George F. Will: What lessons do we draw from Madrid?

SF Chronicle ^ | 3-18-04 | George F. Will

[Oldeconomybuyer]

Washington -- MEASURED by the immediacy and importance of their political effect, the train bombs in Madrid were the most efficient explosions in the history of terrorism. Detonated 74 hours before polls opened in a national election, the reverberations toppled a U.S. ally.

Seven decades ago, Spain became a cockpit for the 20th century's contending totalitarianisms -- fascism and communism. Its 1936-39 civil war, a witches' brew of political and religious passions, was exceptionally savage, even for a civil war. Last Thursday, this century's passions exploded in Spain.

Perhaps Sunday's election, which removed the leadership that took Spain into the war against Islamic terrorism, means that after the homegrown terrors of the 20th century, Spain, like much of the rest of Europe, wants only peace, and at any price. But Americans should be tentative about extracting lessons from all this.

[snip]

[KantianBurke]

why did u exerpt this article?

[Bismark]

"Monday morning's headlines suggested a loss of U.S mastery of events. But, then, belief that events can be mastered is the root of most political misfortunes"

This is so true and it is the major flaw in Liberalism. They truly believe that events can be directed and planned by a central authority.

[Seth1]

Will works for the Wash Compost. Even his syndicated stuff has to be excertped because he is a Wash Compost employee.

[KantianBurke]

sheesh! what a bunch of tightass leftists. Stupid Compost

[InterceptPoint]

why did u exerpt this article?

Well one good he may have done it is because the rest of the article is so rambling, unfocused and inconclusive as to what George Will is really tyring to say that it isn't worth reading.

I think George Will has either gone over to the dark side or is just losing it. He used to be one of the most reliable commentators on things political. These days it just pains me to read his stuff.

What happen to you George?

[Oldeconomybuyer]

George Will writes for the Washington Post. Any article associated with the WP must be exerpted.

[GWB00]

the article is so rambling, unfocused and inconclusive

I thought it was just me.

[finnigan2]

At one time George Will was a good read. Clear, concise, thoughtful and to the point. In the past few years his writings have become dense, turgid, verbose and frankly boring. I can seldom make it past the first few paragraphs before my eyes start to glaze over. What is his problem? I think he's lost his hunger. He's arrived. He's become self important and consumed by small details which he mistakes for insight.
To compare him now to a Mark Steyn article is to compare poop to pearls.

[livius]

I think he tried to cover too many things in the article.

I have seen the point made in the Spanish press, however, that one of the reasons the Spanish left was so emboldened to make political hay out of the attack on Madrid was that they believe there is no support for Bush or the Iraq war here in our own country. Hence, Spaniards felt that our resolve was not firm and there was no point in supporting it. (This impression is thanks to our liberal media, of course.)

[tkathy]

Listening to him on cable, he rambles on about past historical events and it is very hard to figure out if he is saying anything.

[Enduring Freedom]

Will and Buckley are old-school pious GOP debating club elitists who seek to teach and offer goodwill to their inferior opposition, who will in turn slit their throats in less than a minute.

They are completely unarmed against the Clintonian Democrats of the modern era.

Free Republic gets it.

We are Crusdader Warriors for Freedom, and we will kick your ass.

We are willing to make the obvious link between Democrats, Socialists and Terrorists who all despise America and vow our destruction.

And we are willing to take the battle to the enemy.

[Savage Beast]

"Peace at any price" is no peace at all. The world must not forget this.

"When the film's narrator intoned, 'The rebels advanced on Madrid,' the students, enamored of rebellion and innocent of information, cheered. No one had ever taught them which side in Spain had been rebelling."

This illustrates one consequence--additional to "a paralyzing national discorse"--of the vituperation "now so routine" in "American rhetoric." Not only is the public ignorant--it is misinformed.

The propaganda spewed forth by politicians and their supporters, notably journalists, amounts to dysinformation, and it dangerously misleads the public.

Will cites examples in this very well written article.

