... And 1360 Days to Go
The Empire Strikes Back
The left’s disinformation assault machine is hard at work trying to vilify, marginalize and silence any conservative, moderating influence that might slow their steamrolling agenda. Ms. Garafallo says the only possible explanation for the tea parties is racism against Obama! Hmmm, I don’t seem to recall conservative lynchings of Clarence Thomas, Colin Powell, Condy Rice, J.C. Watts, Michael Steele, Larry Elder, etc. But apparently politically correct name-calling trumps or supplants logical argument in liberalism. Surely there could be no rational arguments against the great Obama’s policies? And surely there could only be vile motives in opposing him? The tea party participants were also called extremists, radicals, subversives, and revolutionaries by the media. So, too were the perpetrators of the original Boston Tea Party, in the face of economic tyranny.
More and more we hear the terms Nazi and fascist thrown in the face of conservatives. Odd that liberals seem to be the ones who’ve seriously put forward the “fairness doctrine” to further limit already limited media dissent, who do all they can to silence opposition voices like Limbaugh, Hannity, Palin, Romney, etc.. Now, after completely sidestepping the opposition party before the votes on the biggest spending bills in history, Obama has the audacity to call their resistance petty and political in a time of crisis. Again with the name-calling and vile motives. Just who, exactly, are the fascists demanding unquestioning conformity? They scream bloody murder at the Patriot Act that doesn't really phase anyone's liberty to keep us safe, and don't blink at sweeping economic and other government takeovers that fundamentally affect liberties and choices of us all.
Their definition of compromise is very one-sided, and their definition of bare loss of an election is unconditional surrender. Fight on, young Jedis! Don't fall victim to their attempts to dishearten -- we've survived worse election losses before. To paraphrase Mark Twain, the reports of the death of the GOP or conservativism are greatly exaggerated, and wishful thinking. Nor do we need to move further left -- the pendulum will swing back when the liberals fail. Stick to your phasers (set only to stun, of course) and enduring, timeless principles.
All of this attribution of vile motives and name-calling reinforces the growing stereotype of liberals as emotional, irrational hot-heads. I (and I think most conservatives) don’t generally impune liberals’ motives – generally only their thinking, or lack thereof. Just wanting or meaning to do the right thing isn’t sufficient – you actually need to do the right thing, or at least avoid doing that which backfires and does more harm than good. Like Chamberlain’s “peace in our time,” Barney Frank’s social engineering of home loan standards, FDR’s lavish depression spending (see Feb. 22 post), Johnson's Great Society & welfare system, or Europe’s, Russia’s & China’s failed socialism. And that takes rationality & wisdom, benefiting from history’s lessons.
Political Theory of Relativity
Here’s my political “theory of relativity.” The clearly most liberal senator is elected by a bare plurality of votes, appealing especially to the young who are traditionally liberal & starry-eyed by style & “change,” to those who yearn to be loved and accepted by the world, to appear racially enlightened or accepted, who’ve been won over by the liberal Move-on-dot-org/Soros drumbeat of the “robbery” of the 2000 election, the litany of evils of Bush, and the righteous justice (or at least financial benefits) of class warfare, etc. And so the left-most president in history, without having clearly articulated his “change” before the election (except for a little slip of “spread the wealth” to Joe the Plumber), and with a bare majority, and a crisis at hand, now feels he has some great mandate to take advantage of the crisis (as his chief of staff would say) to implement more change than he even hinted at in the campaign. He claims this is the new “norm” – and to justify his lack of compromise or negotiation, dismisses the opposition with “we won.”
And so, if the newly defined “norm” (not the center) has drifted far to the left, of course the conservative right appears to them to have drifted far to the right – they (the right) are now the “extremists” – the fascists, the Nazis. It’s all relative. Just like the steady slide in the movie rating scale and morals in general. The conservative right need not move at all to appear to the left to move. And they even persuade a senator – Specter “the defector” – who buys into it (or uses it as a convenient cover for more selfish motives), saying that the party has moved too far to the right. How convenient for a fair-weather opportunist who saw he couldn’t win his own primary – clearly the betrayal of his base was not something entirely new. Nor did he have the courage or courtesy to notify his party leaders in advance. Good riddance to one of such dubious principles – neither “hot nor cold.” It appears the Democrats already are not pleased with his earliest shanannigans and have demoted him.
