Wednesday, September 17, 2003
The circle jerk continues
This morning Sandra Bernhard was interviewed on the radio (again, local radio giving me the warm fuzzies.) Over the past few years, I have come to some conclusions about lefty, socialist moonbats such as Ms. Bernhard and her long lost cousin, Michael Moore (among many, many others) and their views on the world:
1. Dissent is being stifled, our 1st Amendment rights crushed, unless somebody who doesn't agree with your position is talking-- they need to keep their mouths shut 'cause they don't know what they are talking about. Example: nobody stopped the war protests, even though they created a mess of city streets and also resulted in vandalism and all-out lawlessness-- dissent stifled. Dixie Chicks open their big mouths and Americans choose to NOT purchase their album-- their first amendment rights crushed. Suddenly Americans are obligated to purchase their album because it's our patriotic duty to support dissent. Wha???
2. Democrats are truthful, Republicans only know how to lie. Example: Bill Clinton lied to my face in a prime-time, take over the networks, finger-wagging, ostentatious display, not to mention his behavior before and after. But Bush is a LIAR. I've asked a million times: show me where he has lied. SHOW ME!!! The silence is deafening. Taking action on the word of our intelligence folks (not to mention the intelligence that came from the ne'er-do-wrong previous administration), where intelligence is clearly not a science and can be less than accurate, is not akin to lying. So save your "Clinton lied, Hillary cried..." and VRWC crap....
3. War can be good or bad, depending on which letter follows our CIC's name. Example: Bosnia? Good war!!! Iraq? Bad war!!! Where were these lefty, loony, socialist moonbats during our campaign in Kosovo, where we completely shirked the UN and went about it even more "unilaterally" than Iraq? TELL ME!!! Where the hell were you? Where were you when we tossed a couple of cruise missiles over to Sudan in "response" to our embassy bombings? Where were your cries of protest when Billy spoke about the long road ahead in combatting terrorism in 1998 while said cruise missiles were happily on their way to their stated targets? Where were your accusations of fear-mongering then, HUH?
4. The rest of the world hates us when we have a Republican in office, and they love us when a Democrat is there. I have one answer to that: a President (D) is sure to allow political correctness get in the way of what is right. A President (D) cares more about the mood on the Paris and Arab "streets" than the good of his own nation. God forbid we rile up them Parisians! On the other hand, a President (R) will back up the bark with a good bite. A President (R) tends to look past the stinky, hippy protesters at the big picture, in full context, considering the consequences of action vs. the consequences of trying to make everybody feel good with inaction.
5. Bad things happen to America only when a Republican is in office, while all is hunky-dory when the likes of a BJ Clinton are in office. Clinton made us all rich. Bush is killing our economy and putting people on the streets. What these narrow-minded idiots seem to forget is that policy doesn't show its effects for years. Not months, not weeks, YEARS. That house of cards of an economy we built up in the 90's was going to come crashing down no matter who was in office. Sure, these folks would feel warm and fuzzy inside, with the self-esteem they always longed for, if their hero BJ was still in office. But guess what? The economy would still be a mess, we'd likely all be paying MORE taxes, and America would be LESS safe because we would not be following through on annihilating the threat against us. But, hell, at least the short-term gratification of self-love would be in full force for our hairy, smelly hippy friends.
Which brings me to this point, and the thing that Ms. Bernhard said that really chapped my hide. She believes, as many like herself do, that 9/11/01 would NOT have happened under Clinton's watch.
This is such utterly ignorant, vile tripe, it's hard for me to even understand why any human with half a brain would believe, much less say, such thing. At the heart of this statement is the belief that 9/11 was Bush's fault, or his doing. Honestly, now. Does this idiot believe that those guys planned those attacks over the course of eight months? The idea sprung into their heads at the end of January? They picked their targets, learned how to fly jumbo jets, and organized the near-simultaneous attacks in MONTHS? Not only that, but this also implies that they had no desire to attack America before Bush was sworn in.
