At what point Un-American?
By Marcus Traianus Posted in Foreign Affairs | Spotlight Blogs — Comments (21) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Recent remarks by Hugo Chavez at the United Nations and in New York City have received some limited rebuke from Democrats. This newly facile posture by some within the Democrat Party has garnered comprehensive textual and oratorical attention. The fascination with Mr. Chavez’s remarks is somewhat of an enigma since it seems to have driven hostile political forces into retreat. However, appearances are sometimes deceiving. Could it be that we are in an election season? Certainly not, since that would mean their response is disingenuous.
Read on
It has been said often by this writer that words have meanings and actions have consequences. Accordingly, both the former and latter part of that statement has particular situational relevance to the Democratic Party beyond Mr. Chavez’s remarks. Why, you might ask? Because, since the Joint Resolution on Iraq Democrats have been increasingly distracted by an effort to discredit our President. In the process of carrying out this parochial assault, they have egregiously demeaned our great Republic. This has largely been ensconced in and driven by domestic political motivation but found a complimentary partner in the global socialist agenda. How many times have we heard Howard Dean, John Kerry, et al talk about world opinion and losing friends when opining about our global actions and policies? So many times, it gives an appearance that Democrats agree more with the greater world community than our own government (in which they participate). Accordingly, Democrats felt safe to stall major pieces of legislation designed to keep terrorism in check. Their opposition to basic security tools such as the Patriot Act, international wiretapping, foreign bank transfers and terrorist trials leaves an ignominious trail of failure. While this is a strategy that seemingly worked well when discontent was rampant at home, Democrats did not anticipate our countries greatest traits: An ability to overcome the odds, prevail through honesty and change opinions through lucid, factual perserverance.
This is all very bad news for Democrats since it puts them on the side of countries cheering at the United Nations for Chavez and Ahmadinejad. To make a bad situation worse, a New York neighborhood mostly inhabited by Democrats hosts the “after party” for Chavez and cheers his anti American remarks. Add Hollywood actor Danny Glover for good measure, discounted oil giveaways and we witness the core Democratic constituency and policy in action. The resulting situation is explosive, especially in an election season where solidification of voter impressions can swing tight races. The Democrat Party was called to arms because it was politically necessary, not for love of country or our President. So they throw out some seemingly principled platitudes, the press picks them up, underreports their holistic remarks and both huddle together hoping some undecided voter believes them. This is an insulting attempt to persuade a public increasingly informed on their inability to formulate thoughtful or popular policy, move beyond an obsession to impeach the President and above all else stay focused on keeping Americans safe.
In a time of war it is imperative to keep our nation protected. To do this, we must as Churchill said “succeed in doing what is necessary”. Democrat’s have not understood this in any sense and opposed every meaningful attempt to strengthen our defense. In this time of unquestionably necessary unity they have sought to divide us. The result of this short sighted action is to keep America from employing our greatest asset, her people. Appropriately, this specious attempt to advance parochial politics, disguised in the name of debate and Constitutional liberties has come full circle and roosted on their doorstep. It is an action that is un-American since it demeans our values, underestimates our intelligence and obscures or primary goal in a time of war, to keep our citizens safe. We will therefore keep this in our hearts and minds when votes are cast in November, no matter what mea culpa or politically necessary statement is spoken.
Yes, it needs to be said ... and it needs to be stopped. The terrorists goals are clear, kill us all ... Give them a nuke and watch it happen.
It's an awful position to place oneself at odds with the goals of country and then try to achieve political advantage from that. The question is why do Democrats do this on a regular basis, ie Vietnam. It's as if they think they have all the answers and no one else should be allowed to speak.
Maybe occasionally slugging one of them would be a good thing.
here and has enjoyed the miracle that is America and knows anything about history and the state of existence elsewhere, can so hate this country, I have not a clue. I suppose its pride, envy, greed, and others of the 7 deadly's.
http://devine-gamecock.townhall.com
www.race42008.com
"Within the covers of the Bible are the answers for all the problems men face." - Ronald Reagan
You couldn't have said it better, Partner. It seems there are "Americans" who want to blame America for every little gaff, misstep of nature and the sins of every other country in the world. What is really surprising is the President Bush hasn't been blames for the Popes quoting Manuel II last week.
