Print

Print


The problem with George Bush is that he is an extremely limited person
who owes his position to gender and class status--the same, by the way,
is true of his predecessor, former president Bush the elder, who must be
one of the most clueless [if not the most stupid, but then there was
Reagan] people ever to serve as a senior government official in this
country.

I'm not sure what point you were making?
Nancy


Date sent:              Fri, 6 Dec 2002 15:52:50 -0500
Send reply to:          "T. S. Eliot Discussion forum." <[log in to unmask]>
From:                   Jacek Niecko <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:                Re: OT: Canada and Vietnam (was, Marianne Moore poem in WWII)
To:                     [log in to unmask]

The problem with Mrs. Rice is simply that she is an extremely limited
person who owes her position exclusively to her ethnic and gender
status--the same, by the way, is true of her predecessor of sorts--former
Secretary of State Madeleine Albright who must be by far one of the most
stupid people ever selected to serve as a senior government official in
this country.

Jacek Niecko
Washington, DC
----- Original Message -----
From: <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 3:11 PM
Subject: Re: OT: Canada and Vietnam (was, Marianne Moore poem in
WWII)


> > From: Nancy Gish [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> >
> > I really don't think you can blame feminism for Condi Rice any more
> > than you could praise masculism for Martin Luther King or Gandhi or
> > Viet Nam objectors who went to Canada.
> >
>
> I think your grouping of these latter three together overlooks an
important point.
>
> ML King and Gandhi fought repressive systems from within through passive
resistance, which included accepting the punishment meted out by the
oppressors and using that punishment to illustrate the injustice of what
was being done.  Those who went to Canada to avoid the Vietnam draft --
whatever their degree of principle, which presumably varied -- were
engaging in something different.  Muhammad Ali would be the better example
to complete your triad, as he remained in the country and thus remained
subject to the law he was challenging (and was ultimately vindicated,
albeit on dubious technical grounds unworthy of the principle he was
standing for.)  That's my view of it, anyway. > > Tom K