You might have thought we were all past the divisive stage, if you hadn't read Hillary Clinton's latest screed, imitating Paul Krugman. She proclaims the murders an act of political "extremism." Sheesh, "even her boss, whose own past love affair with leftist anti-Americanism and moral equivalency still periodically flares up from the embers, performed admirably enough on the mass murder."
Maybe Sarah Palin will learn some restraint, if she listens to the negative reaction to her video from movement conservatives. I'm not the only one on the right who finds her effort here distasteful.
Neo-isolationists are kidding themselves if they think that pulling out of Afghanistan is justified by the money it would "save." Max Boot writes, "Think of all the millions we could have saved by ending wars prematurely -- quite a bonanza, especially if you ignore the rather substantial costs of defeat. . . . [W]e are locked in an existential struggle against Islamist extremists and that defeat in Afghanistan would have severe consequences for us that make the cost of winning the war seem cheap by comparison. It's the lack of liberal support for the war effort that we have to worry about." And an irresponsible neo-isolationist coming along to snag the nomination in 2012.
The Lebanese have a country, if they can keep it. Elliott Abrams explains: "Newspapers today are reporting that Hizbollah-backed members of parliament have withdrawn from the Lebanese government, effectively bringing down the coalition led by Prime Minister Saad Hariri. . . . [A]t bottom this is far less a test of the United States than of the Lebanese. No one will resist Hizballah unless they do. The majority of Lebanese who oppose Hizballah, and who are mostly Maronite Catholics, Druze, and Sunni, must demonstrate that they have the will to keep their country from complete domination by the Shia terrorist group. This is asking quite a bit, to be sure, but Lebanese should have learned from the impact of their March 14, 2005 demonstrations that world support can be rallied and their opponents can pushed back. But they must take the lead." Read the whole, tragic story.
Palin isn't helping, if you want to elevate the national tone. Nathan Diament perfectly sums up: "I am not offended by Ms. Palin's resort to this response, I think her to be a friend of Israel and the Jewish people. But to my ears, her response keeps our political and civic discourse in the gutter. It does not try to lead Americans to a better place, which might offer the most modest measure of comfort that the victims in Tuscon did not die and suffer completely in vain."
Paul Krugman is a good read, if you don't care about the truth. James Taranto points out that Krugman's characterization of a Michele Bachmann quote is "fraudulent." James writes: "If the broader claim -- that the 'rhetoric' of Republican politicians and the nonliberal media was to blame for last Saturday's act of mass murder -- is true, why can't it be presented without false factual assertions? Krugman's little lie undermines the big lie he and his newspaper are attempting to purvey. Krugman and his colleagues on the Times editorial board are not skilled enough to be effective liars. That is far from the worst thing you can say about newspapermen. But when did the people who run the New York Times forget that their job -- their duty -- is to tell the truth?" Come to think of it, Krugman makes stuff up in his area of "expertise."
The real focus should be on mental health, if you want to address a problem and not score political points. Charles Krauthammer: "It started in the Kennedy era with the deinstitutionalization, which was supposedly humane. But today what we are doing with this insistence on individual autonomy and the reluctance to want to put anybody into [involuntary psychiatric] commitment is that the homeless are dying on the street, freezing on the streets . . . .And what we're doing with the dangerous mentally ill, like this Loughner guy, is leaving him loose in society, like the Virginia Tech killer. Remember him? There were all kinds of signs of derangement in him. . . . There were five incidents in the college that Loughner was in -- five encounters with the police, the campus police. One of his professors said: Can't you do anything? And they answered: We can't do anything until he does something."
The left would look much less foolish, if they got the facts before spouting off. It seems --no kidding -- the lunatic wasn't into politics. Amazing,
You see how House Speaker John Boehner has grown into the job, if you watch his memorial speech.
Posted by: cajunkate | January 13, 2011 7:55 AM | Report abuse
Posted by: eddiehaskall | January 13, 2011 9:04 AM | Report abuse
Posted by: Free_American | January 13, 2011 9:31 AM | Report abuse
Posted by: Lazarus40 | January 13, 2011 10:01 AM | Report abuse
Posted by: 54465446 | January 13, 2011 11:18 AM | Report abuse
Posted by: jcp370 | January 13, 2011 11:51 AM | Report abuse
Posted by: 54465446 | January 13, 2011 11:57 AM | Report abuse
Posted by: DocC1 | January 13, 2011 12:21 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: coffeetime | January 13, 2011 12:32 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: kenhe | January 13, 2011 12:42 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: DocC1 | January 13, 2011 12:49 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: 54465446 | January 13, 2011 12:53 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: jmcfan2 | January 13, 2011 5:10 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: GregD1 | January 15, 2011 7:02 PM | Report abuse