Jennifer Rubin’s political hysterics, episode MDCCC: on the Iranian Treaty

The Reactionary Political Template remains the same across generations: The Salem Witch Trials, the Palmer Raids, the utterly shameful Japanese Internment and last, but not least, the political rise of McCarthy and his allies whose slogan was ‘a generation of treason’. Here is that very idea in one word: capitulation in Ms. Rubin’s essay, and for those of us old enough to recall, absent any readers of history, this is more of the same of the Cold War chatter that dominated debate over any negotiation, any treaty with the Soviet Union. Just a small adjustment as to persons,  places and  historical time, and the demands of this shopworn formula are met.  That implacable enemy that could not reason, nor exercise a kind of self-interest common to human beings, are not the Soviets but the Iranians: they are the ideological monsters of this historical moment! While not forgetting the resurgent Russian Bear!
Besides Ms. Rubin’s rather subdued propagandizing, add to the mix the Nihilist Republican’s pronouncements of ideological solidarity in opposition to the president: Senator Tom Cotton and his forty six colleagues. No surprise! But those Republicans have made a wager on the 36.6 % of the American electorate that voted in 2014, the slimmest of political margins, to say the least. Recall the ham handed Impeachment of Bill Clinton as another model of Republican Nihilism: with each passing week the President’s popularity rose in direct proportion to that manufactured political melodrama. As Sen. Cotton, protege of Harvey Mansfield and William Kristol, pursues his quixotic crusade against the Iranian Treaty and the President, his ignorance, self-willed or otherwise, of the political fate of Speaker Gingrich and a host of Republican and Democrats, who cast their lot with those dismal manufactured political theatrics, is a snare which will eventually lead to a heavy political cost: a victory for the Democrats in 2016?

Political Observer

About stephenkmacksd

Rootless cosmopolitan,down at heels intellectual;would be writer. 'Polemic is a discourse of conflict, whose effect depends on a delicate balance between the requirements of truth and the enticements of anger, the duty to argue and the zest to inflame. Its rhetoric allows, even enforces, a certain figurative licence. Like epitaphs in Johnson’s adage, it is not under oath.'
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.