Pandora’s Box
But just whose principles are driving decisions like the release of the interrogation memos? Contradicting earlier statements by Obama, his chief of staff, the DNI & Homeland Security chief, he did declassify & release the memos and then opened the possibility of investigation & prosecution of former administration officials. He caved to the extreme left, Soros-financed Move-on-dot-Org ads calling for war crime prosecutions. As a Wall Street Journal article noted, of course the release of the memos unleashed a liberal revenge/blood lust. Like opening Pandora’s box – and once hearings have begun, they’ll have a life of their own. What other purpose would it serve? Certainly no good one – it breaks with the consistent tradition of not going after prior administrations for political purposes, making us more like a banana republic. And following that precedent, what would prevent the next administration from retribution against Obama (certainly if he continues to weaken the country and we’re attacked)? It gives our enemies more information to prepare & resist interrogation, lessening our chances and options to get information. And as much as opponents say they were unproductive, they lie – waterboarding (only done to 3 senior Al Qaida) did indeed prevent a 9/11-style plot to kill thousands more and leave another crater in place of an LA skyscraper. As the Wall Street Journal noted, the memos also clearly show the discipline of sticking strictly to approved limits.
And for all of the self-righteousness of Pelosi, she had to admit to being present in bi-partisan briefings where the legality & possibility of using these harsh interrogation techniques were presented. She refused to say whether she’d raised objections at the time – apparently not. In fact many on both sides of the aisle, 6 years ago in the wake of 9/11, asked instead if the measures would be enough to get needed information to prevent further attacks. But now she & others hear the hue and cry of the extreme left and want to appear to have always been on their side, and claim to have not realized that the techniques might actually be used. And they can comfortably do this because the measures taken (incl. Patriot Act) have indeed prevented attacks in the intervening 8 years, leaving some free to question whether there even is/was a threat justifying their use. Otherwise, and if/when another attack occurs, those voices would be more subdued.
And these techniques were not even publicized threats with an intended deterrent effect, like the lead-up to the Iraq war. This is amazingly similar to Kerry & many other liberals who went along with the preparations & threats for war against Saddam, including authorization, then later claimed they didn’t think it would actually be implemented. Kerry voted “against the war, before he voted for it.” They all really think they can have it both ways – that the public’s memory is so short. Unfortunately, much of the public’s memory is so short – but not an elephant’s (the GOP). They also forget that the president’s number one job and responsibility is to defend this country against all enemies – not to take over the economy, run various industries and spend the next generation’s wealth to solve today’s problems. And what is Obama’s better solution to Guantanamo? But he has kept an interesting loophole – 3rd country renditions, so that he can outsource enhanced interrogation, or even real torture. So much for his abhorrence of outsourcing.
The Emperor’s Clothes
But for all of Obama’s much-touted style – a major factor in his election & popularity – the several times the teleprompter has failed, the emperor clearly had no clothes. It was pathetic. Almost as pathetic as his spokesman, who apparently was chosen as a counterpoint to Obama, to make him look good by comparison – at least when the teleprompter works. Or they thought his spokesman’s easy-going, good-old-boy style would easily win over the clearly biased media. And so far they are right, with all the soft-balls he and Obama are thrown, like “what is the most enchanting part of being in the White House?” To those for whom this was all a beauty contest, or for whom Obama can do no wrong, that sounds about right. His image is so ubiquitous on magazine covers like Time, posters, etc., one is reminded of the cult of personality of Stalin, Mao, Ho Chi Minh, Castro, Saddam, Kim Il Sung, etc.
And the media gives him a pass (that Bush never got) on gaffes like the “Austrian language,” “Arabic translators for Afghanistan,” “57 states,” or the Air Force One buzzing of Manhattan (& classification of those photos) ... They’re all too ready to praise Obama for the “big win for his administration in its first critical national security test” – taking out 3 pirates (following the example of France, Russia). What overblown hype, considering the other truly more significant security tests alluded to by Krauthammer (my Feb. 22 post), as well as the N. Korean missile launch, Pakistan’s losses to the Taliban, etc. Not to mention his chumming with various vile dictators, bowing to the Saudi king, etc.. For all his apologies for the US abroad (its arrogance, Christianity, etc.), he’s the one we need to apologize for to every president who’s upheld the dignity and special place of that office (and America), and the people who honor it.
After the young, black, articulate president’s “cool” factor has worn off, and the $100,000+ bills hit today’s young adults, they may likely change their political tunes. My grade for Obama’s first 100 days has not changed from his 2nd week – F.