Don't Squat With Yer Spurs On!
BusterJiggs
Democrat’s have not understood this in any sense and opposed every meaningful attempt to strengthen our defense.
they are seen in the occasional company of a few disingeuous, self-serving so-called Republicans.
John
---------
True, you can sit outside in Paris and drink little cups of coffee, but why this is more stylish than sitting inside and drinking large glasses of whisky, I don't know.
P.J O'Rourke
Especially now in the election season.
The constant need for this group to pander defies all logic and reason. We already are hearing from Democrats they may be agreeing on Detainee legislation due to some "sensible" Republicans defying the President; What? Do they actually think at this point anyone believes that?
I believe the more appropriate question is; why did we let this group of three dolts out of the hole they dug so easily? As much as they profess their constituencies support efforts to protect the enemy, somehow I suspect that is political pablum.
"Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori"
From:
Right Wing News: Celebrities Discuss The War On Terrorism -- The Quotes
by John Hawkins
http://www.rightwingnews.com/quotes/celeb.php
"When I see an American flag flying, it's a joke." -- Robert Altman
"I also think that there is a strong streak of racism, and whenever we engage in foreign adventures. Our whole history in regime change has been of people of different color." -- Ed Asner
"The real terrorist threats are George W. Bush and his band of brown-shirted thugs." -- Sandra Bernhard
"I think war is based in greed and there are huge karmic retributions that will follow. I think war is never the answer to solving any problems. The best way to solve problems is to not have enemies." -- Sheryl Crow
"I don't know if a country (America) where the people are so ignorant of reality and of history, if you can call that a free world." -- Jane Fonda
"(W)hen Communist U.S.S.R. was a superpower, the world was better off. The right-wing media is trying to marginalize the peace movement." -- Janeane Garofalo
"America has never paid any attention to other people, so it's absurd for Bush to say that it's all in the best interests of the Iraqi people." -- Richard Gere
"Yes, (Bush is a) racist. We all knew that but the world is only finding it out now. As Texas's governor, Bush led a penitentiary system that executed more people than all the other U.S. states together. And most of the people who died from (the) death penalty were Afro-Americans or Hispanics. (Bush) promoted a Conservative program, designed to eliminate everything Americans had accomplished so far in matters of race and equality." -- Danny Glover
"A sad figure (Bush) -- not too well educated, who doesn't get out of America much. He's leading the country towards Fascism." -- Larry Hagman
"This is a racist and imperialist war. The warmongers who stole the White House (you call them "hawks", but I would never disparage such a fine bird) have hijacked a nation's grief and turned it into a perpetual war on any non-white country they choose to describe as terrorist." -- Woody Harrelson
"I believe - though I may wrong because I am no expert - that this war is about what most wars are about: hegemony, money, power and oil." -- Dustin Hoffman
"Let's get rid of all the economic (expletive) this country represents! Bring it on, I hope the Muslims win!" -- Chrissie Hynde of The Pretenders
"It is an embarrassing time to be an American. It really is. It's humiliating." -- Jessica Lange
"I don't believe war is a way to solve problems. I think it's wrong. I don't have respect for the people that made the decisions to go on with war. I don't have that much respect for Bush. He's about war, I'm not about war - a lot of people aren't about war." -- Avril Lavigne
"Melt their weapons, melt their hearts, melt their anger with love." -- Shirley MacLaine on her anti-terrorism policy
"Many families have been devastated tonight. This just is not right. They did not deserve to die. If someone did this to get back at Bush, then they did so by killing thousands of people who DID NOT VOTE for him! Boston, New York, DC, and the planes' destination of California--these were places that voted AGAINST Bush!" --Michael Moore, September 12, 2001
"I just think we are a little bit of an arrogant nation and maybe this is a little bit of a humbling experience ... what has our government done to provoke (9/11) that we don't know about?" -- Backstreet Boy Kevin Richardson
"I think that we see war as a virtual thing and we even get to believe that bombs fall on top of cardboard cutouts and stuff like that. They don't. They kill real people, real children, real mothers and millions of innocent people." -- Shakira
"We have a president for whom English is a second language. He's like 'We have to get rid of dictators,' but he's pretty much one himself." -- Robin Williams
"Created by the untalented; sold by the unscrupulous; purchased by the unknowing." When I read cr*pola like the quotes above I am often reminded of this description of "modern art."
