Comments on: I Hate Cold War Liberalism

By: Gotham Image

Gotham Image — Thu, 11 May 2006 13:17:55 +0000

Beinart means well. That’s all that counts.

By: R J Stove

R J Stove — Tue, 02 May 2006 03:12:42 +0000

Now, thanks to Daniel McCarthy’s Wikipedia link, I know why Scoop Jackson was called Scoop. I’d wondered about this for years.

By: Jason

Jason — Mon, 01 May 2006 23:10:40 +0000

I didn’t read the story, but Beinart is beginning to sound like a broken record. Apparently, he is of the belief that if you just keep repeating a moronic idea that nobody really likes then it will catch on.

By: Maximos

Maximos — Mon, 01 May 2006 19:57:21 +0000

Good God, that’s awful. May God save us form whatever metasticization of liberalism they’re cooking up.

By: Charley

Charley — Mon, 01 May 2006 13:42:49 +0000

I just finished reading Beinart’s article in the NY Times magazine and was also appalled at the obvious logical flaws. He thinks the Democrats need to go back to cold-war “liberalism” as their historical vision for US foreign policy and pretty much fails to mention that those policies met their inevitable and ignominious end in the rice paddies of Vietnam.

Buried in Beinart’s “analysis” is a reference to a Democrat who perhaps can provide a historical reference point for a new Democratic US foreign policy – Henry A. Wallace. Here’s Wallace in his speech Century of the Common Man during WWII: “…when the time of peace comes, The citizen will again have a duty, the supreme duty of sacrificing the lesser interest for the greater interest of the general welfare. Those who write the peace must think of the whole world. There can be no privileged peoples. We ourselves in the United States are no more a master race than the Nazis. And we can not perpetuate economic warfare without planting the seeds of military warfare. We must use our power at the peace table to build an economic peace that is just, charitable and enduring.”