The left’s disinformation assault machine is hard at work trying to vilify, marginalize and silence any conservative, moderating influence that might slow their steamrolling agenda. Ms. Garafallo says the only possible explanation for the tea parties is racism against Obama! Hmmm, I don’t seem to recall conservative lynchings of Clarence Thomas, Colin Powell, Condy Rice, J.C. Watts, Michael Steele, Larry Elder, etc. But apparently politically correct name-calling trumps or supplants logical argument in liberalism. Surely there could be no rational arguments against the great Obama’s policies? And surely there could only be vile motives in opposing him? The tea party participants were also called extremists, radicals, subversives, and revolutionaries by the media. So, too were the perpetrators of the original Boston Tea Party, in the face of economic tyranny.
More and more we hear the terms Nazi and fascist thrown in the face of conservatives. Odd that liberals seem to be the ones who’ve seriously put forward the “fairness doctrine” to further limit already limited media dissent, who do all they can to silence opposition voices like Limbaugh, Hannity, Palin, Romney, etc.. Now, after completely sidestepping the opposition party before the votes on the biggest spending bills in history, Obama has the audacity to call their resistance petty and political in a time of crisis. Again with the name-calling and vile motives. Just who, exactly, are the fascists demanding unquestioning conformity? They scream bloody murder at the Patriot Act that doesn't really phase anyone's liberty to keep us safe, and don't blink at sweeping economic and other government takeovers that fundamentally affect liberties and choices of us all.
Their definition of compromise is very one-sided, and their definition of bare loss of an election is unconditional surrender. Fight on, young Jedis! Don't fall victim to their attempts to dishearten -- we've survived worse election losses before. To paraphrase Mark Twain, the reports of the death of the GOP or conservativism are greatly exaggerated, and wishful thinking. Nor do we need to move further left -- the pendulum will swing back when the liberals fail. Stick to your phasers (set only to stun, of course) and enduring, timeless principles.
All of this attribution of vile motives and name-calling reinforces the growing stereotype of liberals as emotional, irrational hot-heads. I (and I think most conservatives) don’t generally impune liberals’ motives – generally only their thinking, or lack thereof. Just wanting or meaning to do the right thing isn’t sufficient – you actually need to do the right thing, or at least avoid doing that which backfires and does more harm than good. Like Chamberlain’s “peace in our time,” Barney Frank’s social engineering of home loan standards, FDR’s lavish depression spending (see Feb. 22 post), Johnson's Great Society & welfare system, or Europe’s, Russia’s & China’s failed socialism. And that takes rationality & wisdom, benefiting from history’s lessons.
Political Theory of Relativity
Here’s my political “theory of relativity.” The clearly most liberal senator is elected by a bare plurality of votes, appealing especially to the young who are traditionally liberal & starry-eyed by style & “change,” to those who yearn to be loved and accepted by the world, to appear racially enlightened or accepted, who’ve been won over by the liberal Move-on-dot-org/Soros drumbeat of the “robbery” of the 2000 election, the litany of evils of Bush, and the righteous justice (or at least financial benefits) of class warfare, etc. And so the left-most president in history, without having clearly articulated his “change” before the election (except for a little slip of “spread the wealth” to Joe the Plumber), and with a bare majority, and a crisis at hand, now feels he has some great mandate to take advantage of the crisis (as his chief of staff would say) to implement more change than he even hinted at in the campaign. He claims this is the new “norm” – and to justify his lack of compromise or negotiation, dismisses the opposition with “we won.”
And so, if the newly defined “norm” (not the center) has drifted far to the left, of course the conservative right appears to them to have drifted far to the right – they (the right) are now the “extremists” – the fascists, the Nazis. It’s all relative. Just like the steady slide in the movie rating scale and morals in general. The conservative right need not move at all to appear to the left to move. And they even persuade a senator – Specter “the defector” – who buys into it (or uses it as a convenient cover for more selfish motives), saying that the party has moved too far to the right. How convenient for a fair-weather opportunist who saw he couldn’t win his own primary – clearly the betrayal of his base was not something entirely new. Nor did he have the courage or courtesy to notify his party leaders in advance. Good riddance to one of such dubious principles – neither “hot nor cold.” It appears the Democrats already are not pleased with his earliest shanannigans and have demoted him.
