Jul 09 2005
In Response, Bullshit
The right wants to get the people who bombed London.
The left wants to get Bush.
If there’s any doubt in your mind, troll some leftwing blogs. Read DU. Check out all the tolerant lefties around the world.
Yet again I ask a question that is never answered. What specifically is the left doing to make America safer? We know what the right is doing / trying to do. We know how the left has basically dismissed everything attempted or done as having done nothing.
So what have they done?
What specifically is the left doing to make the world a safer place?
Disagree with the Patriot Act, Aghanistan, Iraq, no fly zones, etc all you want, but that shows an effort.
Where is the effort on the left?
I’ll tell you where it is. Destroying Bush. Pin this bombing on Bush. Pin Madrid on Bush. Pin it all on Bush. There’s only one thing consistent among the left since the year 2000. A complete misunderstanding of every single problem facing this country, and a complete unwillingness to offer a solution.
July 9th, 2005 at 2:14 pm
the bodies were still warm on Thursday when barbara boxer decided it was appropriate to go off on the occupation of iraq and bush policies as THE cause of the London bombings. un-freakin’-believable, but so typical.
July 9th, 2005 at 3:59 pm
Just to be contrarian: what specifically is the right doing to make America safer? I mean, when Clinton was in office, right, any terrorist attacks anywhere in the world were clearly his fault. I mean, not like he was the perpetrator or anything, but his policies and whatnot — his responses or lack thereof — certainly didn’t stop anything (even though this data shows otherwise). I’ve seen countless posts here and elsewhere that squarely lay the blame of the Cole bombing, for example, on Clinton.
Now that Bush is in office, though, with control of the House and the Senate, any terrorist attacks anywhere in the world are clearly … what? Many on the left ALL ALONG have said from the get-go that the war on Iraq was a DISTRACTION from capturing or killing Bin Laden. When you’re not running the country, though, deciding which wars to start in which countries, it’s kind of hard to be held accountable for what you’re NOT doing.
So the Bush Administration pushed hard for a war in Iraq, while the conflict in Afghanistan hadn’t yet accomplished one of it’s primary purposes — that whole “dead or alive” thing with Bin Laden.
Has the war in Iraq made America safer? That’s the big question. If you think it has, then you already have your answer about how the right has helped. If you think it hasn’t — if you think it’s a terrible distraction, and that while Hussein may have been a murderous effing thug he wasn’t in a position to plan or commit atrocities on our soil — then Left has been doing the best they can when they don’t control the White House: try to convince people that Iraq is a fucking mistake, and that the tens of billions of dollars that have been funnelled there would be better used on securing our ports and borders and public transportation systems, and, once again, taking the fight to Al Qaeda. A prolonged military occupation is not the way to stop terrorism.
Also see this good (recent) article from the Times Online, titled We can beat the al-Qaeda Hydra.
July 9th, 2005 at 4:54 pm
Well there’s certainly nothing that Fox News will tell you about, but quite a lot is going on actually. Most involves efforts at eliminating social injustice and other possible causes of terrorism. For instance, a veteran’s organization I belong to is helping to restore water treatment to parts of Iraq. There’s many other specific examples, but I don’t have time to develop a comprehensive list and I doubt it would be read here anyway.
Unfortunately, these nonviolent actions aren’t as noticable as the war waging efforts of the right, but (in case you haven’t noticed yet) the left isn’t in charge in America and thus doesn’t control its resources. Otherwise the very real plans alluded to in the silly little snippet in your post could have been implemented and may have done some real good. We’ll never know.
And for those of you who rant about criticizing our government, please ponder these quotes:
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.” Theodore Roosevelt
“Here in America we are descended in blood and in spirit from revolutionists and rebels - men and women who dare to dissent from accepted doctrine. As their heirs, may we never confuse honest dissent with disloyal subversion.” Dwight D. Eisenhower
“It is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” Herman Goering
July 9th, 2005 at 5:58 pm
Sometimes you read something so full of shit you stop reading the minute you read it. This is one of those quotes:
.
I did? Countless?
A quick search through my archives shows that I have written about the Cole on numerous occasions, and at best criticized the lack of a response of the Clinton Administration. I don’t remember blaming Clinton for anything except the lack of a response, and my archives back me up, despite the claim that there are “countless” posts to the contrary.
