Wednesday, March 28, 2007

"We're Sorry"

I'm beginning to agree with the Republicans when I hear them say this. They are, indeed, a sorry bunch.

I'm so glad that I'm not the only one who finds the unending apologies completely idiotic. Ann agrees with me. Just today I was having a conversation with a friend on the topic of the fired U.S. Attorneys. Why in the world didn't the administration simply say: we fired them because we wanted to. Frankly, we don't need a reason. If you insist on having a reason, how about this: we didn't like the way they looked at us.

This constant defensiveness and apologizing smacks of weakness and a lack of understanding about how to fight a political opponent who wants to see you stumble and fall. You'd think that the GOP would have the Demo playbook figured out by now.

While I'm on the topic of weakness, why in the world hasn't Tony Blair issued an ultimatum yet? Release our Marines in 24 hours, or we begin the systematic destruction of your navy. Fail to release them after we sink your fleet, and we'll begin bombing Revolutionary Guard targets and oil refineries - the systematic destruction of your army and infrastructure.

Has the West lost its sense of self-preservation? Have we no pride any more?


michael hargis said...

This is a weak administration. Has been from the beginning. There have been a few bright spots here and there, but all in all I'm completely unimpressed with Bush.

Even the one thing I'll allow him a little leeway on, the war, has been mismanaged. What you said --"systematic destruction" -- is exactly what should have been threatened, and carried out, in the very beginning. we are, so no point in whining about the past, eh?

It's a tough time for lovers of liberty.

Call Me Mom said...

I can't help but to wonder how much of our view these days is orchestrated by what the MSM CHOOSES to show. Are we really that self centered and helpless, that willing to lay down our rights so that the government is given such a huge role, or is our thinking being shaped? It's all in the editing.

michael hargis said...

My thinking is not being shaped by anyone. Bush continually refers to the enemy as "the terrorists" as though we are fighting an army composed of people like Carlos The Jackal. That ain't the way it is.

Our enemy is fighting from a religious standpoint, at least some are. They think that if they die while killing a few dozen civilians, then the Supreme Pimp, Allah, will set them up with virgins for the afterlife. It's a murder for sex thing.

Now, I have to think that the people in charge don't really believe that. Cannot possibly believe it. But...they CAN use it as a tool for recruiting. Barnum's statement about a sucker being born every minute is true for all races and creeds.

What do we do? How 'bout this:

1) Warn them.
2) Kill them.

If anyone'll give me an example of any other way that a war gets won, I'll ask for forgiveness.

The Monarchist said...

Speaking for myself, the only MSM in my diet is the Chicago Tribune. Online, so I don't read anything that doesn't interest me. Talk radio is my main source of news.

I agree with Mr. Hargis. I had lunch with a guy this week who made this point: with Germany and Japan we defeated their entire way of life, completely broke them. Not so in our current conflict. Given that we're politicizing prosecution of the war, here's what I see happening. While we may "succeed" in Iraq, we won't really know what that looks like - there won't be any papers signed on the deck of an aircraft carrier. We eventually won't have active combat operations and the Iraqis will have a functioning, popularly elected government... that's how I see success.

But one of two things have to happen for this larger war to end. Either there is a Reformation in Islam that rejects extremism and other Muslims help end this larger war, or, an enormous global conflict (a true World War) settles it once and for all. If we acheive success in Iraq, as I defined it, doesn't mean that the ideology of extremism fails - it's merely one part of a bigger struggle, unfortunately.


Call Me Mom said...

Believe me, I am aware that the bloggers here are able to think for themselves and do.

What I am wondering is how much of our population are also thinking for themselves and how much just gets their news from the MSM and believes every word of it?

How does the government function when the MSM chooses what information to disseminate about what the government does or is doing? Is the MSM taking the place of a ruling body in a de facto way by their manipulation of the information?

This is the question I am trying to get at. What do you think?

p.s. I'm currently reading "Spin Sisters: How the Women of the Media Sell Unhappiness --- and Liberalism --- to the Women of America". It's very interesting and has me thinking about the current presidential campaign and their use of the media as well as the media's use of them.

The Monarchist said...

Well, Mom, I think the majority of Americans get their news from the MSM, and accept the media's agenda as their own. I'd be surprised if anyone who hangs out here would disagree with that.

A necessary part of politics is excellent communication. This administration is not strong in this regard, so the media gets to portray the administration how it chooses, and who's to argue?

I'm curious if there's a solution to this problem. I see the strength of conservative talk radio and the internet being a potential balance against the MSM, but there are demographic phenomenon that cause some concern (PC ownership and literacy is a big one).


P.S. Mrs. Monarchist read Spin Sisters after I heard the author on talk radio maybe over a year ago, and she really enjoyed it.

michael hargis said...

Like you said, AH, there isn't going to be any treaty signing aboard a US warship. I wonder exactly what will constitute victory. Terrorism doesn't have any national boundaries. So...what I really think is, that this is a war between the 21st century and the 10th (or whatever)century.

We oughta win hands down.

For some reason there's an attitude out there that power should restrain itself. I completely disagree. The reason we're at peace with Germany and Japan is because we annihilated them in warfare.

This may sound hard, but I think the way to win is to show the world that we are prepared to kill as many people as necessary to achieve peace. Who's gonna stand against us? We've got submarines that could wipe out most of China in a matter of hours.

Who's left?

The Monarchist said...

Mr. Hargis,

No fair hogging all the top posts in my imaginary American Federalist administration. You can't be Treasury Secretary and Defense Secretary, among other worthy posts.


P.S. Didn't anyone ever teach you how to share?

Anonymous said...

its .i thinking is not being shaped by anyone ....