|
August 16, 2005
Can it be love?
I think so. Although James Wolcott doesn't seem terribly in love with John McCain. Not if this venom-dripping screed is any indicator: I'm watching "maverick" John McCain on Fox News Sunday.There's more such lovey dovey sweetness: McCain will hear none of this defeatist talk. "We can't afford to fail," he emptily intoned, and then cleaved to Bush, claiming that Bush is no cold-hearted monster with no time for a Cindy Sheehan, no:I've been more disappointed in McCain than in any politician ever before (McCain-Feingold came close to high treason), but Wolcott's making him look downright attractive. He's making me like McCain against my better judgment. No question about it; Nightingale Wolcott really can write! But is this any way to help Hillary? Such blind devotion is so touching that I'm almost touched. posted by Eric on 08.16.05 at 10:39 PM
Comments
Hmmm.... Very interesting. This James Wolcott has been an interesting foil of yours in some ways. Yes, I can see that he could have an affinity with Camille Paglia. I stopped reading Salon after Camille Paglia quit writing there. I have always either violently agreed or violently disagreed with her opinions, but I find increasingly now that I agree with many of the judgments that I had at that time disagreed with her. The two I can think of at the moment are her positive assessment of Bush and her negative assessment of McCain. In the 2000 Republican primary, I voted against Bush and for McCain. I admired McCain primarily because of his conduct as a P.O.W. in Viet Nam. That he may be a hawk is a plus in my eyes. Unfortunately, as we saw with the McCain-Feingold Strangulation of Free Political Speech Act, he is also a statist, not that different from Hillary Clinton or other Democrats. I would be hard put to choose between them. Camille Paglia has an excellent visual, intuitive, Right Hemisphere, sense of things. Steven Malcolm Anderson the Lesbian-worshipping man's-man-admiring myth-based egoist · August 17, 2005 02:02 AM The irony is that I really like Wolcott's writing; I just disagree with his thinking. Can such things be? (There are plenty of people who think the same way as Wolcott who bore me to tears. I'd never bother with them, because they don't stimulate my imagination the way Wolcott does. Who knows why?) Eric Scheie · August 18, 2005 10:38 AM |
|
March 2007
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
March 2007
February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
War For Profit
How trying to prevent genocide becomes genocide I Have Not Yet Begun To Fight Wind Boom Isaiah Washington, victim Hippie Shirts A cunning exercise in liberation linguistics? Sometimes unprincipled demagogues are better than principled activists PETA agrees -- with me! The high pitched squeal of small carbon footprints
Links
Site Credits
|
|
That's just was I was thinking as I read this. If McCain can cause this kind of reaction in Wolcott, maybe I need to give McCain another look-see. Wolcott never goes for reasoned argument where a small-minded put-down will do.