Sunday, September 16, 2007
The "rarely challenged" Zbigniew Brzezinski
The New York Times Book Review has a cutesy graphic that gently mocks the problem of "authorial confusion" -- authors who are easily confused for other authors (such as, for example, Robert Frank, the author of Richestan, and Robert Frank, author of Falling Behind). One supposedly easy to confuse author is the architect of the Carter administration's foreign policy, Zbigniew Brzezinski. The authors of the graphic characterize him as a "rarely challenged foreign policy aficionado" (click to enlarge).
Zbigniew Brzezinski is "rarely challenged?" Only at the New York Times.
5 Comments:
By 
, at
Sun Sep 16, 01:30:00 PM:
"Zbigniew Brzezinski is 'rarely challenged?' Only at the New York Times."
Not so fast, big guy. You need to read a bunch of the other descriptions in the picture. It's obviously parody, and some pretty funny stuff, at that.
"Witold Rybczynski: vowel-challenged architecture aficionado"
In other words, whoever wrote it recognizes that Brzezinski is one of the most challenged people in the field, hence the parody.
Don't you remember what your psychiatrist told you last week?
"No ideological demagoguery on Sundays."
Wise man.
By 
A Jacksonian, at
Sun Sep 16, 02:47:00 PM:
Is this a game anyone can play, or is the NYT the only decider of what is or is not valid criticism of Mr. Z?
I gots lotsa problems with Mr.Z, not only being a 'realist' but also being clueless as to what to do with radical Islam. He was the one who wanted to start looking for 'moderate' 'radicals' of the Islamic sort... that meme, alone, has cost the US and the world more lives than I care to think about because residents of the Oval Office suddenly think the idea of diplomacy is so swell. But then I am only *just* an American citizen, not some poo-bah that adores supporting such 'moderates' because they just might kill you a bit less quickly than the 'radicals'. You can *talk* to the 'moderates' FIRST, then they kill you.
By , at
Sun Sep 16, 07:59:00 PM:
a jacksonian:
I despise B's damngerously simplistic view of the world as much as anyone. However, let's not place all the blame on him regarding the less radical radical Muslims.
It would be my bet that he was mirroring the views of a good portion of the Arabists in the State Department and intelligence agencies.
PS. I am in reading Bill Gertz's "Enemies". I have not yet come to anything regarding the Arabists influence, but it is clear that the U.S. leadership was being influenced by those in government not working in the best interests of the US. This begs the question - If you are truly working, not as a polician but as a patriot, with the best interests of the country in mind - how can you not act upon, the advice of your "neutral" State Department and intelligence agencies. You, as the leader, get the blame for egregious "mistakes" in foreign policy, while the analysts stay on staff to continue to affect the safety of the country.
By , at
Sun Sep 16, 08:24:00 PM:
Who cares...his daughter Mika is pretty hot.
By Assistant Village Idiot, at
Sun Sep 16, 09:30:00 PM:
I didn't take it that way, Merc. I thought that ZB being "rarely challenged" was meant at face value, to contrast to the other two, who are "challenged" in some way. As evidence, zip in "often-challenged" into ZB's descriptor and it is neither more nor less funny. They had a choice of two equal, and went for the one they meant.