You’re right. The left has been doing the best they can to try to get the White House to the exclusion of all else. Just ask the last Dem to try to win the Whitehouse. Iraq was, wasn’t, was, wasn’t, was, wasn’t, was, wasn’t a good idea if you ask him. After all, he voted to fund the troops before he voted against funding the troops.
What has the right done?
Simple. Go after the countries harboring terrorist training camps and chemical production plants (something Hans Blix claimed were there, not George W. Bush). Go after regimes that fund suicide bombers in other countries (Saddam and the Taliban). We removed a major source of money from Saudi Arabia because they’re nothing but terrorist supporting thugs, by closing Prince Sultan Air Base, a base we built and staffed since the war in Kuwait.
We’ve cut funding to terrorist organizations, and made numerous terrorist-related arrests. We’ve foiled numerous bombing plots on our own soil, and broken up at least two major terrorist cells (one in Portland and one in Buffalo NY).
That’s what the right has spearheaded and accomplished.
The left, on the other hand, has done nothing but blame Bush for everything EXCEPT…
There have been NO terrorist attacks in this country since 9/11/01.
What did the left do to contribute to that? Vote for the Patriot Act which they’ve done nothing but distance themselves from and paint as W’s attempt to take over the world? Or maybe the war in Iraq, which no one who voted for it on the left has taken credit for supporting?
While the right is DOING, the left is criticizing, hemming, hawing, whining, handwringing, and complaining.
If everything Bush does is wrong, so be it.
A favorite quote of mine from Robert Schuller really says it all:
Attempting to stop terrorism is a great thing, and making an attempt or taking action that may be wrong is better than watching from the sidelines saying how you would do things better, which is all the left seems to be able to do lately.
July 9th, 2005 at 6:01 pm
You presumptive ass. What makes you think I even watch Fox News?
FYI: I haven’t watched any of the worthless news channels on cable since the day after the election.
You may want to stop painting people with broad strokes. Every time you do, you dribble paint on your shirt.
July 9th, 2005 at 8:52 pm
“Attempting to stop terrorism is a great thing…”
Then when is Bush going to start doing something ro stop it?
I mean his Oil War is not even bringing the gas prices down.
He was a failure as an Oil man.
He was a failure as a baseball club owner.
He is a failure as a president.
July 10th, 2005 at 12:12 am
Have you looked at the snippet YOU appended to the original article lately? You need to improve your lying technique. You’ll never make it in Republican politics if you keep making it this easy to catch you.
July 10th, 2005 at 12:32 am
That video has been floating around the internet since last July.
Ass.
I didn’t make it.
Ass.
Yet again, you presume.
Yet again, you’re an ass.
July 10th, 2005 at 7:15 am
Hey Vinny I didn’t know you were a Republican. I thought you were an independant.
Also, I do watch Fox news. It is the only cable station that I can find that covers Iraq. Good and bad stories are shown/printed daily. I don’t watch stations that won’t show the positives along with the negatives.
July 10th, 2005 at 9:40 am
Paul hasn’t been reading long enough to know that. He just makes assumptions, repeatedly, and he’s not very good at it.
In fact, it’s downright frustrating. You would think someone with so much to say would at least get some backstory before saying it.
July 10th, 2005 at 1:59 pm
Vinny — I should have clarified the “countless posts” bit to reference comments. Posts elsewhere, and people commenting on your posts. You can’t argue the fact that MANY on the right were just as quick to blame 9/11 on the Clinton Administration as they were to blame it on Bin Laden. You know the drill as well as I do — he gutted the military, gutted the intelligence community, had BJ’s on the brain and didn’t care about National Security, etc. etc. etc.
There’s truly no shortage of idiots, either right or left, who want to blame the victims and not the perpetrators.
And, really, it’s patently unfair to claim victory for “the right” for any of the actions you describe, unless, of course, you assume that the only people involved in any of those actions live on the right side of the fence.
Honestly, I think it’s a silly and divisive argument. I’m sorry I responded to it in the first place. People who don’t support Bush still enlist in the Armed Forces and fight in Iraq and work in various government agencies that provide information and support to our counter-terrorist organizations. Just because somebody disagrees with Bush’s foreign policy doesn’t automaticaly make them “a Bush hater,” nor does it prevent them from working in the Coast Guard, or as an EMT, or a police officer, or in the Department of Homeland Security, or in any other capacity that helps to protect our country.
You also have to have an extremely narrow view, suggesting that any anti-terrorist activities that take place in other countries (England, for example) are only being initiated, funded, and managed by conservatives in those countries as well.
