Transterrestrial Musings  


Amazon Honor System Click Here to Pay

Space
Alan Boyle (MSNBC)
Space Politics (Jeff Foust)
Space Transport News (Clark Lindsey)
NASA Watch
NASA Space Flight
Hobby Space
A Voyage To Arcturus (Jay Manifold)
Dispatches From The Final Frontier (Michael Belfiore)
Personal Spaceflight (Jeff Foust)
Mars Blog
The Flame Trench (Florida Today)
Space Cynic
Rocket Forge (Michael Mealing)
COTS Watch (Michael Mealing)
Curmudgeon's Corner (Mark Whittington)
Selenian Boondocks
Tales of the Heliosphere
Out Of The Cradle
Space For Commerce (Brian Dunbar)
True Anomaly
Kevin Parkin
The Speculist (Phil Bowermaster)
Spacecraft (Chris Hall)
Space Pragmatism (Dan Schrimpsher)
Eternal Golden Braid (Fred Kiesche)
Carried Away (Dan Schmelzer)
Laughing Wolf (C. Blake Powers)
Chair Force Engineer (Air Force Procurement)
Spacearium
Saturn Follies
JesusPhreaks (Scott Bell)
Journoblogs
The Ombudsgod
Cut On The Bias (Susanna Cornett)
Joanne Jacobs


Site designed by


Powered by
Movable Type
Biting Commentary about Infinity, and Beyond!

« Missed It By That Much... | Main | A Loophole? »

Happy To Be Wrong

Yesterday, in a momentary fit of insanity, I defended Bill Clinton in an email to the Mickster.

Here's what I wrote him:

Mickey--

You quoted Bill Clinton as saying "We need to be creating a world that we would like to live in when we're not the biggest power on the block," and implied that it was semantically equivalent to Howard Dean's statement. Now, I'm normally the last person to defend Bill Clinton (or Chris "the weasel" Lehane), but I don't see the two statements as equivalent. Like most of Mr. Clinton's pronouncements, it is somewhat ambiguous and lawyerly.

He's saying that we ought to build a world as though we weren't the most powerful nation in it, even though we are. I don't infer that he's saying that we necessarily may not be in the future (or, of course, that he's not saying that either--as I said, ambiguous). That is, he's making a moral imprecation, not a practical recommendation. Sort of like the Golden Rule.

Dean's statement was much more explicit, and therefore more attackable.

Mark this day--I'll probably never defend Mr. Clinton again (and in fact, I don't agree with his comment, or at least what he actually means by it, which is just more of the transnational gooiness that he and Ms. Albright gave us, and got us into this mess).

Happily, he set me straight. (Sorry, no permalink. It's near the top now, but for archival purposes it's the April 30 posting.)

When provided the full context, I agree that it's clear that Mr. Clinton did mean exactly what Governor Dean said--that we will decline, and we should prepare for it. I'm relieved to know that on the rare occasion that I defend the ex-sinkmeister, that I'm wrong.

Posted by Rand Simberg at May 01, 2003 09:24 AM
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.transterrestrial.com/mt-diagnostics.cgi/1188

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference this post from Transterrestrial Musings.
Comments

This country will someday "decline", just as someday we are all going to die. The problem with statements like Dean's and Clinton's is not a recognition of that fact of life, but they think we should voluntarily hasten that decline along. Dean in particular seems to think that such decline is a good national policy we should embrace. He's running to be for this country was Kevorkian was for medicine.

Posted by Raoul Ortega at May 1, 2003 12:37 PM


Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments: