"At a minimum, a head of state should have a head", esta terá sido a frase proferida por Vladimir Putin a propósito de Hillary Clinton na sequência desta ter dito que este "doesn't have a soul". A Hillary é tão boa que até me faz encontrar pontos de concordância com o tiranete russo.
Entretanto, Andrew Sullivan tem mais um texto arrasador para certa direita e para a ignorância da mesma (e que me leva a mim, que sou de direita, a cada vez ter menos pena do que acontece pelos lados da direita norte-americana):
Entretanto, Andrew Sullivan tem mais um texto arrasador para certa direita e para a ignorância da mesma (e que me leva a mim, que sou de direita, a cada vez ter menos pena do que acontece pelos lados da direita norte-americana):
What people fail to understand is that in politics, words are also substance. The ability to inspire people is not inherently a dangerous phenomenon. It is sometimes critical to effective governance. Conservatives used to understand this. Perhaps Churchill's greatest actual weapon was the English language. It did things no bureaucrat, soldier, armament, or policy could do. The core of Ronald Reagan's success was his rhetorical ability to reach over the heads of the Washington process to the people who can force Washington to change: the American people. And I don't recall conservatives decrying the rhetoric of hope reacting to George W. Bush's inspired speeches after 9/11.
Look: flim-flam and emotional hysteria are dangerous things. There are moments when Obama's rhetoric gets the better of his common sense. But the record shows that he also does have common sense - more common sense than Charles Krauthammer or me when it came to predicting the practical consequences of an Iraq occupation. And if a potential president has a head on his shoulders and is able to inspire millions, what on earth is wrong with that?
|