Interestingly, Daniel-in-Brookline, resides in the lovely blue-shaded state of Massachusetts. Whatever. It's still about the debate that Americans all too often shy away from: politics.
Read what Daniel-in-Brookline has to say about the public perception that Bush is a liar. He outlines scant evidence that reads like a boring inter-office memo. He offfers nothing except to urge us to take his word on everything.
Daniel-in-Brookline and his cohort, Rich Casebolt attempted to tag-team me when I commented on the above post.
Read the comments Here.
The gist of their argument is the standard neocon talking points since 9/11. Republicans have a newfound special spot in their hearts for the welfare of the Muslim world. Saddam was a monster waiting to be vanquished along the typical macho bravado better served for Dirty Harry than for the world's only superpower.
I will readily admit that I attempted to bait Mr. Daniel-in-Brookline by mentioning his relationship with Israel as a factor in his worldview.
Your Pro-Israel banner, which I am not against, plainly clouds your view of this unfortunately war.
I added the modifier to the sentence to make this point: Being of Portuguese descent, I too, would be a war hawk if the Spanish were raining SCUDS over Lisbon while I'm drinking expensive Port wine in the comfort of my Northern California home, but, they're not and all I have is Two Buck Chuck in my cabinet.
I urge readers of the Lunatic Fringe Report to visit these blogs to witness arguments that are quite foreign to liberal and moderate minds and pointedly un-American. The neocon philosophy of forcefully reorganizing the Middle East with American power along with the brutality of the enemy and political sleight of hand that follows it must be recognized before it transforms this country from the Shining City on the Hill to a ghetto of darkness.
I unleash you, Lunatics!
5 comments:
LFR= Red F.Y.I.
Thanks for the kind thoughts!
You're probably right that the sentiments I've expressed, on my blog and elsewhere, are "foreign to liberal and moderate minds". (I guess that's why I'm called a conservative... although my voting record might surprise you.)
It's been quite a while, though, since I've been described as "pointedly un-American". (Please note that I said nothing of the sort about you.)
Nor did Rich and I attempt to gang up on you. We simply responded to what you had to say; Rich and I happen to be in agreement on this point. You're welcome to respond to our comments yourself, you know... which thus far, a week after your original comment, you have neglected to do.
best wishes,
Daniel in Brookline
Technically only the arguements were called unamerican, not the writers of said arguements. That being said, I don't think they are unamercian just misguided.
I am about as pro-Israel as one can get. I lived there when I was in high school for a while, and just in general and a staunch supporter of the country. Given my support I believe the war in Iraq was a bad desicion, and one that was fed to us through falsehoods. I don't really see a connection between my support for israel and my disdain for this war. They are two seperate issues, one which has nothing to do with the other.
Steve, you asked me over on Daniel's site:
Don't you see how foolish your exhuberance for a far-flung, phony war looks to the rest of the country and world?
Here's my one-line answer:
As for the opinions of others ... consensus that is not based in sound principle is the way of the lemming, and leads to the same end.
But wait ... there's more.
... and more.
It is small consolation that you are admired by others ... when the only chance to receive such admiration is at your funeral.
Post a Comment