Not one of these miserable creatures has the courage to actually try living in one of the h*ll-hole that they think are so pure and noble; to stand up for women who are being hanged and stoned for being raped and thus violating their chastity; and the list goes on and on.
But at the end of the day no one with more than three functioning brain cells is actually paying attention to them anyway.
John
---------
True, you can sit outside in Paris and drink little cups of coffee, but why this is more stylish than sitting inside and drinking large glasses of whisky, I don't know.
P.J O'Rourke
of the cost of all public construction in the country goes to subsidize more crap. My mama would have beat me half to death if I'd put something on her walls like the stuff that goes on the walls of public buildings.
In Vino Veritas
These are comments that come from a group that idolize, celebrate and reward cold blooded killers, despicable despots, and the occasional convicted-fugitive child rapist.
___________________________________________________________
Thou art the Great Cat, the avenger of the Gods, and the judge of words...-Inscription on the Royal Tombs at Thebes
Believing that Robin Williams said this. I have a harder time believing that he meant it. He has been to the desert to entertain our troops. He is Very supportive of our young people in uniform. But he is also a comedian. And he plays to varied audiences. Perhaps he thought this would play well with the audience that night. I wonder if there's anything out there that he has said or done to spport the idea that he truly does feel that way.
"Always be honest with yourself even if you are honest with no one else...
...It helps you keep track of your lies..."
--Myself
The mistake people make is equating celebrity status with having something intelligent or useful to say.
Most are trolls on the blog of life. Opining incoherently and revealing they spent too much time listening to themselves babble.
"Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori"
"a pimple on the A*s of progress."
John
---------
True, you can sit outside in Paris and drink little cups of coffee, but why this is more stylish than sitting inside and drinking large glasses of whisky, I don't know.
P.J O'Rourke
"At what point un-American?"
OK, I'll advocate for the devil, just to liven this discussion up a bit.
This is an interesting question, and although I think Chavez is a two-bit thug and Ahmedinijad is a Loon, I'm not so sure I buy the notion that being critical of the Bush Administration is the same thing as supporting Chavez and Ahmedinijad, or weakening the country.
To be sure, it could look that way- but that says more about the perspective being taken than it does about the real situation at hand. The real situation is more complicated than simply 'if you're not with us, you're against us'- another valid view is that taking this view is potentially self-defeating.
The box you've drawn leaves little room for principled disagreement; and even though I think it's frustrating to hear democrats promise to pull out and disgusting to see the U.N. reduced to the kind of circus we saw yesterday, that doesn't mean we as conservatives, and as Americans, couldn't profit handsomely from regular criticism, both from within and from without. What's at issue is not the freedom to disagree; we have that in spades. What's at issue is our willingness to take criticism constructively, rather than knee-jerk invalidating each other. This speaks to the original complaint: that we are not united, and that this lack of unity emboldens our enemies.
If we're gonna accuse the Democrats of harming the country by dividing it, we might want to note that we're the other partner in that tango. Blaming the other side might briefly help us forget our own role in this dynamic, but doing so doesn't accomplish what we want. If we really want unity, we might want to re-consider whether accusing them of being anti-American is the most effective way to do that.
Besides, paying attention to jackals like Chavez and Ahmedinijad isn't a sign of weakness; that they're heads of state based on their rabid Anti-American sentiment is instructive. We've got work to do, both at home and abroad. Probably we have better things to do than invalidate and demonize the Dems for failing to align with our approach.
/advocate
Fire away!
Publishing a bogus article which states that U.S. troops are flushing Korans down toilets is highly desireable criticism of the Bush Administration. So is accusing our troops of war crimes, and likening them to Nazi storm troopers. This is "dissent" and it is "patriotic."
