“Got us attacked” — you have to love the world-began-in-2001 mentality behind that statement. Jonathan, we got attacked in 1993 (World Trade Center I), 1996 (Khobar Towers), 1998 (embassy bombings in Tanzania and Kenya) and 2000 (USS Cole). The result of 9/11, which apparently Valania thinks we somehow provoked (by using the phrase “got us attacked”), was at least one war both presidential candidates have pledged to fight harder. The other, Iraq, is about to wind down completely in victory, no thanks to Barack Obama, who demanded that we flee Iraq when the going got tough.

Let’s not forget the seizing of the American embassy and the taking of hostages in Iran in 1979 and the bombing of the Marine barracks in Lebanon in 1983. The key is that people who disagree with the existent of Israel have been willing to attack us since at least the early 1980’s.
–
Ignorance, our most costly commodity – paraphrased from Rush Limbaugh.

A sample of things to come?

Well written.

I know who -my- enemy is.

Grue in the Attic on October 27, 2008 at 3:10 PM

…I believe in simple societal mathematics…the friend of my enemy is my enemy.

Therefore, Syria — enabling the resupply and reinforcement of Al Qaeda in Iraq — is my enemy…and can stop bellyaching about their airspace/territory being “violated”…they’ve been running a war on the cheap….

Therefore, Iran — materially assisting, training and augmenting Al Qaeda in Iraq — is my enemy…and can stop joining Syria in bellyaching…well, you know….

Therefore, many in Pakistan — sheltering, assisting and otherwise sucking big butt of Al Qaeda and the Taliban in the gathering them to their warm bosoms — is my enemy…and frankly deserves the unrest, tribal murder and economic turmoil they now experience…it’s a toss-up whether they’re useful or harmful to the War on Terror…every step forward is met with two backwards….

…and the Democratic Party — celebrating every defeat of American forces, trumpeting its every misstep, even condemning as war criminals our service personnel without the slightest shred of evidence — is my enemy…but that’s nothing new.

As ambitious as Lucifer, the Democratic Party shows, through the scribblings of this thread’s subject, that they neither respect nor really understand the concept of democracy. For at least a generation now, the perpetual infants of the Left have held that democracy means that they get what they want, when they want it…and anything which thwarts their wishes runs counter to democracy.

They’ve been doing everything in their power to undermine the very concept of democracy — the ballot — as evidenced by the gambollings of ACORN, the subversion of a never-really-that-free press, the slicker-than-owl-snot under-the-table financing arrangements being daily discovered, and the general absence of any sort of loyalty to anything beyond the narrow agendas of party.

Race is a tool, economics is a tool, the press is a tool, any promise one can mouth is a tool (why not, as we all know they’ll be repudiated at the first convenient momemt), and all the tools come together to rebuild the US into “America as a socialist beehive”.

Back many years ago, a disturbed man let loose in a San Diego, CA, McDonalds with a brace of hand- and small-caliber weapons. It was euphamistically called the “Big Mac Attack”…and it’s been repeated by other broken toys masquerading as men many times since. Just after it happened, though, I remember a Lefty editorial writer suggesting that we end trial by jury, as the law was too complicated to be left to us, the “great unwashed”.

The Left has no sympathy for us…for our Constitution…for our traditions as a nation…for our value as human beings…and I don’t believe for a second that this cited piece (of sh*t, it must be said) is anything even distantly resembling Mr. Swift’s “A Modest Proposal”. It’s more a glimpse into the black soul of the Left.

I know who my enemy is…and I think that it’s about time he knew that I have a free citizen’s eye on him….

In 2000, Bush-Cheney stole the election, got us attacked, and then got us into two no-exit wars. Four years later, white people reelected them.

If only Black people had been allowed to vote in 2000 and 2004, this would never have happened!

Oh, wait.

Racism. There is no other name for it. Jonathon Valania, in an editorial published (shamefully) by the Philledelphia Inquirer, shows a level of self loathing that is rare even among liberals.White people shouldn’t be allowed to voteAs a lifelong Cauca…

hawkdriver on October 27, 2008 at 4:19 PM

Interesting and well put.

P.S. “Comments are closed” and after just 41 comments. I wonder why that could possibly be?

andycanuck on October 27, 2008 at 3:58 PM

System overload or, what the New Orleans paper does, cut off comments if they all are essentially the same and inconveniently opposite what the Times-Picayune puts on its editorial pages. Criticism of William Jefferson is quickly squelched. Criticism of Ray Nagin can go on for days.

What if 95% of Whites clung bitterly to the candidate whose skin matched theirs?

The answer you get back from asking such questions to liberals usually starts with a look of bemusement and a comment about how whites have been clinging to white candidates for centuries. Then you’d get a long list of “charges” enumerating all the ways “whitey” has systemically kept the black man oppressed. It would not be surprising to find claims that Thomas Jefferson was a moron and Sally Hemmings was the one who penned the Declaration of Independence. Likewise, you’d find out that there wasn’t a single significant historical, cultural, or technological event that wasn’t really the work of blacks and stolen by whites.

Shortly after that, you’d simply be condemned as a racist for not giving Obama his rightful place in the nation after all the things “you and your people” did to the black race. How dare you! ;0

The losing side is always guilty.
progressoverpeace on October 27, 2008 at 3:43 PM

That was the beauty and genius of Lincoln and Grant as the South surrendered at Appomatox. When the South (Gordon) ceremoniously surrendered their arms to the North (Chamberlain) many concessions were made that paved the way to a complete nation again.