The unfortunate reality is that it is damn near impossible to eradicate terrorism, just as it’s damn near impossible to eradicate crime. Somebody wants to strap a bomb to himself and walk into a crowded market? How the fuck do you stop that? You try to minimize it. You try to make sure it doesn’t happen within our borders. You try to do some proactive work to see if you can prevent people from ever becoming criminals/terrorists.
July 10th, 2005 at 2:20 pm
MANY? I don’t know ANY that blamed the actual bombing on Clinton. His lack of response, however, was quite alarming. He did nothing afterward, except prepare indictments.
That’ll scare ‘em.
Don’t split hairs. That’s not the point at all.
The “right” as you scare-quoted it, initiated the policies that brought the afforementioned actions into fruition. The left has done nothing but distance themselves from anything done by the Bush administration.
For example…
The Patriot Act was probably mostly responsible for breaking up the cells in Lackawana and Portland. It was also responsible for the arrest of Mike Hawash (surely you remember him?) who said he knew nothing only to plea-bargain and start naming names that he supposedly never had.
As for your “narrow view” argument, it’s the same thing I said above. The left has distanced itself from the actions that are taken in the name of stopping terorrism or fighting it, since the elections immediately following 9/11. Somebody disagreeing with the actions isn’t necessarily an instant blockade to fighting the fight, however the “left” cannot distance itself from policies and take credit for them at the same time.
It is damned near impossible to erradicate terrorism. However, I’d rather see an attempt made to do something (the right) than distancing, carping, and handwringing (the left).
July 10th, 2005 at 3:48 pm
You may want to stop painting people with broad strokes
Your post is blaming “the left” for focusing too much on Bush and not enough on fighting terrorism. The entire left…that’s not a broad stroke?
July 14th, 2005 at 7:17 am
This is in response to the gentleman who thinks the “Left” is a bunch of hand wringers. As a military man currently serving overseas with the 7th flt I am disheartened to hear that some of the very people I am protecting think I’m an ineffectual hand-wringer. Just to set the record straight, my views on various politcal issues have absolutely nothing to do with my patriotic love for my country. Anyone who paints people of left/right political leanings as “unpatriotic” based solely on that criteria is unamerican in my humble opinion.
It is my understanding that most issues of interest to politically minded people have more to do with social and economic issues than they do with patriotism anyway. Regardless of whether the person housesitting at 1600 Penn happens to be a Republican or Democrat it has never had any effect on how much I love my country and I don’t think it has that effect on others either. I think when people vote they are thinking about what is best for their families and for the future of their country. I don’t think they are concerned that one candidate or the other is more patriotic than the other. Or at least they shouldn’t. The most that anyone should require of their candidate in terms of a litmus test of patriotism is that they serve their country honorably when called to do so and that the policies the propose enhance the basic freedoms enumerated in teh Constitution, not detract from them. After all, we insist our leaders swear to uphold the constitution, not the flag. If the spirit of freedom and liberty espoused by the Constitution is upheld, the flag will continue to fly proudly. It doesn’t need politicians to support it, it stands taller when held up by a free and proud populace.
Just as the military uses the power entrusted to it to protect the less powerful general population against military threats, a political party should use the power entrusted to it to protect the less powerful against those in society who would threaten them economically or socially. A party that alligns itself with an elite minority of the wealthy and powerful is not a democratic party should find no welcome in a democracy. However, this is a free country and, just as the Communists and Facists are free to preach their unpopular views, partys who advocate for the working classes and parties that advocate for the wealthy or industry are free to attempt to convince the voters to support them. Thats democracy.
One last point then I will move on. The Press and the Media are NOT intended, nor do they serve any purpose as cheerleaders for the politicians. It can be assumed that the politicians will use their ample air and press time to promote their one-sided view. If the media is to serve any worthy sevice it must be critical. And as the earlier posting so clealy pointed out with the quotes from past Republican presidents, being critical does not equal unpatriotic.
Please stop with the insults and do some serious critical thinking about the policies and programs you believe in your heart to be beneficial to the people of our country. And people both of Left and Right persuasion should be most critical of themselves and examine their beliefs, criticize and attack their own beliefs until they’ve found through rigorous critcizm those belief that stand up to scrutiny and which they can support with rational arguement, not meaningless vitriol.
Thats all I have to say about that.
July 14th, 2005 at 7:20 am
Actually, we’re talking about the left who isn’t in the military. Obviously those in the military don’t count as handwringers and opportunist politicians