« GW speaks truth to power -- 'bout time. | Main | Mary Mapes and the 'new KKK' »

November 12, 2005

Yes, I DO question your patriotism

GW's long-over-due speech in PA yesterday has hit a few Left cultist nerves. Seems they, along with their fellow travelers in the MSM, have their tits in a wringer when the President steps up to counter their lies in no uncertain terms. As Jeff Goldstein observes (with several illuminating links)

Pointedly, Bush used the term “some Democrats” to label those opponents—a designation that I believe is important, because it signals that the partisan gloves are about to come off, and that Democratic leaders who have been making strong public accusations questioning the honesty and good faith of the administration (I’m looking at you Harry and Howard and Nancy) are about to be forcefully challenged on those claims.

Finally. Finally. Finally.

Of course, the comment thread is trolled by the usual suspects with the ChimpyHalliburtonNoWMDNoAQChickenhawkLiar meme we have all come to know and loathe. Up, too, as an object of spittle-flying rage [fair warning on the cognitive dissonance at the two previous links] is Glenn
The White House needs to go on the offensive here in a big way -- and Bush needs to be very plain that this is all about Democratic politicans pandering to the antiwar base, that it's deeply dishonest, and that it hurts our troops abroad.

And yes, he should question their patriotism. Because they're acting unpatriotically.

Policy differences are one thing, the active behavior and words of such ilk as Mommy Sheehan, CodePink, James Massey, A.N.S.W.E.R., oodles of barely warmed-over 60's peaceniks in tied-died t-shirts and grey-haired ponytails, and masked/dressed in black vandals-cum-anarchists DO evidence profound hatred of America and its values and that along with their concerted efforts at aggitating for defeat of American troops in Iraq and their implicit and explicit support of the insurgents bespeaks volumes on being unpatriotic.

Of course, the "how dare you question my patriotism!" shibboleth that rolled so easily off the tongues of Dems during the 2004 election cycle, enabled by non-Dems who immediately retreated into defensive mode when no one was "questioning" the patriotism of said speakers, became an entrenched tactic by the Left to shut down any discussion of the reality of 21st century fascism with the Islamic face.

I've never been afraid to say it. So let me be brutally clear.

You say "Bush Lied" in order to invade Iraq [to enrich Halliburton, for Israel, to further the NeoConZionist agenda, to avenge daddy, because of Prescott Bush and Nazis] ... I question your patriotism

You say Iraq was better off under Saddam ... I question your patriotism

You say American troops in Iraq are the moral equivalent of Nazis ... I question your patriotism

You say Gitmo is the moral equivalent of Soviet Gulags ... I question your patriotism

You say "all cultures are equal" and "who are we to judge other cultures" ... I question your patriotism

Patriotism is not blind support. Patriotism is not "My country is perfect in everyway."

Patriotism is a moral choice, freely embraced and it demands consistent tending. Just as a good marriage is one where both partners not only love each other but are committed to the survival of their relationship and work toward common values and goals, so patriotism is the love relationship in marriage with one's country. It envolves a free embrace of its values and goals with a commitment to work on and with those values and goals. America's core values Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness are moral values. Proper moral values for human beings. Even if one doesn't personally believe in God/Creator, the philosophical necessity of referring to such in the Declaration of Independence was to proclaim as inherently self-evident that Man was not animal. Man as an end in Himself, not a means. This remarkable distillation of values evidenced in Declaration of Independence and in the Constitution is markedly different than many other cultures. To deny the moral imperative of defending those values is to deny their survival. Such a stance is unpatriotic.

Evolution is a process that never stops. Baboons who fail to exhibit moral behavior do not survive; they wind up as meat for leopards.

The next level in moral behavior higher than that exhibited by the baboon is that in which duty and loyalty are shown toward a group of your own kind too large for an individual to know all of them. We have a name for that. It is called "patriotism." ~~Robert Heinlein's address at the U.S. Naval Academy April 5, 1973

Futher discussion and links to be found at:

Jay at Stop the ACLU
Michelle Malkin
Baldilocks ... who pithily observes "You know and I know that this won’t be the end of matter. Those who attempt to shape history don’t just back down when actual facts are presented. "
Beth at MVRWC, who uses the term "chickenjihadis". Love it.
Jay Tea at Wizbang, who states the obvious: "One of the aspects of the anti-war movement that has gotten on my nerves is the blatant dishonesty of the debate."

tracked at Basil's Blog

Posted by Darleen at November 12, 2005 07:44 AM

Comments

I don't bother questioning anybody's patriotism, because it's like questioning their sexual preferences: There's no obvious way to tell, and I'd just as soon not find out for myself anyway.

I do, however, question the intelligence of people who blindly repeat what they've been told without bothering to find out whether it's true or not. I question their intelligence a lot.

And I question the character of anybody who would spread those absurd rumors with full awareness of their falsehood. I not only question their character; I question whether they have any at all.

Calling people like that unpatriotic is off the point. Call them what they are: bastards.

