Thursday, February 12, 2004
TOWARDS A UNIFIED THEORY OF NOW
Yesterday, Hugh Hewitt asked the Northern Alliance blogs what relevance Kerry's 1971 testimony is to the presidential election of 2004 (don't look at us funny, he hasn't kicked us out yet, we're not even on probation). My answer: very little. Two reasons:
1. I live in a glass house. I long ago burnt my own diary from that time period (it was appalling! embarrassing! I think it even had smily faces instead of dots over some of the "i"'s). Lileks makes this same point, but in a slightly more mature manner:It's strange to me that the 70's loom so large for both political parties. The Democrats are trying to weave ancient tidbits into a Unified Theory of Bush and the Republicans into a Unified Theory of Kerry. Doesn't everyone know that the swing voters are under 30?I held contrary positions when I was Young and Idealistic, and thought that those were attributes that lent some sort of moral weight to what I thought. (Hah!)You really should read his pithy rendition of said youthful positions if you haven't already--it's trademark Lileks.
2. The election is being held in 2004. As the Fraters' Atomizer huffs,I don’t give a damn what the man said 30 years ago. I also don’t give a damn what President Bush did or said 30 years ago. I care about what he is doing now. This non-stop back and forth business of “He did this” answered by “Oh yeah? Well HE said THIS” is freaking beginning to wear me down.
