RE: On Dishonesty
Nope, they're mostly just talking about Sheehan these days, which is pretty sad.
I'm afraid you're wrong about that. As an experiment, I timed the news reports on Fox this evening. In an hour of news, they spent a grand total of 60 seconds on Cindy Sheehan. Conversely, they spent over ten minutes reporting on the car bombs in Iraq, the debate over the Iraqi constitution, and new information on jihadist beheadings. On the front page of Town Hall, which you seem to love so much, there was exactly one Sheehan story and one Iraq story.
Sorry, but I've got to stop you when you claim omnipotence on the subject of my thoughts.
There's no omnipotence needed to know your thoughts on this subject. But I'll play along for the moment. Are you opposed to it on constitutional grounds because Congress didn't take an explicit enough position on declaring the war? Are you opposed to it because we're fighting it like a bunch of PC weenies? Are you opposed to it because we're fighting it tactically instead of strategically? Do you think we're wasting time in Iraq when we should have invaded Syria or Iran or even Saudi Arabia? I didn't think so. We may have some commonality in our reasons for opposing the war, like the fact that neither of us is probably too happy about the Bush Doctrine, but I expect most of the commonality ends there.
We were told that Bin Laden was the problem, and I'm totally for going the distance to find and take him out.
There's where the denial comes in. That sounds good, but what do you mean by "going the distance?" If we found out that Syria was harboring him (which is very likely), would you favor a ground invasion of that country, probably necessitating the removal of their government, as was the case in Afghanistan? How about nuclear weapons? Would you favor tactical nuclear strikes to take him out? What if Iran was hiding him? Would you favor military action to go get him there. And would you favbor action while we're at it to destroy their nuclear infrastructure? Your denial is embodied in the fact that you don't believe that the problem is bigger than Osama Bin Laden. You would balk at the very real possibility that to end the bloodshed once and for all, we will have to wipe radical Islam from the face of the Earth, just as we did Nazism and Japanese Imperialism? That is denial of the problem and, ergo, of the solution.
But I do hate being misled about important things such as going to war and reasons for doing so.
I'm sure the Bush Administration feels the same way, if you're talking about the whole WMD thing. But I'll admit maybe I'm attributing too much rhetoric to you in which you haven't actually participated.
Why is it that non-conservatives are regularly accused of hating their country just because they care enough to speak out?
You sound like Behethland. And to both of you I would say, "Methinks the lady doth protest too much." There is no assertion anywhere here that all liberals hate America. The only time I pin that moniker on someone is when they spew the formulaic hate America bile that Sheehan has. If you can't see that a statement like, "America is not worth dying for" falls into the hate America category, then you need to examine your contexts.
And what's wrong with Sheehan protesting Bush? The Iraq War was his baby. Who else should she protest regarding the war? No one? 'Just sit down, shut up, and let us take care of this war stuff as well as how we choose to use your son's life?' I don't think so. Even the president of the United States should be held accountable, and hopefully, everyone's thinking a little bit more about the validity of his word these days.
No one has asserted that Sheehan has no right to protest or that there is anything wrong with her protesting. Where are you guys getting that? I have to assume you have a guilty conscience or you're inventing it out of thin air. What everyone on the right is saying is that Sheehan is owed no special consideration because she's a war Mother. She is either a useful idiot or a dedicated, extreme, hate America leftist. We are also questioning her motives since she has a history of inconsistency. She is the one who opened herself up for microscopic examination by thrusting herself into the public eye. Neither she nor anyone else has a right to complain when the public eye reveals some big, ugly warts.
I'm afraid you're wrong about that. As an experiment, I timed the news reports on Fox this evening. In an hour of news, they spent a grand total of 60 seconds on Cindy Sheehan. Conversely, they spent over ten minutes reporting on the car bombs in Iraq, the debate over the Iraqi constitution, and new information on jihadist beheadings. On the front page of Town Hall, which you seem to love so much, there was exactly one Sheehan story and one Iraq story.
Sorry, but I've got to stop you when you claim omnipotence on the subject of my thoughts.
There's no omnipotence needed to know your thoughts on this subject. But I'll play along for the moment. Are you opposed to it on constitutional grounds because Congress didn't take an explicit enough position on declaring the war? Are you opposed to it because we're fighting it like a bunch of PC weenies? Are you opposed to it because we're fighting it tactically instead of strategically? Do you think we're wasting time in Iraq when we should have invaded Syria or Iran or even Saudi Arabia? I didn't think so. We may have some commonality in our reasons for opposing the war, like the fact that neither of us is probably too happy about the Bush Doctrine, but I expect most of the commonality ends there.
We were told that Bin Laden was the problem, and I'm totally for going the distance to find and take him out.
There's where the denial comes in. That sounds good, but what do you mean by "going the distance?" If we found out that Syria was harboring him (which is very likely), would you favor a ground invasion of that country, probably necessitating the removal of their government, as was the case in Afghanistan? How about nuclear weapons? Would you favor tactical nuclear strikes to take him out? What if Iran was hiding him? Would you favor military action to go get him there. And would you favbor action while we're at it to destroy their nuclear infrastructure? Your denial is embodied in the fact that you don't believe that the problem is bigger than Osama Bin Laden. You would balk at the very real possibility that to end the bloodshed once and for all, we will have to wipe radical Islam from the face of the Earth, just as we did Nazism and Japanese Imperialism? That is denial of the problem and, ergo, of the solution.
But I do hate being misled about important things such as going to war and reasons for doing so.
I'm sure the Bush Administration feels the same way, if you're talking about the whole WMD thing. But I'll admit maybe I'm attributing too much rhetoric to you in which you haven't actually participated.
Why is it that non-conservatives are regularly accused of hating their country just because they care enough to speak out?
You sound like Behethland. And to both of you I would say, "Methinks the lady doth protest too much." There is no assertion anywhere here that all liberals hate America. The only time I pin that moniker on someone is when they spew the formulaic hate America bile that Sheehan has. If you can't see that a statement like, "America is not worth dying for" falls into the hate America category, then you need to examine your contexts.
And what's wrong with Sheehan protesting Bush? The Iraq War was his baby. Who else should she protest regarding the war? No one? 'Just sit down, shut up, and let us take care of this war stuff as well as how we choose to use your son's life?' I don't think so. Even the president of the United States should be held accountable, and hopefully, everyone's thinking a little bit more about the validity of his word these days.
No one has asserted that Sheehan has no right to protest or that there is anything wrong with her protesting. Where are you guys getting that? I have to assume you have a guilty conscience or you're inventing it out of thin air. What everyone on the right is saying is that Sheehan is owed no special consideration because she's a war Mother. She is either a useful idiot or a dedicated, extreme, hate America leftist. We are also questioning her motives since she has a history of inconsistency. She is the one who opened herself up for microscopic examination by thrusting herself into the public eye. Neither she nor anyone else has a right to complain when the public eye reveals some big, ugly warts.
posted by Anonymous | 7:41 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home