On Mars.
There would be more legitimacy to the "criticisms of the Bush Administration" if they were not the same criticisms we've heard, over and over again, for thirty years, through one Administration after another, sometimes even from the same people. At some point this stuff ceases being criticism of an Administration, and becomes nothing more than bad-mouthing the United States. Edward Kennedy, John Kerry, Ramsey Clark, Jane Fonda... these are like zombies arisen from the dead to mouth the same criticisms and the same platitudes they were spewing in the 1960's. What does Cindy Sheehan bring to the table except a new voice to utter the same "criticisms of the Bush Administration" that the old voices have been mouthing since the Johnson Administration?
These people do not have a problem with "the Administration." They have a problem with the United States. They never have anything good to say about the United States. It is "all bad, all the time." And this they call patriotism.
No it isn't. It might be self-loathing, it might be mental illness... I don't know what it is. But it is not an attempt to help. It is an attempt to run down, to demoralize, to wallow in self-pity, to whine, and to inflict upon themselves and their countrymen the punishment they deep-down believe is their lot... just for being who they are.
The way to "unite the country" in the face of such individuals is to so marginalize them that for all practical purposes the country is united, except for an institution's worth of nutcases hollering in the corner. Attempting to accommodate people who propagandize on behalf of Islamic Fascists is a waste of time. If they do not see the necessity of defeating a force that stifles speech, oppresses women, and brooks no dissent whatsoever, than we may safely assume that they have 'lost it' and are no longer worth considering as deliberative members of our society.
We should do what we are already doing, which is to organize to render them powerless in our government by defeating them at the polls. Why even listen to people who cheer at the publication of our military secrets? Can they possibly be trying to help? No. They seek to destroy. Let us push them out of the way and proceed without them.
Drink Good Coffee. You can sleep when you're dead.
John
---------
True, you can sit outside in Paris and drink little cups of coffee, but why this is more stylish than sitting inside and drinking large glasses of whisky, I don't know.
P.J O'Rourke
I don't know the context, but it sounds as though he was being pressed for his opinion, which he gave honestly, while accepting that his celebrity gave him no special insight. The actual opinion, of course, is standard-issue Hollywood blather, but at least he makes no claim that it is especially important.
Quentin Langley
Editor of http://www.quentinlangley.net
College professors, journalists, artists, poets, pseudo-intellectuals of all flavor; they have always been voices of anti-Americanism. And it is a problem, because they have a privileged access to media.
Why would people denounce a society of common people who have learned to govern themselves and create wealth so successfully for over 200 years? Why would they denounce the opportunity and freedom of our society? They do so because they crave a level of status and politcial power beyond what their practical talent can achieve in the context of democracy and capitalism.
I'm a computer science researcher, and I've watched this effect in the microcosm of my own field. Industry has driven important innovations and transformed the world with fiber optics and micro electronics and software usable by ordinary people. All great and good, unless you're a college professor who feels that somehow you should be the one who is controlling this and getting all the public adoration. Thus you hear people talk about Intel or Microsoft or Apple in the same terms that Hugo Chavez used at the UN.
History contains many battles between practical people and ambitious agitators who can't win the game of practical achievement. It's not oil that has caused the great wars, it is the egos of revolutionaries like Hitler and Lenin and Bin Laden. If this was just about exchanging our money for their oil, nobody would be setting off bombs.
Indeed, substitution for practical achievement is a theme pushed by the generation in question. It is a destructive excuse propagated as thoughtful action and equivalent to hard work.
Accordingly, we have a group of people who use this as a modus operandi. This causes them to lie, cheat, cajole and otherwise use dishonest means to achieve a parochial goal. The rewards have been dispensed by like minded sycophants in the form of supportive press, institutionalized political correctness and dishonest academic persuasion. To a degree, this has infected future generations and handicapped their ability to reason and set realistic expectations.
This is indeed destructive and un-American since it places personal achievements, formulated through fallacious reasoning above fact and the combined pillars of our society. It is a basis for destructive forces in our ethics, families, institutions and government. In addition, it has helped create a generation of perennial underachievers with unrealistic expectations for success. This has depleted a truly American quality for success through hard, honest and thoughtful endeavor.