We were, in fact, attacked on Clinton's watch. Problem was he did not do enough about it. Case(s) in point: 1993 World Trade Center attack (6 Americans killed); 1993 attack on our troops in Somalia (19 dead); 1995 Riyhad bombing (5 Americans killed); 1996 Dharhan bombing (19 American servicemen killed); 1998 Embassy bombings, Tanzania and Nigeria (12 Americans, 200+ others killed); 2000 bombing of USS Cole in Yemen (17 American sailors killed). If this proves anything, it's that pacifism is a sign of weakness to our enemies-- and those who protest strong action are, indeed, "useful idiots." Ms. Bernhard and her ilk believe that 9/11 would not have happened under Clinton's watch? Who is she kidding? Our enemies were everything BUT afraid of the U.S. under his watch. They knew that they could continue to kick us, they mistook us for Tibet.
Ms. Bernhard is of the opinion that this administration is engaged in fear mongering. Hate to break it to ya, but the sights and sounds of 9/11, plus the attacks listed above, plus the attacks by the same enemies that don't happen to target Americans, have me plenty afraid for the security of this country and democracy in general. If we don't take care of them, we'll lose much more than our beloved servicemen and women and a few bucks. I demand that my government take a stand and do something about it. Bush did not instill this in me. Our complacency did it to me. These enemies of ours want only for us to be afraid-- very afraid. You can go to your little happy, Zen-topia place if you wish, I won't.
If she had half a brain, and any sort of memory, she would recall that Clinton engaged in the same f'ing rhetoric (or, as she calls it, "fear mongering") as our current administration-- he threatened terrorists around the world, he threatened-- and attacked-- Iraq, and he went on about the threat of OBL and his network. The difference? He just talked. He never acted in any meaningful way.
I don't fully blame Clinton for what happened to us, or him or Bush for the state of affairs today. I do, however, think that Bush is doing what is best for our long term future, and he doesn't seem to mind that he might lose popularity points in the process. I didn't even vote for him, much less like him in 2000. Now I have the utmost respect for him. Unlike his predecessor, he doesn't lead according to the latest poll.
It's hard to understand this mentality that is so often on display in these parts, and among the "elite" in Hollywood and academia. Those who complained about "incessant" bashing of Clinton are doing the same, only much worse, to Bush (I don't ever recall pictures of Clinton with a Hitler mustache or swastika on his forehead, just BJ jokes). The same people that whine about crushed dissent shout down those who disagree with them, as if they know some grand truth that the rest of us are completely missing (Sandra's answer to everything? "read Fast Food Nation", as if it's the bible of truth). And the truly ironic thing is that these people who would prefer to sit in a circle and sing kumbaya to make our enemies love us, and tell me I need to seek out spirituality to understand, bash our Christian President for being a "bible-thumper" because he believes in morality, and that there is such a thing as good and evil. I'll take a moral, Christian President over an immoral, laissez-faire cheater any day.
One more thing that I find amazing as far as ignorance and hypocrisy go: Clinton was desperately involved in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. He wanted more than anything to have "peace" between them as his legacy. He was a staunch supporter of Israel. Many would argue that the Islamists hate us because we support Israel-- we are a Zionist tool. Many criticized Bush for not being involved enough in the Middle East issue, or even in foreign affairs in general, before 9/11. So these enemies of ours wouldn't have attacked under Clinton's watch? Clinton may have been adored by our socialist Euroweenie friends, but the Islamists who are our enemy hated him as much as they hate Bush. It doesn't matter who is in office, they hate all things America, not just our leaders. Difference was that they were not afraid of Clinton at all.
The hypocrisy is astounding. The stupidity is annoying. When will these people grow up? They simply want to sweep reality under the rug so we can all go to that shiny happy place in our drug-induced la-la land. I know what my truth is: my country is good, others want to destroy us. I give the benefit of the doubt to my President, not the tyrannical dictators who would like nothing more than to see us fail. I don't see my country as a threat to world peace, but a beacon of peace, freedom and equality. American might is GOOD for the humankind around the world. Peace through strength is the only true kind of peace (ask nuke-totin' Israel about that...)
I'm glad I have this blog, this has been therapeutic. This morning I wanted to beat the crap out of a hippy. I feel much better now.
Comments: Post a Comment