Bell Curve The Law Talking Guy Raised by Republicans U.S. West
Well, he's kind of had it in for me ever since I accidentally ran over his dog. Actually, replace "accidentally" with "repeatedly," and replace "dog" with "son."

Saturday, September 20, 2008

Tony Blair on the Daily Show

Anybody else see Tony Blair on the daily show? Apparently he is teaching some course on religion about faith and globalization. As a recently converted Roman Catholic, Tony Blair has interesting views about religion. (Stewart did not ask Blair if he believed that birth control was morally indefensible, which is the position of his new church). But the truth is that Tony Blair sounded, well, not very smart. In fact, his embrace of GWBush in the interview was kind of odd, until you realize that they actually do BOTH have the same very limited worldview that has decided that we are in the middle of some sort of cosmic clash between democracy and Islamic fundamentalism that parallels WWII with its significance. That's the Lieberman position too, by the way. Repeatedly, Blair said "9/11 changed everything." That is very intellectually lazy. September 11th was the bloodiest of a string of terrorist actions stretching from the 1960s through the bombings in Spain and London, but it was of the same type. It changed us; it didn't change them. I came away with the impression that Tony Blair just isn't that bright after all.

And that explains an awful lot.


Raised By Republicans said...

I have to say that I had a similar impression. Although it was clear that Blair understands the Bush view of the war on terror much better than Bush does that's not a very high bar. It makes you wonder what would have happened in 2003 if the UK had refused to go go along with the US in the invasion of Iraq. Would Bush have done it? What would public British opposition have done to the debate in Congress?

USwest said...

I had the same impression. He is sort of a bumbling, confused "Hugh Grant" type who can't get a sentence out. Jon was talking more than Blair. You have to wonder what was going through Jon's head. Somthing like, "geeze this isthe guy who came up woth teh "Thrid Way?"

Lucky for Blair, he has this British accent thing, which makes his bumbling much less crass and a bit more endearing than that of our own GW. I realized lasst night just how much like Bush he really was. The British must have managed to cover it up for the first 4 years when the guy was paired with Clinton.

I was also struck at how different he looks. I would have had a hard time recognizing him had I not known it was him. Amazing how these guys age over 1o years.

In fact, I couldn't watch the whole thing because it was just a waste of time.

Raised By Republicans said...

The "Third Way" is a concept of moderate social democracy that has been widespread throughout Western Europe. I'm not sure who originally coined the term but I doubt Blair can claim to have come up with it. Arguably the first Socialist or Social Democratic party to govern from the middle (at least as the locals define the middle) might have been Mitterand in the later part of his Presidency.

Raised By Republicans said...

I'm still interested in having a conversation about what we think would have happened in 2003 if Blair had publicly opposed the invasion of Iraq.

I suppose then Bush would have made a big deal about Australian support (just like in Vietnam).

The Law Talking Guy said...

I said in 2003 and will repeat that I believe Blair had the ability to stop the invasion. IF he had stood up against it, that would have given the Democrats in Congress the ammunition and backbone to oppose the invasion - something that Jacques Chirac's (correct) opinion did not give them after the demonization of France by Fox News and the GOP.

The Law Talking Guy said...

The UK also could have blocked any UN resolution.

USwest said...

Had Blair done what he claimed he was doing, "working to influence" Bush, had he opposed the war in 2003, I am willing to bet that the US would not have gone to war and Bush may not have gotten a 2nd term. The nay sayers, like France and Germany may have gotten more traction had the UK joined in. Spain may not have gotten involved either. And the focus would have remained on Afghanistan where everyone was in agreement.

As for Blair and Stewart, the other possibility is that he isn't stupid, but that he was nervous because he was trying to be clever since the Daily Show is a "comedy" show. You know how you feel that you have to be "on" . Maybe he was just, "off" for that hour.

The Law Talking Guy said...

You would think that a man who had been prime minister of England for a decade would be okay with being "on" for a basic cable interview with a comedian.

Pombat said...

He wasn't that great was he? Seemed unsure of exactly what to say and when, although he improved a little after the break (only a little). At least he seemed to've lost his usual smarminess and freaky body language though (body language: watching him, his body language was always correct, 'trust me' style, but it looked forced to me, like he was faking, which always made me question what his true body language would've been. Needless to say, never voted for him).

I'm inclined to agree that the UK saying no to Iraq could've prevented it all. A united no-Iraq Europe could well have given Bush pause, and other smaller-force countries such as Australia would likely have joined the no bunch. UN resolution - yep, UK could've voted no there too, Bush may've ignored that though.