Back from a brief sabbatical, Thomas Friedman of the New York Times - an early, eloquent supporter of the preemptive war on Iraq - wrote yesterday that he doesn't know what is "salvageable there anymore."
"This war has been hugely mismanaged by this administration, in the face of clear advice to the contrary at every stage," he continues, "and as a result the range of decent outcomes in Iraq has been narrowed and the tools we have to bring even those about are more limited than ever."
Friedman goes on to say that every time the Bush White House had a choice between "doing the right thing in the war on terrorism or siding with its political base and ideology, it chose its base and idology."
Finally, he urges that "we immediately get the Democratic and Republican politics out of this policy...."
The naivete of that last recomendation is identical to the nativete with which the neo-cons in Washington and their friends in the press - Friedman, Zakaria, Hoagland, among them - bought the idea that we could bomb the Middle East into democracy.
But no matter. I cite Friedman because his is just one of many thoughtful voices in the New York Times and in the national debate. As are Zakaria (Newsweek) and Hoagland (Washington Post).
Which leads to a thought about the Albuquerque Journal. Forget its rightist leanings on its editorial and Op-Ed pages. That is the publiusher's right (no pun intended), after all. Our daily compares badly with other dominant newspapers in its level of discourse, in energy and intelligence.
Understand me. I am not talking about point of view here, but rather of the ability to go beyond the conventional. In comedic terms, the Journal, I regret to say, is Jay Leno. Maybe it's asking too much for it to be Jon Stewart, but surely it can aspire to David Letterman or Conan O'Brien.
This state boasts umpteen PhDs. Why not recruit those of them who are literate and have something to say about our concerns? We have lots of artists, too, some world-class. Why not use them, too? There may even be resources at the universities.
OK. I admit it. Yesterday, after reading the Journal, I read several sections of the New York Times and the contrast was huge. But I do not expect the Journal to move to the same level, just narrow the gap.
Or is that naivete on my part?