Hope is not  Jeffrey Carl Simpson, the somewhat acclaimed writer for Canada’s The Globe and Mail, wrote a nasty, slanted Fourth of July article sarcastically titled, “Happy Fourth of July–America Needs It.”

It was nasty because it adopts the typical Canadian superciliousness borne of Canada’s inferiority complex toward America; it was slanted because it starts from the premise of an idealized, gushing view of our president as the best thing to happen to America since the advent of Canadian bacon.

Simpson’s twisted gushing could cause the average American in the summer of 2010 to gag over his idolatrous praise of Obama and his skewed perspective of political life in the land of his birth.

He writes, “The United States gave itself the most gifted President in several generations, handed his party a majority in both houses of Congress, only to watch his presidency be swamped by the doleful legacy of the Bush years, a worldwide recession and its parlous aftermath, and a ferocious Republican opposition bent on a search-and-destroy mission of his presidency:” http://tiny.cc/cx7q3

That sentence, touching on many of the defensive points of the Obama administration, could have been written by David Axelrod or Rahm Emanuel.  

Tags: Stanley McChrystal  Simpson’s most egregiously misleading comment related to his dismissal of the dismissal of General McChrystal as commander of America’s forces in Afghanistan of which he wrote, “The U.S. commander there, Stanley McChrystal, was sacked for impolitic remarks about various high officials in the Obama administration, a dismissal even the choleric Republicans did not criticize.”

Aside from using the loaded and misleading word “choleric,” Simpson misses the point of McChrystal’s sacking.  He also ignores the substance of the remarks that got the general sacked.  In brief, McChrystal felt, and no doubt still feels, that Obama and his clowns running the war in Afghanistan are out of their league.

Granted, the general committed a grave military and common sense faux pas by agreeing to a wartime interview by Rolling Stone, a publication known as much for salacious pictures of young tarts and Lady Gaga as for political articles.  “The Runaway General” was hardly a puff piece but also wasn’t nearly as inflammatory as the public has been led to believe.

Apparently, McChrystal may have agreed it was “impolitic” but he didn’t see it as career-ending since he signed off on the contents of the piece.

Nevertheless, those contents deserve greater attention than they have been accorded by the mainstream media, and by Mr. Simpson.  They might even change Simpson’s view of those “impolitic remarks.”

Part Two: What the general said, why he said it, and what he didn’t say.