Regarding my earlier post today ("Jonathan Alter Gets It Wrong"), I have to comment on the way in which Alter defines his own use of the word imperialism as a "straightforward description" whereas it is "false" or merely a "left-wing epithet" when used by others in reference to our little overseas adventures in Korea or Vietnam. This reminds me of when Chris Matthews in 2005 referred to those who did not like Bush at the time as "the real whack-jobs, maybe on the left". What they are talking about is the far left, not supposedly reasonable people like themselves who probably vote for democrats at least once in a while.

No matter that the far left was correct and way out ahead of the rest of the country, and these two pundits, on so many thing about our Iraqi misadventure. The far left was the first to identify the current Iraq War as a geopolitical oil grab. The far left was the first to protest this war when upwards of 70% of Americans were cheering it on. The far left was the first large demographic in this country to agree that the mission declared by Bush, to build a unified and democratic US ally in the mideast, was doomed to failure. Even some astute democrats were able to predict sectarian difficulties in Iraq way back in 2002 when BushCo was promising a cakewalk.

Yet supposedly reasonable "mainstream" commentators like Alter and Matthews continue to hold tight to their unfounded biases against the left, especially the oh-so-spooky-run-away far left. What exactly are they so afraid of that they can't give credit and credence where credit is due?