<< did i miss it? no one has any comments on the redick way the feds treated the elian situation?
tear gas? guns? fuckmedead! connections. look people we'll fuck you over if you keep getting out of hand.
what the hell is the deal with this situation that it got treated like this?? what the hell is at stake? clinton/cuba/reno. is there some reason why clinton needed to go out in this blaze of (gag) glory? i've not been following this issue because it bored me to tears after a month of it.
thoughts? >>
* * *
>From a political point of view I thought the situation was mishandled. The
govt let it go on far too long; they should have moved as soon as the INS
ruled. And what were they thinking, letting photographers in there? Now, was
it bad, an evil instance of government repression, to enforce a government
ruling not obviously bad in itself (the child arguably belongs in custody of
the surviving parent) with force? No, unless you are an anarchist who thinks
that governmental decisions whould not be enforceable. Outside the anarchist
community that would be a hard sell. Liberals like me and Marxist-Leninists
will agree that there is legitimate state coercion. Perhaps even the latter
will agree that there can be legitimate coercion, in some circumstances, by
the bourgeois state. Thsi might be one of those circumstances. Whether it was
carried out in a prudent way, whether it was politically smart, that is a
different matter. --jks