No honest person would stifle factual debate that is intended to make our country and system of government work better. After all, we are a government of the people committed to democratically propagated freedom. However, when that debate is intended to attack the basis of our chosen system of government, Constitution and societal mores it threatens our very existence.
"Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori"
This is one of the things that I've noticed all along, especially in terms of the mass media culture and how it continues, despite the presence of such personalities as Rush Limbaugh or Ann Coulter, to espouse the self-destructive ideologies that rose into prominence on the Left in the Vietnam War era. I am sick of having to tune in on a news broadcast and finding that some celebrity or another has something to say (or do, as Mr Glover so recently demonstrated) that runs so counter to what common sense and the evidence of our own eyes proves otherwise as to seem like utter insanity. One wonders how it cannot be a willful alliegance to the enemies of the United States and the institutions therein which have enabled these men and women such opportunities as would be virtually impossible for a poor farmer living in the so-called "Third World" or any other country where similar democratic ideals have not taken root.
Such is the pervasiveness of the destructive anti-American sentiment that I even find myself confronting its like in (of all things) discussions about the ongoing subplot of a superhero comic. There, I've found the use of said plots to justify some form of Bush Derangement Syndrome that uses every trick in the book to impunge the current administration as being essentially "extreme-Right" and "Nazi" at any opportunity. It is akin to being confronted by a hysterical, screeching child whose parents had snatched away the candy he or she was not supposed to be taking from the counter at that moment. The current example being some rumored statements by one artist named Frank Miller, who is said to be planning a "Batman versus Al Qaeda" type of series in the future and had made statements that touched off one such reaction amongst a group of comics fans. Never mind that the actual statements were linked and the original message deleted before I could be aware of it; I've found myself in an argument with one of the BDS patients to whom my only response may as well be repeating the questions:
"What would you have done if September 11th happened when Al Gore was President?"
"What do you think President Gore have done differently from President Bush in this situation?"
I expect no real answer other than the continuing hyperventilation and mudslinging. If these people were truly willing to act on their hystrionics, we'd be having a civil war right now. Chances are, I fear, that's probably not far off anyway. The question then becomes "Will the Islamo-fascists take advantage of the chaos to get hits on on their targets at this point?" That'll be quite possible.
So long as actors and acresses, songwriters and even comicbook artists are in lockstep with the well-embedded Leftists in our mass media, academic and political circles, there is the danger that they might (not necessarily knowingly) be willing accomplices in the next major terrorist attack on American soil. The perception is certainly there, and I fear that we will have to make a decision at that point which all of us may live to regret later on.
--
"Straight Talk Express"? My bum feet! -- Me, on Senator McCain and other "moderates"
Needed Blog message. Thanks.
You said:
"It has been said often by this writer that words have meanings and actions have consequences."
So far the main consequence of the Dems post-Iraq invasion rhetoric are more dead and wounded American troops due to the emboldening of the enemies of America in Afghanistan and Iraq. The enemies know which party is the appeasement party going back to Vietnam thru Sandinistas thru Iran thru Somalia. And they see them 24-7 on 527 Media promising to cut and run if they get power. So they stay in the fight in hopes they win the political argument.
The other consequence is the continued denial of power to the Dem party in elections.
But the danger is the between election environment.
The way I see it, given the state of the media, and given the prestige of the Office of the Presidency and the nature of president Bush himself, the only group of people that could effectively combat the dems aiding and abetting of the enemy are elected congressional republicans.
How could they do it?
By accurately characterizing democrat statements in blunt terms on live tv while side by side with them, that their statements put blood on their hands. That their statements couldn't be more pro-enemy than if the enemy chose what to say. Cite Saddam's ;lawyers arguments and al qaida's arguments verbatim from Dem statements. Call them out, and occasional slug one of them.
They must be shamed into patriotism of silence.
And I see no other group or institution that can do it.
they kill Americans a sure as if they fired the bullets.
http://devine-gamecock.townhall.com
www.race42008.com
"If they attack us, it means we're winning." - Rush Limbaugh