Wednesday, September 28, 2005

War and peace

This stuff drives me crazy. The war bloggers have come up with this new logo and new smear meme for the left. Pro-victory my lily white butt. They're not pro-victory, they're anti-peace. The logo would make more sense if they used a plane flying over a flag-draped coffin, not that most of this crowd would ever take a chance on coming home in one. War is good, but it's for other people to risk their lives in. But what's a little collateral damage as long as they can claim to be tough and not have to admit they're wrong?

For the life of me I can't understand why Don Surber is on this bandwagon. He's a smart guy and I really like his work and I'm not just saying that because he's the only conservative with the balls to blogroll me. [Which I appreciate btw. Thanks Don. I'll make a Libbytarian out of you yet.]

Nonetheless, I couldn't let this post pass unremarked. I'm in a little debate in the comments section there.

Don's fed up with the "anti-American antiwar movement." Why is it these folks call the exercise of our constitutional right to dissent anti-American? Wouldn't that title be more appropriate for bloggers who seek to silence their fellow citizens, in what they keep telling us is still a "free" country, just because we disagree with them?

And I'm really sick of the anti-peace crowd painting the hundreds of thousands of pro-peace marchers as fringe lunatics because ANSWER had a hand in organizing the march. We don't blame them for Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh, or call every conservative a dumb dittohead just because they share some goals, so I think it's time they stopped blaming us for anti-war radicals.

Really it shows the weakness of their position when they can only refute ours by zeroing in on people and personalities rather than policy. Their myopia is astounding. They tear into the speeches made at the pro-peace rally for garbled messaging but fail to note that the 400 or so that attended the pro-Bush, anti-peace rally overwhelming spent their time bashing Cindy Sheehan instead of speechifying on why the war is so damn good for us. Could it be they have nothing positive to offer?

And you have to wonder how 400 lost souls with nothing of substance to say can claim to be the silent majority. Or maybe they can. The silence of their imaginary supporters is deafening.
Bookmark and Share


Blogger DonSurber said...

I do not relish war. I opposed intervention in Kosovo, in which the death toll at the hands of Milosevic was far smaller than that of Saddam.
I voted for Bush in part in 2000 because of his opposition to nation building.
9/11 changed that, yet a year later I did reject the WMD argument because Saddam would have deployed them. Nonetheless, he had to be removed.
I respect most pacifists. I remember the alternative service pacifists from teh Vietnam years.
ANSWER however is an anti-American org that I despise. Last weekend's rally was an ANSWER production

9:14:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home