Tuesday, October 19, 2004


Let's see if you can pick out the real losers!

This typifies the lefty mindset on this issue. They see it as a choice between some blissful, otherwordly peace and the nasty Bush Nazis, when in reality, it was a choice between making an intolerable situation a bit better or considerably worse (and if you can't figure out which is which, then you have problems...).

I should make mention of the fact that Mr. Kendall and I saw "Team America: World Police" over the weekend. I heard that both sides of the political spectrum were zinged, but I can see why lefties thought they (justifiably) got the worst of it. I think back to the movie Toys where the lead nemesis, a hot headed military guy, at one point is playing an arcade game and he starts blowing up the U.N. trucks that are supposed to be helping him ("What in the hell are they doing here?" was what he said, or something like that). It was supposed to be a critique of his character, but my brother and I got a charge out of it and were yelling at the screen for him to blow those suckers up!

Much the same can be said for Team America, hawks view extreme takes on their viewpoints as to be so over the top as to be hilarious. On the other hand, taking left wing (self destructive) pacifism to an obvious extreme hits close to the bone for lefties. I could envision lefties squirming in their seats as there ignorant arguments were repeated back on the screen under obviously threatening circumstances. Why squirm? There's little doubt that what transpires on the screen is pretty much how the situation would transpire - there is no 'obvious extreme' to left wing pacifism. You can well picture lefties salt and peppering themselves up as a tiger is about to devour them.

(As a note though, the movie is definitely not for everyone. There were portions so crude that even I couldn't bare to watch it).

On a related note, it upsets me that it doesn't seem to bother enough people that if John Kerry had his way that the Sandinistas would still be in charge of Nicaragua, the Russian backed commies would still be in Grenada, the Soviet Union would probably still be around, Saddam would still be in Kuwait, and hell, Saddam would still be in charge of Iraq. Many have made the point that under a Democratic administration, we would still be negotiating with the Taliban to have them give us Osama. Jonah Goldberg has a great corner post today that furthers the point greatly:
He [Kerry] touts his decidedly pre-9/11 book on global crime as a training manual for post 9/11 world in which hunting terrorists is a "law enforcement issue" and terrorism is something he hopes to get to the nuisance level. His pre-9/11 views on diplomacy, defense and intelligence don't really seem to have gone away -- or gone away for long. He invokes the same idiotic story about De Galle trusting the United States, he worships the UN, he voted against the $87 billion for ever-changing reasons, but none of them seem to be the result of an epiphany about the dangers of the 9/11 world. To this day the only use of force he's said wouldn't be subject to a global test and that he could be counted upon to administer would be a response to an attack. Woop-dee-frickin' doo.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

> This typifies the lefty mindset on this issue.

I like how they're in a forest. Is that like SYMBOLIC or something? World peace, fuck Bush, save the spotted owls, perhaps?

> (and if you can't figure out which is which, then you have problems...)

But it was all about the oooooooooooooooooooooooooooyul!

- Justin