(BTW, did Karen Kwiatkowski refer to Defense Department officials as "E-Ring Jews, or is this Will's paraphrase?)

Hyperbole is an expected part of pre-election campaigning, but charges such as those made by Ted Kennedy and Howard Dean exceed hyperbole and become dangerous dysinformation. They obviously know this. Evidently the possible consequences of such mendacity do not concern them--or the journalists and academicians who repeat it. Those who spew forth such reckless dysinformation should be called to task and condemned for it by all who consider themselves truthful.

"Monday morning's headlines suggested a loss of U.S mastery of events. But, then, belief that events can be mastered is the root of most political misfortunes."

Yes, and the American people had better remain focused to what is best for the U.S.--which, of course, includes maintaining the support and alliance of the people of the world.

But one thing is certain: America had better remain the richest and most powerful nation on earth.

Another thing is also certain: Americans--especially those who are particularly influential--must become far more scrupulous about truth.

[cynicom]

Will was just another draft dodger that makes his living writing with his right eye and right hand. He could switch and no one would know or care.

[PGalt]

Very well stated.

[Enduring Freedom]

The Socialists are vulnerable on a few critical fronts, and only Free Republicans seem to understand, with the exception of Rush, Coulter, Steyn and Hannity.

By their nature, they are vastly different people.

The GOP care about content. They value words, coherence, logic. They are intellectual.

The Socialists ignore content and are swayed by pictures, style, appearance. They are emotional.

The GOP care about truth. They value justice, the rule of law, respect, discipline, responsibility, consistency, ideas.

The Socialists ignore truth and are swayed by charm, envy, lies, instant-gratification, convenience, power.

The GOP are fierce individuals, many of who have moved on to the level of inter-dependence with other competent colleagues to achieve higher goals.

The Socialists are dependents, peer-pressure victims who are weak and dangerous parasites to their hosts, often the GOP. And rather than be gracious and thankful for the handout, the Socialists resent and hate their benefactors, biting the hand that feeds them. They will not bow to its GOP host for kindness, instead the Socialists believe they have a moral claim against GOP assets, and that their plight is the fault of the GOP.

It is useless to try to convince a Socialist by debating them - they are more akin to dumb animals than humans.

But in that is the key to their conquest - they will react predicatably because THEY DO NOT THINK.

Here goes:

1. Always translate ideas to their EMOTIONAL EQUIVALENT.

As examples:

Don't say:
"President Bush is fighting the War on Terrorism", say
"PRESIDENT BUSH IS KEEPING YOU AND YOUR FAMILY SAFE FROM ATTACK".

Don't say
"Kerry voted against military funding", say
"KERRY VOTED TO PUT AMERICAN SOLDIERS AT RISK".

2. Image-oriented stimulus-response Socialists live in fear of public humiliation - it is the equivalent of death.

Ridicule is the secret weapon of both the GOP and the Socialist leaders too to influence the lunk-headed Socialist voters.

Remember "It's the economy, stupid"? This powerful campaign was created by the Socialists and aimed to influence their own stupid voters!

Other examples of this powerful technique:

Don't say:
"Kerry is soft on defense", say
"CHOOSE SUICIDE - CHOOSE KERRY"

Don't say:
"Kerry will negotiate and appease terrorists", say
"ONLY FOOLS AND DEAD PEOPLE TRUST TERRORISTS"

[cajungirl]

You are so incredibly wrong about George Will that I am shocked. He is a conservative, no employee of the post and one of our best best voices.

[Enduring Freedom]

Or how about these:

"FUNERAL DIRECTORS FOR KERRY -
Any business is good business."

"BUY YOUR FAMILY PLOT
Kerry for President"

"ONLY LOSERS VOTE FOR A RICH WHITE LIBERAL"

[Enduring Freedom]

Read my reply - I think Will is good-hearted but completely ineffectual.

Why he would play puppet to George Steph is astonishing. It is degrading and supportive of the pathetic agenda of the former Clinton squaw.

[cajungirl]

I disagree with you about Will. I read this column and understood it.