I can’t find the exact quote, but a Civil War soldier from Tennessee named Sam Watkins said something to the effect, “America has no north, no south, no east, no west. The sun rises over the hills and sets over the mountains, the compass just points up and down, and we can laugh now at the absurd notion of there being a north and a south. We are one and undivided”.

It’s why we say the United States “is” and not the United States “are”.

Post-racial media: White people shouldn’t vote

Brilliant, cutting satire or earnest policy suggestion? The Philadelphia Inquirer runs Jonathan Valania’s column
proposing a moratorium on Caucasian votes in Pennsylvania as a……

Terror based execution of civilians is one line that should not be crossed. The Russians, Germans, and Japanese are known for having done it, and some were rightfully prosecuted for it.

Count to 10 on October 27, 2008 at 3:52 PM

We, rightfully, threatened to exterminate the Japanese and started on it with firebombings and nukes. This is what was required and it was the correct thing to do. Trying to split these hairs over “civilians” and such is what gives openings to scum like Jeremiah Wright – he banks on the fuzziness of moral generalizations that are supposed to be “universal”. My view is that war is not “universal” in any sense, but the most deeply personal (in terms of nations) of all. We make judgments about war based on nothing but our interests and our sense of right and wrong.

We had problems with the Japanese and Germans for what they did to us and what they tried to carry out that would have affected us. That their behavior, that we found out about, turned our collective stomachs is just something on top of it all – worthy of extra punishment (though that is not what many of them got, anyway! – life sentences … LOL). But, civilians are targets in every war, and we all know that. We cannot start formulating laws that deny one of the basics of warfare (at least insofar as all of recorded history has told us).

And we should never give our sovereignty to an multi-national body to make the sorts of fuzzy judgments that are required in these circumstances. They will always be warped into something destructive.

P.S. “Comments are closed” and after just 41 comments. I wonder why that could possibly be?

proposing a moratorium on Caucasian votes in Pennsylvania as a response to bald assertions of Keystone State racism from John Murtha and Ed Rendell.

The worst racism out there is being ignored. What if 95% of Whites clung bitterly to the candidate whose skin matched theirs? But they aren’t…not even in supposedly racist PA.

Janos Hunyadi on October 27, 2008 at 3:48 PM

I don’t mean to take away from the ones that were rightfully prosecuted for atrocities. But there were those who should not have been.

progressoverpeace on October 27, 2008 at 3:43 PM

Some standards, even in war, should be enforced. Terror based execution of civilians is one line that should not be crossed. The Russians, Germans, and Japanese are known for having done it, and some were rightfully prosecuted for it.

MB4 on October 27, 2008 at 2:16 PM

I prefer these myself.

“Before all else, be armed.”

“For among other evils caused by being disarmed, it renders you contemptible.”

Niccolo Machiavelli

German generals were tried and found guilty of basically following orders while being on the side deemed to have initiated a conflict, because no one could find an atrocity to stick on them.

Count to 10 on October 27, 2008 at 3:36 PM

This is incorrect: several German military officers were convicted of knowingly engaging in policies designed to murder civilians and prisoners of war. They were not convicted ( or put on trial ) for “basically following orders” ). Their “side” did not “initiate a conflict”, but engaged in wholesale genocide

That is what the “Nuremburg Trials” were about; you are either ignorant or deliberately misrepresenting the historical facts–or both

Thats better, thanks for fleshing out your point, I withdraw the cranial vacancy comment!

German generals were tried and found guilty of basically following orders while being on the side deemed to have initiated a conflict, because no one could find an atrocity to stick on them.

Count to 10 on October 27, 2008 at 3:36 PM

The losing side is always guilty. And this stuff about “atrocities” during war is one of the worst developments of modern times. All war is bad. That’s why countries ought to think 5 times before starting them. And, if they lose, they are criminals – how bad is determined by who they lost to and how much damage and utter chaos they wreaked. If we decide that they acted in a way that offends our sensibilities then we just say that and punish them for it, but this idea of “crimes against humanity” or anything else like that has always seemed silly and naively dangerous, to me.

This is not directed at you, but the general idea of “war crimes” or “crimes against humanity”. I think that what we did in Nuremberg set the stage for the idiotic hair-splitting that we see nowadays with people whose evil and threat to our society is quite obvious. It also stops us from using tactics that must be used in wartime, depending on the culture of the enemy.

“The oath taken by all officers of the Regular Army reads as follows: …do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely……

The liberties which we enjoy in this nation are now taken for granted, but you must remember that they were bought with blood. They are set forth and guaraneteed in the Constitution. It is significant that this oath emphasizes protection of the Constitution as the first loyalty”

No member of the military is obligated to follow an unlawful order; in fact, anyone who carries out an unlawful order is responsible for any consequences

Do your self a favor and count yourself out as an individual that has a brain! Maybe we should try “passive warfare”; now..now Adolf, your invasion of europe has earned you a time out, go to your room you bad boy! (maybe bad is to strong a word?)

dmann on October 27, 2008 at 3:29 PM

?
Can I call a Godwin, here?
German generals were tried and found guilty of basically following orders while being on the side deemed to have initiated a conflict, because no one could find an atrocity to stick on them.