I just have an observation to make after reading Obama’s latest encyclical let loose upon the imagination of the American public in regards to the panty-bomber. As a preamble, it doesn’t take much to notice the bizarre order of events with his response – an attack on Americans wasn’t enough for him to bother his vacation, and when he finally made his first speech on the issue he was painfully sensitive to call the wretched failed bomber an alleged criminal instead of an enemy combatant. When given enough time to research what the American people wanted to hear, and read his critics, more than a week later, he’s able to perform an act of anger to fit what he has surmised would be the best received reaction.
Some have already observed the linguistic gymnastics he painfully tiptoes through in order to maintain his false image as the beloved dear leader of not just his American constituents, but the adopted constituents of the Earth, despite the evidence showing their disdain for his conciliatory antics. What strikes me is how idiotically literary his response to our terrorist attackers is. He has repeated a few times his unwavering intent to “disrupt, dismantle, and defeat their networks” once and for all.
What he doesn’t mention is the essential element of DESTROYING our enemies. His goal is to render their networks useless – ostensibly doesnt this mean that our enemies will still exist, but they won’t be able to… connect to each other via wi-fi? Is he going to shut down their twitter access like our good friends in Iran?
This highlights the main difference between conservatives and liberals. The left places their faith in their brains, in their intellect. The right places their faith in wisdom. As long as you have a PhD., the left will bow to you, and if you’re the leftist president, you’ll bow to anyone that has the slightest of imagined grievance against the US, because that’s what PhD’s have taught him is the answer to all aggression.
As Dennis Prager says, if your enemy tells you he’s going to get up in the morning and murder you, then you get up earlier and kill him first. To add a hint of Christianity, you pray for his soul first before you kill him. This is especially true if his aim is not just to kill you, but to slaughter your family, and destroy your civilization.
The concomitant liberal aphorism would be, if your enemy says he’s going to get up in the morning and murder you, you get up earlier, make him breakfast in bed, hug him, and stretch out your neck for his scimitar so that he knows you’re not a racist or an imperialist. Let’s see how far we get with that tactic….
It also reminds me of an article in Time magazine that was printed soon after 9-11. While we were all recoiling in horror at this awful attack, failing to find the words, the way to express how terribly this day was, Time magazine girded its frontal cortex with its intellect and sputtered out this article entitled, “The Banality of Bin Laden” (http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,188329,00.html). It was if our struggle against Islamic extremism could be analogized as a limp-wristed literary squabble between bespectacled English teachers.
Guess what, morons, they don’t want to criticize your linguistic skills. Our enemies want to slit your throat, stone your wife, mutilate your daughter’s genitals, and enslave your son. They want to destroy your civilization.
We should have known even back then that the left didnt take this seriously, that they didn’t understand the seriousness of this struggle. The seeds of our current cowardly attitude toward this war were clear even back then. And these seeds have slowly come to their fruition in the person of Barack Obama.
I was reminded of this article recently when CNN had a very intelligent and eloquent guest reviving this sophisticated smug criticism of our mortal enemies. It flashed on the screen again, those idiotic words, “The Banality of Al-Qaeda.” The left is still playing a little cerebral game with the Islamists. They’re not even bringing a knife to a gunfight – they are bringing chess pieces to combat a suicide bomber.
So don’t be surprised when Obama tries to fight suicide bombers with alliteration. “Disrupt, Dismantle and Defeat” of networks sounds so much more eloquent and clever than “Axis of Evil” or calling for the defeat of the “Evil-doers”. Maybe Bush was a little awkward with his descriptions. However, given the option, I’ll take clumsy and alive over educated and dead any day.