Posted by: Jeff Harrell at November 12, 2005 07:38 PM

Yeah, but those who knowingly spread the falsehoods do so BECAUSE they're unpatriotic. They want us to lose because it's their way of discrediting Bush. That's all that matters to them--saying they win, regardless of the real human beings--fellow Americans--who risk and lose their lives. They blame America for all the ills in the world, and claim they love America, when the America they love only exists in their utopian imagination. They don't like the America we have or our history. That is unpatriotic. They think criticism is patriotic, when the truth is criticism (dissent) only means they're AMERICAN. Not necessarily patriotic, just American, and with the amazingly good fortune of being so.

Calling them unpatriotic is absolutely on target, but they DON'T CARE. They sneer at the concept of "patriotism," except when they want to say they're "patriotic" because of what they say. It's bullshit, of course, but look at how they HATE flag-waving, America-cheering patriots. HATE. They foam at the mouth at the sight of it, and say so themselves that they do. It's almost pointless to call them unpatriotic, like it would be pointless to "accuse" us of being patriotic. They're bastards, all right--and that's far too kind a term for them.

Posted by: Beth at November 13, 2005 01:19 AM

Time to quote some unpatriotic leftard jihadists from our American past.

Those like Teddy Roosevelt:
"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."

or Dwight Eisenhower (who basically IS a leftad jihadists compared to today's silly ass chickenhawk repubs): Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. This is not a way of life at all in any true sense.

Or Abe Lincoln:
Allow the President to invade a neighboring nation, whenever he shall deem it necessary to repel an invasion, and you allow him to do so, whenever he may choose to say he deems it necessary for such purpose – and you allow him to make war at pleasure…. Study to see if you can fix any limit to his power in this respect, after you have given him so much as you propose. If, to-day, he should choose to say he thinks it necessary to invade Canada, to prevent the British from invading us, how could you stop him? You may say to him, "I see no probability of the British invading us" but he will say to you "be silent; I see it, if you don’t."The provision of the Constitution giving the war-making power to Congress, was dictated, as I understand it, by the following reasons.Kings had always been involving and impoverishing their people in wars, pretending generally, if not always, that the good of the people was the object. This, our Convention understood to be the most oppressive of all Kingly oppressions; and they resolved to so frame the Constitution that no one man should hold the power of bringing this oppression upon us.


[Interestingly there is a counterpart to Lincoln's warning about placing too much blind trust in the executive - from none other than Hermann Goering, who seems to have had Darleen and our New McCarthysim in mind: Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine 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 to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country. Yes, Herr Goering, we can see that.]

To finish up, let's give another cheer to all the rightard jihadists (like the all but 4 pubs who recently voted to amend a bill to suspend the Supreme Court decision that the writ of habeas corpus - that's all, just habeas corpus - extended to WOT captives ) who believe we must destroy America to save it. Another leftard speaks, that moonbat Winston Churchill:

"The power of the Executive to cast a man into prison without formulating any charge known to the law, and particularly to deny him the judgment of his peers, is in the highest degree odious and is the foundation of all totalitarian government whether Nazi or Communist."

Posted by: Snickle at November 13, 2005 04:47 AM

Hrubec/Snicker

Pay attention now, this is really simple

Criticism is not a synonym for lying.


Posted by: Darleen at November 13, 2005 09:01 AM

Darleen/Snarling Wingnut, you don't need to make things simple for me. The problem for you is the world is NOT simple. You had a president who exploited a national tragedy, using cherrypicked intelligence that elimitated any countervailing evidence. You had a Congress that cravenly abdicated their Constitutional responsibility and gave a blank check to the Executive, an inexcusable affront to our democracy.

No one is lying now when they say BUSH LIED. Bush is the POWER that took us to war. Bush had the final say. Bush knew (or should have) that he had given incomplete information to Congress, and he knew why (he should have asked Cheney to explain it to him if he didn't.)

Just because the sheltered little princeling Bush is whining now that it isn't his fault that Democrats didn't stop him from driving our country off the cliff doesn't make it true. It doesn't mean a real president has the right to pick and choose when he will accept responsibility. Once a president said The only thing we have to fear is fear itself; now we have one who says Be afraid and cancel your common sense. Once we had a president who said The buck stops here; now we have Bush who says Nothing is ever my fault! Stop being mean to me!

It's not simple Darleen. The only thing that's simpley clear is that the scales have fallen off America's eyes and we see how we were played for fools by a silly puppet president being driven by an unAmerican cabal of elitists using our kids' blood to play out their elitist geopolitical fantasies.

Posted by: Snicker at November 13, 2005 01:16 PM

Actually, if someone says they think Iraq was better off under Saddam I question not only their patriotism. . .

I question their sanity as well.

(Snooker-snickums, I've never questioned your sanity at all. Two sentences into your rants, and I know you're nuts.)

Posted by: TalkinKamel at November 14, 2005 12:02 PM

Furthermore, Darleen wastes good band width on you, toad, letting you spew here.

(Quite obviously, nobody else wants to listen to you.)

Posted by: TalkinKamel at November 14, 2005 02:18 PM

"You say "Bush Lied" in order to invade Iraq [to enrich Halliburton, for Israel, to further the NeoConZionist agenda, to avenge daddy, because of Prescott Bush and Nazis]"

--no, I don't say that he lied. Frankly, I don't know if he lied. But... there are some things that i'd like answered. Does that make you question my patriotism...

ps... I dig your blog.

Posted by: scody at November 16, 2005 03:24 PM