Farewell. The Flying Pig Has Left The Building.

Steve Hynd, August 16, 2012

After four years on the Typepad site, eight years total blogging, Newshoggers is closing it's doors today. We've been coasting the last year or so, with many of us moving on to bigger projects (Hey, Eric!) or simply running out of blogging enthusiasm, and it's time to give the old flying pig a rest.

We've done okay over those eight years, although never being quite PC enough to gain wider acceptance from the partisan "party right or wrong" crowds. We like to think we moved political conversations a little, on the ever-present wish to rush to war with Iran, on the need for a real Left that isn't licking corporatist Dem boots every cycle, on America's foreign misadventures in Afghanistan and Iraq. We like to think we made a small difference while writing under that flying pig banner. We did pretty good for a bunch with no ties to big-party apparatuses or think tanks.

Those eight years of blogging will still exist. Because we're ending this typepad account, we've been archiving the typepad blog here. And the original blogger archive is still here. There will still be new content from the old 'hoggers crew too. Ron writes for The Moderate Voice, I post at The Agonist and Eric Martin's lucid foreign policy thoughts can be read at Democracy Arsenal.

I'd like to thank all our regular commenters, readers and the other bloggers who regularly linked to our posts over the years to agree or disagree. You all made writing for 'hoggers an amazingly fun and stimulating experience.

Thank you very much.

Note: This is an archive copy of Newshoggers. Most of the pictures are gone but the words are all here. There may be some occasional new content, John may do some posts and Ron will cross post some of his contributions to The Moderate Voice so check back.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wednesday, May 21, 2008

Lieberman channels his inner neocon

By Libby



There was a time in my life when lunatic ravings like this would have been regulated to street corners in Times Square. Now they get prime real estate at the Wall St. Journal. Joe Lieberman laments the loss of 'his' former party. Choosing a quote out of this exercise in overblown inanity at random:

This was the Democratic Party of Harry Truman, who pledged that "it must be the policy of the United States to support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures."



And this was the Democratic Party of John F. Kennedy, who promised in his inaugural address that the United States would "pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, to assure the survival and the success of freedom."

The key words in the first graf would be "resisting attempted subjugation." That might imply to a sane mind that intervention would be appropriate when there's an active resistance to tyranny that needs help. Not so much to interjecting military interference in a tyranny where the oppressed aren't already fighting.



As for JFK, I don't think he means what Joe thinks he means. Unlike our current president and his supporting cast of clueless neocons, JFK actually fought in a war. He understood the underlying meaning of the claim. The words weren't just a slogan designed to excuse unilateral aggression. I shudder to think what might have happened in the Bay of Pigs if Bush had been president then.



I don't suggest you read the rest. The short version is "Oh no, I guess I finally have to admit I'm really a George Bush Republican." Steve Benen as usual sums it up perfectly in a post that should be read in full.



"It�s not that Lieberman has changed, necessarily, but rather it�s that his hackery has become more intense and bellicose. He�s gone from being a largely incoherent neocon to being a largely incoherent belligerent neocon."



2 comments:

  1. >>This was the Democratic Party of Harry Truman, who pledged that "it must be the policy of the United States to support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures."
    Sounds like Harry wouldn't have been happy about the CIA employing Saddam Hussein, or happy that, for decades, the US considered Saddam an ally.
    >>And this was the Democratic Party of John F. Kennedy, who promised in his inaugural address that the United States would "pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, to assure the survival and the success of freedom."
    Problem is, since Kennedy said this, the definition of 'freedom' has been changed to 'support of the policies of the fascist far-right wing of the Republican Party'.

    ReplyDelete