"Lennon came to represent life, while Mr. Nixon... and Mr. Bush... represent death."
WTF? Does anyone else here think that Vidal, great novelist though he is, is a pompous windbag when he turns his hand to political comments? If you're going to make an lame-brained statement, at least have it make sense.
When darkness overcomes the heart, Lil' Slugger appears...
How does that statement not make sense?
John symbolizes peace and understanding while Nixon and Bush symbolize war and hatred.
In Vidal's mind, yes. But he was saying it as if it was an accepted fact, instead of his rather nonsensical opinion. Nixon and Bush represent the Republican party, the presidency, etc. War and hatred would be low on the scale except to a minority.
When darkness overcomes the heart, Lil' Slugger appears...
Um. No. I actually applauded when he said that. W. is a warmonger, plain and simple.
shareI don't think we need Vidal for us to know that.
When darkness overcomes the heart, Lil' Slugger appears...
Haven't you just contradicted yourself, there?
shareNo. That Bush pushed through his government and country a war on flimsy reasons (WMDs) is beyond doubt (hence making him a warmongerer, or at least a man who didn't look before he leaped). Expanding that into saying Bush was a symbol for death is just absurd.
When darkness overcomes the heart, Lil' Slugger appears...
Well it;s true isn't it - because of him (Bush) a lot have people have died unnecessarily that wouldn't have had a Democrat been President, or possibly even another Republican....and under Nixon the Vietnam war reaged on, and, again many people were unnecessarily killed...it's a fair statement if a little glib.
shareWhile it's true that Republican presidents like Bush and Nixon are responsible for their fair share of wars, it was Kennedy and Johnson, both Democrats, who helped escalate the situation in Vietnam into the full-blown war that Nixon inherented.
And Clinton, while in many ways an admirable and capable president, was quite wishy-washy on the Saddam question, relying on half-measures like a bombing campaign (that achieved zilch besides the deaths of civilians) and sanctions that did nothing but shred the Iraqi economy, lead to the deaths by malnutrition of large numbers of Iraqi children and helped strengthen Saddam's regime. One could argue for the Iraqi War as having finally put an end to a festering sore of a problem (while creating a new one but hey, hindsight is a poor substitute for insight). The reason Clinton isn't remembered for that failure is probably (1) seemed like a moderate and thus good policy at the time (2) it didn't directly affect America, unlike the current occupation, and thus isn't considered worthy of notice.
Vidal really has a selective memory, and his attitude that America went wrong the moment it went beyond the immediate post-Revolution system (regardless of the actual worth of the system in question) is hopelessly blinkered. A great fiction writer (his 'Julian' is one of my favourite novels) but his political writings stink.
When darkness overcomes the heart, Lil' Slugger appears...
Clinton wasn't really left-wing...
"Let the f-ckers work that one out."-John Lennon