A vehicle for venting on philosophy, religion, and the general state of things. Proprietor: C. W. Powell

Saturday, February 05, 2005

Richard Nixon's Revenge
I don't much admire Pat Buchanan, for his philosophy is more reactive than creative. But he has nailed this one. Clever title: Richard Nixon's Revenge. Or it could be titled, "How Spiro Agnew brought down Dan Rather." Hee, Hee, Hee. One great quote, "Somewhere Richard Nixon is smiling. Somewhere Spiro Agnew is laughing. I will not ask Dan Rather where they are—as he and CBS are just not “fair and balanced” on this question."

Thursday, February 03, 2005

Dennis Prager: The left is worth nothing: "About 60 percent of the Iraqi people went to vote despite the fact that every Iraqi voter risked his or her life and the lives of their children, whose throats the Islamic fascists threatened to slit. Yet, the Left continues to label the war for Iraqi democracy 'immoral' while praising the tyrant of Cuba.
Leftists do so for the same reason they admired Ho Chi Minh and Mao Tse-tung and condemned American arms as the greatest threat to world peace during and after the Cold War. The Left 'does not know the difference between good and evil.' And that is why it is worth nothing."
Amen. See my next post. The problem with liberals is this: they have no transcendent idea of law and morality. They recognize no God except one who is fully enclosed in the history of the world, one who could not give the Ten Commandments. They certainly cannot recognize that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, One who came down from above. There is no "above" for liberals. Whatever God there is cannot speak except in the history and consciousness of the human race. Because of this denial of transcendent law, every human experience is equally valid--and equally invalid. Who can say that Muhammed's Koran is not equal to Paul's Romans? Why cannot the religious excitement of the Hindu be equal to the regeneration of John Huss? By what standard do we evaluate truth?

These nothing-people are therefore incapable of discerning the difference in the value of a life compared to another. They will not blink at the murder of innocents in the womb, but wax hysterical over the most just deaths of Saddam's most evil sons. They cannot see any difference between the rather mild humiliation of thugs and socio-paths by US Marines in military prisons in Iraq and the rape and murder houses of Saddam. The very idea of evil is a concept they reject and they reject those who think that such a concept could be valid.

But why should we be surprised? These are the same people who defended communism and the wholesale slaughter of the gangster regimes of the USSR, Cuba, Red China, North Korea in the 20th centuries, just as their political ancestors defended Hitler and racism. Why shold we trust their moral judgment now? John Kerry was not able to know if the Iraqi war was worth it until "we know how it turns out." So much for moral clarity!

Wednesday, February 02, 2005

Naysayers tight-lipped since success of Iraq vote - The Washington Times: Nation/Politics - February 02, 2005: " Chicago Sun-Times columnist Mark Brown, who has consistently opposed Mr. Bush and the war in Iraq, wrote for yesterday's edition that 'it's hard to swallow,' but 'what if it turns out Bush was right, and we were wrong?'
The Chicago columnist wrote that he was struck by 'television coverage from Iraq that showed long lines of people risking their lives by turning out to vote, honest looks of joy on so many of their faces.'
'If it turns out Bush was right all along, this is going to require some serious penance,' Mr. Brown wrote. "
As refreshing at it would be, and is, to hear the deafening silence from the "naysayers," after the heroic performance of the Iraqi people in the election, this quotation from Mark Brown shows the moral bankruptcy of the left.

What courage Jimmy Carter and his "Carter Center" showed by their cowardice in not going to monitor the elections, choosing rather to stay in Jordan. Those aged and crippled Iraqis who were carried to the polls had more guts than the whole bunch of carping crybabies in the blue states.

But the worst is the pragmatic ethics of Brown and the rest of his band of brothers. "If it turns out that Bush was right..." What a revelation of Brown's ethical temperature. If it works it's right. How far we have come from Patrick Henry and Nathan Hale.

Modern Pasty Henry "Give liberty unless it carries a risk of death. Then, don't bother. I won't fight for liberty unless I can be assured that I will win the battle and come out o.k."

Modern Nathan Hell: "I regret that I have only one life to give for my country. Because I have only one life, why should I give it for my country? What good will that do me? I won't be around to enjoy my country and don't enjoy it much now anyway. The war in Iraqi is for oil and what good does that do me. What a stinking world we live in."

But history does not belong to the morally bankrupt. I would rather be a Islamic fundamentalist fighting for Allah than one of this crowd that lives for nothing. Shame, shame, shame. It is better to die for something than to live for nothing.


Blog Archive