inhale those special ideological sentences that the assumption is abroad that there could not possibly have been any rational basis for opposing the neo-fascist policies of the bush 2 administration and that such opposition as there was driven by some imaginary resentment shaped along partisan lines. it also appears that this peculiar scenario is situated as a description of normal political engagement.
this scenario concerning this characterization of "normal" political engagement is plausible because it amounts to a projection onto a largely imaginary Other of attributes which are the negative of those held by people who allow themselves to be interpellated (positioned by) conservative ideological statements.
this is an old feature of contemporary american neo-fascism by now. it's function has consistently been to erase the radical character of american neo-fascist conservatism (which is not all conservatism btw) by making it appear reactive....o They already do x, o They already think y...
so you have this bizarre recurrent claim that somehow or another it is "hypocrisy" for "liberals" to not oppose the libya thing when they opposed iraq....the ludicrous empirical claim subtending that----one of the lines ace has been trying to defend with predictably incoherent results---is to attempt to make equivalences between the invasion of iraq and the action over libya. that this is a reality-optional statement apparently does nothing to diminsh the fun that some conservatives seem to have repeating it.
take marv's steaming little fetid heap of reality-optional projection for example....
actually, maybe take something interesting instead.
on another note....
michael tomasky has an interesting-ish edito in this morning's guardian:
Obama's maddening silence | Michael Tomasky | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk
in which he expresses and exasperated puzzlement over the fact that obama hasn't made a national teevee address to explain the libya action.
do you think such a statement is necessary?
i can't remember if clinton made a speech(es) that explained the action in bosnia-herzigovina or not....did he? that would seem a more obvious precedent for communication strategy than the actions tomasky points to...