George W. Churchill?
























I'm sick and tired of all these silly WWII analogies that have been applied by the Rumsfeld and Company to spin the war in Iraq (and the war on terrorism). I'm writing a long article on the topic which will be published next month. But I do want to share with you this Letter to the Editor that appeared in The Economist in May:

SIR– Please do not ever mention George Bush. And Winston Churchill in the same sentence again, even if you must break all the rules of grammar to do so.

Steve Pettit

California


And another short Letter to the Editor on the same subject in Time magazine:

Churchill and Bush can both be considered wartime leaders, just as Secretariat and Mr. Ed were both horses.

JAMES RHODES

Norman, Okla.


Exactly my sentiments.

Comments

Anonymous said…
WH speechwriters love to cook up some Chicken McChurchill speeches for base to scarf down - whenever Dubya is supposed convey 'resolve' etc.


It's unfortunate that they do this - even Olmert seemed to try to mimic the Churchill cadence in speech to the Congress - as if that were a natural thing to do.

In many ways that was refreshing - seeing that other countries too were subject to Churchill imitatators.

Churchill was unique - Is this all Republican payback for Democrats mimicing JFK all those years?

Churchill was a better writer than Bush - But maybe Bush can write about his days in the National Guard = and see if it can compete with Churchill's military memoirs.
9:45 PM
Anonymous said…
We will fight the besechers, both on the beach and against the retreaters. We will confront the suiciders with all our Almighties. We shall not burn flags nor fail our children. We'll never contend her.

-George Dubya Churchill
4:59 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Pundits who screw-up: No big deal...

Image
Matt Barganier desconstructs Andrew Sullivan's mea sorta culpa on Iraq in Time magazine (Sullivan seen above in a thoughtful pose on Bill Maher's "Real Time"). There have been many of those in recent weeks (including by WFB and Fukuyama ). In an commentary published last year, Oops! I helped start a War which was about one of the earlier apologizing-war-aplogists, I pointed out to the contrast between the way the losers who operate in the market (including financial analysts) are punished and the reality in which the losers in the political game (including foreign policy analysts) rarely get punished: Imagine: for a few years you were investing the money you had saved for your daughter's college education in one of those moderately conservative plans that provided some increase in the value of the investment without exposing it to major risks. But then your financial planner – let's call him Ken P. – got in touch with you and came up with a really great ide...
Read more

When will Israel attack Iran?

Image
I'm not an "Intelligence analyst" and I don't play one on television. But I urge you to study the following items: 1. Seymour Hersh new piece in The New Yorker, "The Next Act: Is a damaged Administration less likely to attack Iran, or more?" 2. Tony Karon's "Israel's Domestic Political Games Raises the Danger of a U.S.-Iran War." 3. Aluf Benn's "Olmert's Drums of War" in Haaretz . 4. Bush:I would understand if Israel chose to attack Iran. 5. Michael Oren's op-ed piece in the Wall Street Journal on November 16 which is only accessible to subscribers. So here are a few interesting quotes: Much like 1967, Israel faces a Middle Eastern leader who has repeatedly sworn to wipe it off the map, and to that end is assiduously trying to acquire nuclear weapons. Like Nasser, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad can cripple Israel economically by keeping it in a state of alert, driving away foreign investment and tourism. In the absence of interna...
Read more