Pandora’s Box
But just whose principles are driving decisions like the release of the interrogation memos? Contradicting earlier statements by Obama, his chief of staff, the DNI & Homeland Security chief, he did declassify & release the memos and then opened the possibility of investigation & prosecution of former administration officials. He caved to the extreme left, Soros-financed Move-on-dot-Org ads calling for war crime prosecutions. As a Wall Street Journal article noted, of course the release of the memos unleashed a liberal revenge/blood lust. Like opening Pandora’s box – and once hearings have begun, they’ll have a life of their own. What other purpose would it serve? Certainly no good one – it breaks with the consistent tradition of not going after prior administrations for political purposes, making us more like a banana republic. And following that precedent, what would prevent the next administration from retribution against Obama (certainly if he continues to weaken the country and we’re attacked)? It gives our enemies more information to prepare & resist interrogation, lessening our chances and options to get information. And as much as opponents say they were unproductive, they lie – waterboarding (only done to 3 senior Al Qaida) did indeed prevent a 9/11-style plot to kill thousands more and leave another crater in place of an LA skyscraper. As the Wall Street Journal noted, the memos also clearly show the discipline of sticking strictly to approved limits.
And for all of the self-righteousness of Pelosi, she had to admit to being present in bi-partisan briefings where the legality & possibility of using these harsh interrogation techniques were presented. She refused to say whether she’d raised objections at the time – apparently not. In fact many on both sides of the aisle, 6 years ago in the wake of 9/11, asked instead if the measures would be enough to get needed information to prevent further attacks. But now she & others hear the hue and cry of the extreme left and want to appear to have always been on their side, and claim to have not realized that the techniques might actually be used. And they can comfortably do this because the measures taken (incl. Patriot Act) have indeed prevented attacks in the intervening 8 years, leaving some free to question whether there even is/was a threat justifying their use. Otherwise, and if/when another attack occurs, those voices would be more subdued.
And these techniques were not even publicized threats with an intended deterrent effect, like the lead-up to the Iraq war. This is amazingly similar to Kerry & many other liberals who went along with the preparations & threats for war against Saddam, including authorization, then later claimed they didn’t think it would actually be implemented. Kerry voted “against the war, before he voted for it.” They all really think they can have it both ways – that the public’s memory is so short. Unfortunately, much of the public’s memory is so short – but not an elephant’s (the GOP). They also forget that the president’s number one job and responsibility is to defend this country against all enemies – not to take over the economy, run various industries and spend the next generation’s wealth to solve today’s problems. And what is Obama’s better solution to Guantanamo? But he has kept an interesting loophole – 3rd country renditions, so that he can outsource enhanced interrogation, or even real torture. So much for his abhorrence of outsourcing.
The Emperor’s Clothes
But for all of Obama’s much-touted style – a major factor in his election & popularity – the several times the teleprompter has failed, the emperor clearly had no clothes. It was pathetic. Almost as pathetic as his spokesman, who apparently was chosen as a counterpoint to Obama, to make him look good by comparison – at least when the teleprompter works. Or they thought his spokesman’s easy-going, good-old-boy style would easily win over the clearly biased media. And so far they are right, with all the soft-balls he and Obama are thrown, like “what is the most enchanting part of being in the White House?” To those for whom this was all a beauty contest, or for whom Obama can do no wrong, that sounds about right. His image is so ubiquitous on magazine covers like Time, posters, etc., one is reminded of the cult of personality of Stalin, Mao, Ho Chi Minh, Castro, Saddam, Kim Il Sung, etc.
And the media gives him a pass (that Bush never got) on gaffes like the “Austrian language,” “Arabic translators for Afghanistan,” “57 states,” or the Air Force One buzzing of Manhattan (& classification of those photos) ... They’re all too ready to praise Obama for the “big win for his administration in its first critical national security test” – taking out 3 pirates (following the example of France, Russia). What overblown hype, considering the other truly more significant security tests alluded to by Krauthammer (my Feb. 22 post), as well as the N. Korean missile launch, Pakistan’s losses to the Taliban, etc. Not to mention his chumming with various vile dictators, bowing to the Saudi king, etc.. For all his apologies for the US abroad (its arrogance, Christianity, etc.), he’s the one we need to apologize for to every president who’s upheld the dignity and special place of that office (and America), and the people who honor it.
After the young, black, articulate president’s “cool” factor has worn off, and the $100,000+ bills hit today’s young adults, they may likely change their political tunes. My grade for Obama’s first 100 days has not changed from his 2nd week – F.
Another great commentary. I too hope the Jedis soldier on.
ReplyDelete