James Carville's WaPo op-ed of today has already been diaried here, but rather than respond rhetorically along the lines of "that means Clinton is Jesus," I'd like to deconstruct his bullshit arguments in this space. It seems to me that Carville has written some very telling things in that op-ed - perhaps more telling than he intended. His attempt to defend his indefensible "Judas" reaction by disguising it as a matter of principle is frankly laughable; I think, though, that besides failing to make his case, Carville has also inadvertently exposed more of his thought process to the light of day than he might perhaps intend, were he able to see "the beam in his own eye." In particular, reading his op-ed, I got the impression that for him, the purely personal trumps everything else: personal loyalty matters more to him than, say, loyalty to the good of the country. Personal relationships, it seems, are for Carville the only absolute principle, and everything else is just details.

Consumed as we are by primary politics in this endless electoral season, unfortunately few diaries have been posted about current events in Tibet. In particular, I haven't seen too much written here or elsewhere on the link between the international reaction to Tibet and the upcoming Summer Olympics in Beijing.

The recent unrest in Tibet has, though, garnered surprising attention in countries where "people-powered" struggle against a repressive state is a relatively recent memory. Poland's Gazeta Wyborcza newspaper has a thought-provoking, and somewhat contrarian, editorial on the issue today, written by Mariusz Zawadzki (link is in Polish). My translation is below the jump.