I always assumed that the Left’s hostility to any efforts in the war against terrorists (“can’t we all get along?”) was a byproduct of Bush Derangement Syndrome, a la Groucho Marx’s “Whatever you’re for, I’m against it.” Ann Coulter, however, sees Ned Lamont’s election as proof of the opposite:
As some of us have been trying to tell you, Democrats don’t oppose the war on terrorism because they hate Bush: They hate Bush because he is fighting the war on terrorism.
I’m not so sure, although it does seem as if the peace movement, one that exists in a fantasy land where terrorists don’t plan to blow planes out of the sky just to make a point, is no longer simply a reflexive anti-Bush syndrome. That is, to the extent BDS preceded 9/11, I still think that BDS was the driving force behind the anti-War movement. However, many things, regardless of their origin, eventually have lives of their own, and that’s what we’re seeing here. Hating Bush is no longer a necessary requirement for the anti-War movement. The new anti-War movement is more dangerous for the Republicans, because it’s big enough to have an intellectual reach beyond “I hate Bush.”
I was also going to say that the newly discovered terrorist attack in England may cause some who have doubted the ferocity of the Islamist’s hatred against us to revisit and discount those doubts. However, the mere fact that some people will have this reaction will only fuel the irrationalists’ belief that there was no bomb plot, just a government manipulation to affect people’s thinking.
Filed under: Anti-war, Bush Derangement Syndrome
What’s happening to you is an overload of media.
My husband is almost past it, but there is backsliding. He’s finding it very hard to believe that there are Americans who actually want to see this country destroyed and us reduced to third world status. Why he kept asking. The whys are varied and complicated and don’t really matter. What matters is that they be stopped.
What must be kept in mind at all times is, the left is leftist first, last and always. All other considerations are a distant second. That’s why NOW isn’t out there demonstrating against Moslem women being beaten and murdered for going outdoors without covering themselves a shroud and environmental whackoes aren’t decrying the pollution in China and Russia or even in France. BTW — the French have been using DDT all along to keep their tourist beaches mosquito free. I almost dropped my teeth when my son let that one slip. He lives in France, don’t even ask.
Ann Coulter is right. Perhaps she’s not as genteel and lady-like as one might like, but her brash talk gets her covered in the msm and people who might never have heard her, get to hear what she says.
The leftist mind-set was against confronting Hitler…
It was against a democratic party that was confronting communism in Vietnam. Whether Johnson was strategically correct in increasing the war in Vietnam was irrelevent to the ‘appeaser’ mind-set. They would have opposed anyone who for any reason, resorted to force.
Despite their claims, for most, it is NOT force against others to which they truely oppose, it is the possibility that force against them might exist.
Churchill as usual said it best, “An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.”
After all the intellectual smoke and mirrors is cleared away, at base it is intellectual dishonesty concealing moral cowardice. It is one that values above all else, self-preservation and is willing to sacrifice anything in order to preserve it.
I also begin to see that the Left believe in “another America.” They will replace the evil US with a New Order.
The oft-repeated rant about a ‘divided America,’ (meaning real Americans won’t submit to them) is really more than Freudian. The Left actually live in a different America. With their ‘reconstructed history,’ their set of American criminals (Bush to G.Washington)- their hatred of truth, well described by D_Brit.
I think I saw that vison of a defiled America once. Pope John Paul (?) was allowed to visit Cuba during the late 80’s/early 90’s in a unprecendented gesture of propaganda from Fidel. The world peered in, too, without the propaganda of CNN/the MSM.
The Cuba we saw on our screens– a prison of sameness, ugly poverty, nothingness, people caged into animal-like appearance, despair.. all that is the Marxist nightmare the Left offers. (With the best medical care system, of course!)
As Fidel dies (we hope), the walls will go down? and those who love Cuba may try to resuscitate her. Then the horrors will come forth.
Opportunity knocks during times of war such as ours now, for was not Russia seized during the end of World War I? She is likewise a ruined country who endured unaccountable suffering during decades of insanity, one who also massacred her own citizens, one who threatened to end the world.
I guess I am in Lieberman’s corner. Someone must confront the monster eating the Democratic party.
The British have their home grown terrorists, as we see again today.
So do we.
[...] [Read more and discuss…] [...]
I think that BDS, as well as the newer ‘anti-War/anti-WOT’ followers, are intertwined and interchangeable. We see the same political muck being flung as we saw being scooped up and hurled during the Vietnam War, and the same Communist-influenced thought processes.
For these people, the true believers, nothing can turn them from thier ‘Happy Place’. The strait-jacketed thinking that defies facts, and is exemplified in the tortured and sloppy thinking of Cindy Sheehan, is their meat. Nothing can sway them, nothing can convince them of error.
They are lost and can never find their way home.
b. The Democrat party wasn’t fighting the Cold War that’s why it took Reagan’s election to win it and they most certainly weren’t trying to win the Vietnam War.
They were repeating the propaganda that the Soviets were our equals or even superiors when the truth was they weeren’t even in the same ball park as the west.
Sadly, it’s no different from today’s Democrats.
erp: You bring up a good history lesson. So, the Left has always peddled deafeatism, haven’t they, for decades? Towards what goal?
For the goal of starting a 9/11 so that they can use their muscles, in retaliation to an unjustified attack on the homefront. Every Democrat wishes that they were in power after 9/11, because only then were they at the top of their game. Clinton admitted it himself.
It was supposed to be the Left’s just rewards for acting morally and passively against threats that had not become “imminent”. When a threat had become imminent, due in part to their passiveness, the Left was NOT EVEN in power. Can you not see how frustrated they are? To be so close to the pinacle of liberal morality and righteousness, only to have a poseur aristocrat like Bush be at the center of it when it came?
It’s not that the Left wants to lose, it is just that the Left are waiting for the right moment to nuclearize their enemies. A tarantula, being patient, waiting for the pounce, for the kill shot. Democrats from Roosevelt to Clinton to Carter, have always waited, and waited, until they had the justification and the pretexts to annihilate the enemy. They are populists after all, they are beholden to popular belief. Until that changes, their power is limited by the Constitution.