|
|
Posted on 10/26/2003 12:34:58 PM PST by Chi-townChief
The hate just never stops.
Now it's George Bush's fault that the prime minister of Malaysia is an anti-Semitic bigot.
This is what Paul Krugman, the leader of the Republican-haters on the New York Times opinion page, believes.
In case you missed it, a couple of weeks ago, the prime minister, Mahathir Mohamad, told an Islamic summit meeting: "The Europeans killed 6 million Jews out of 12 million. But today, the Jews rule this world by proxy: They get others to fight and die for them."
To make it worse, Mohamad got a standing ovation from 57 Muslim leaders.
This hate was astonishing enough. I didn't think it could be topped. But I underestimated the ability of Paul Krugman. He topped it.
Krugman says you really can't blame Mahathir; Bush made him do it!
Here's how Krugman explained it on Tuesday morning:
"Mr. Mahathir thinks that to cover his domestic flank, he must insert hateful words into a speech mainly about Muslim reform. That tells you, more accurately than any poll, just how strong the rising tide of anti-Americanism and anti-Semitism among Muslims in Southeast Asia has become.
"Thanks to its war in Iraq and its unconditional support for Ariel Sharon, Washington has squandered post-9-11 sympathy and brought relations with the Muslim world to a new low."
Is there anything at all in the world that the Bush-haters will not blame on the president?
Krugman is one of many such haters on the Left. Eight years ago, Nina Totenberg, a reporter for NPR, as much as wished doom upon Sen. Jesse Helms.
"If there is retributive justice," she said during a heated radio discussion, "he'll get AIDS from a transfusion, or one of his grandchildren will get it."
Now Totenberg is back with a similar sentiment for Army Lt. Gen. Jerry Boykin. The general's sin? He described the war on terrorism as akin to a war on Satan.
Now I believe some of the things Boykin said were a little nutty. But I also believe it was hard not to see something Satanic in the images of the condemned workers peering out the windows of the World Trade Center on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001.
But seeing evil in wanton murder is too rigid and fundamentalist for good people like Totenberg. She said of the general: "I hope he's not long for this world."
When people who heard her were taken aback, she backpedaled. "In his job, in his job, in his job, please, please, in his job!" she said.
Thanks, Nina. That makes it all better.
Earlier this summer, I wrote about the Left's hatred for all things Bush, and so I have hesitated to bring it up again lest I be guilty of repetitiveness.
But this week, I can't rein myself. The hate just gets more and more offensive.
For example, in September, Jonathan Chait, a writer for The New Republic, wrote a remarkable piece explaining why he hates President Bush. Some of his friends, Chait said, describe Bush's very existence as a "constant oppressive force in their daily psyche." Chait can't even stand the way Bush talks or walks.
Is this hatred normal? Or are we approaching the edge of insanity here?
Not only do the Bush-haters hate, they also lie.
For instance, a couple of months ago, President Bush stated there was no evidence of a close link between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida. The press bit into his leg like a pit bull and hasn't let go yet. They keep saying gleefully that Bush "admitted" no link.
But this loaded word makes it a lie, because Bush never said there was a link. We didn't knock out Saddam because the dictator plotted 9-11; we knocked him out because we want to create a stable, democratic Middle East that won't birth more fanaticism and terror.
Another thing the haters complain about is that Bush sold the war as a response to an "imminent" threat. He lied, they cry — Iraq was never an imminent threat.
Again, those who accuse Bush of lying are lying themselves. Bush never said the threat was imminent. In fact, in his State of the Union address, he said just the opposite:
"Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words and all recriminations would come too late."
And then there's the report by weapons inspector David Kay to the Senate Intelligence Committee.
According to Sen. Saxby Chambliss, a Georgia Republican who attended the closed briefing, Kay said he had found no actual weapons of mass destruction. But this was only a small part of the report. Kay also outlined what had been a vigorous, extensive and frightening effort by Saddam to gain such weapons.
For instance, said the senator, "Kay found a prison laboratory complex that might have been used to test biowarfare agents on humans, unmanned aerial vehicle and missile technology banned by the United Nations, and equipment for uranium enrichment that could have helped restart Iraq's nuclear weapons program once sanctions were lifted."
Chambliss was shocked when he woke up the next day to headlines such as: "No evidence of Iraq WMD programs found."
Pathetically, the Bush-haters can dish it out, but they can't take it. Whenever a conservative says something even remotely skeptical of the motives of the Left, they go into a rage about Republican "mean-spiritedness."
It boggles the mind. Do these people ever read their own newspapers? And have they never heard the awful things said by the likes of Bill Moyers, Bob Herbert and Michael Moore?
Did they miss the recent "Boondocks" strip in which the cartoonist had our wonderful and brilliant national security adviser, Condi Rice, destroying the planet because she can't get a boyfriend?
Today's Bush-haters: Never before have I seen a group of such mean, nasty bullies pretend to be the victim of such meanness, nastiness and bullying.
Michael Bowers is a copy editor for The Star. He can be reached via e-mail at mbowers@starnewspapers.com.
Well, so far, they haven't claimed that W sired the Clintons.
Conservatives who think progressives are misinformed idealists will forever be blind-sided by the malice of the left-by the cynicism of those who pride themselves on principle, by the viciousness of those who champion sensitivity, by the intolerance of those who call themselves liberal, and by the ruthless disregard for the well-being of the downtrodden by those who preen themselves as social saints.
Conservatives are caught by surprise because they see progressives as merely misguided, when in fact they are fundamentally misdirected. They are the messianists of a religious faith. But it is a false faith and a self-serving religion. Since the redeemed future that justifies their existence and rationalizes their hypocrisy can never be realized, what really motivates progressives is a modern idolatry: their limitless passion for the continuance of Them.****Hillary Clinton and the Third Way from "Hillary Clinton and the Radical Left" by David Horowitz.
|
|
Yes.
Or are we approaching the edge of insanity here?
Not really. This is their "normal" pathologically sociopathic behavior.
Not only do the Bush-haters hate, they also lie.
Headline: The World Is Round!
This is a little
off-thread, but I thought you might
want to read this link:
...
Communism has been defeated and discredited for over a decade now and privatization along with NAFTA was supposed to have turned the Southern Hemisphere into a burgeoning free trade paradise – So what in the heck is going on down there? Why are the people of South America doing all they can to reject the American system of free trade and privatization as forced upon their respective nations? According to the Elites and the mainstream press, the only hope for the Third World is to totally embrace the American plan of privatization, free trade, and “American-style” democratic governance. Yet these Third world folks just don’t seem to understand…
In order to understand what is going down there and to understand where Christianity fits into all of this, lets look at what has recently happened in Bolivia and at the “beta” version of the American Elite’s privatization model, Chile under Augusto Pinochet. ...
[BOLIVIA AND THE CHILEAN MODEL: WHAT DO THEY PORTEND FOR AMERICA AND THE CHURCH?, By Sean Mayfield]
It is very very bad policy to let a country get away with this. It means that others will try to do so in the future and that no agreement with you will be honored. Why should they honor it? There are no consequences if they don't.
I firmly believe that the war with Iraq was coming whether 9/11 happened or not.
To: South40
This would not be happening if the United States, this wealthiest nation on earth, had a DEFENSE DEPARTMENT and a WHITE HOUSE that had cared enough about the American people to make sure there was a NATIONAL FIRE-FIGHTING FORCE equipped to protect us, which is what our government's number one obligation is supposed to be.
Instead, they're using OUR money to protect the people of Iraq.
7 posted on 10/26/2003 10:24 AM PST by katya8 [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.