Free Markets, Free People


Quotes of the Day–liberal irony edition

Seriously folks, Victor Davis Hanson got me laughing so hard today that I almost coughed up a lung. 

What struck me as so funny?  His characterization of the left and Lybia Libya.   His article nails it.

Quote one:

Even liberal television and radio commentators cite ingenious reasons why an optional, preemptive American intervention in an oil-producing Arab country, without prior congressional approval or majority public support — and at a time of soaring deficits — is well worth supporting, in a sort of “my president, right or wrong,” fashion.

He calls that the “war mongering liberals” and claims it may presage a move by the left to pre-Vietnam days of “hawkish ‘best and brightest’”.  Still laughing over that possibility.

Quote two:

Conservatives have complained that opposition — especially in the cases of then-senators Barack Obama and Joe Biden — to George W. Bush’s antiterrorism policies and wars in Afghanistan and Iraq was more partisan than principled. Obama ended that debate by showing that not only can he embrace — or, on occasion, expand — the Bush-Cheney tribunals, preventive detentions, renditions, Predator attacks, intercepts and wiretaps, and Guantanamo Bay, but he can now preemptively attack an Arab oil-exporting country without fear of Hollywood, congressional cutoffs, MoveOn.org “General Betray Us”–type ads, Cindy Sheehan on the evening news, or Checkpoint-like novels. In short, Obama has ensured that the antiwar movement will never be quite the same.

Tell me you’re still not chuckling, huh?  I mean check out that laundry list of, uh, accomplishments that Obama has “embrace[d]” or “expand[ed]” upon.  It was that list that had the left in a high hover for almost 8 years when Bush was in office.  Obama?  Meh, not so much.  It is absolutely telling that the “anti-war movement” now appears to have been about as principled as Jimmy Swaggart.  Long on preaching, making signs and talking about high minded principles.  But when their choice of a prez does the same or more … pretty much crickets. Remember the rumble about “preemptive” war? “War of choice”?  “Dumb wars”? Done and done.

While there are some on the left that have been consistent in their positions, they’re few and far between.

So, is your irony meter pegging out yet?  No?  Try this – quote three:

The media serially blamed a supposedly lazy Ronald Reagan for napping during military operations abroad. George W. Bush was criticized for cutting brush at his Texas ranch while soldiers fought and died in Iraq. Obama rendered all such presidential criticism mere nitpicking when he started aerial bombardment in the midst of golfing, handicapping the NCAA basketball tournament, and taking his family to Rio de Janeiro.

Inconsistency?  Not our media.  Bad “optics” are only for the right.  Of course they’re no worse than our President or the left in general.  But the irony impairment of all those folks remains a serious condition.

Quote four:

After Bush’s interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan, many war-weary Americans believed that we would never again get involved in a Middle East war. But now, with Obama’s preemptive bombing of Libya, giddy American interventionists are again eyeing Iran, Syria — and beyond!

I keep thinking back to Robert Gates at West Point this year and his line about how any president who gets us engaged in another war in the middle east needs to have his head examined.

Uh, I think it is about time, don’t you?  Some may argue it is well past time.

~McQ

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Tumblr
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • email
  • Print
  • Google Bookmarks

9 Responses to Quotes of the Day–liberal irony edition

  • I’ve been bad. I snuck over to Prof. Erb’s blog and found his latest blathering on Obama and Libya. I gotta tell you it’s a humdinger. It starts this way:

    President Obama’s speech on March 28, 2011 may go down as one of the historic Presidential speeches as he not only explained and defended a controversial foreign policy decision, but clearly enunciated a foreign policy doctrine.   It also was a forceful, unambiguous speech, resisting efforts to use vague slogans and unclear rhetoric to cover up tough issues.  For the first time in his Presidency Obama has had to show true foreign policy leadership and he has come through.

    That’s a tough act for even Ott Scerb to follow.

  • huxley is a better man than I for strolling into the madhouse, but I am not surprised at the quote he presents.  Indeed, it’s similar to what quite a few leftists have been saying over the past couple of weeks.  Thus I say that VDH’s “the antiwar movement will never be quite the same” is patent nonsense: the “anti-war movement” is and will remain what it always has been, which is just a lefty agitprop operation.  Yes, there are those in the anti-war movement who are genuine pacifists, but taken as a whole, it is and always has been a way for dems to astroturf opposition to GOP politicians.

    When I think of the hypocrisy that is on display from the left these days, it really makes me rather sick.  There is no dealing with people who are so dishonest.

    • Thus I say that VDH’s “the antiwar movement will never be quite the same” is patent nonsense:

      I guess VDH means that the perception of the antiwar movement will never be quite the same, because I see little hope of that movement changing. It is an astonishing thing that no matter how caught up in contradictions it becomes the left (for practical purposes the same as the antiwar movement) doesn’t even justify it. Mostly leftists ignore the contradictions and even go on the offensive, as Erb does, proclaiming the contradictions as virtues and historic occasions.

      “We have always been at war with Eastasia.”

      Leftists even quote Orwell, having no awareness that 1984 was a critique of the left, not the right. They just don’t notice. But hey! time’s short and they have to bounce — the Two-Minute Hate is about to start. Who is it this week?

      • huxley - I guess VDH means that the perception of the antiwar movement will never be quite the same, because I see little hope of that movement changing.

        Whose “perception”?  Those of us on the right know and have known the “anti-war movement” for what it is; our perception won’t change.  Indeed, it is reinforced by the blatant hypocrisy currently on display. 

        The left, as you point out, effectively doubles down: they will not – perhaps CANNOT – recognize that they are participating in a lie.  Their perception won’t change, either.

        • Whose “perception”?

          docjim505: The independents and centrists I would hope, though how many of them are around I don’t know. But I suppose you are correct. On the right we have new arguments for the left’s hypocrisy, but it won’t make much difference.

    • Yeah, I used to think that it was a matter of sitting down and discussing in cogent arguments, making your point, and acknowledging the validity of each side.
      I realized that the left regards those of us on the right as evil and to be defeated utterly by any means necessary.  To them, we have no right to our positions.  We can’t be allowed to present any dissenting opinion.  Our voices, or orgs must be suppressed.  They slander us by the self same practices that they follow.
      We can’t even get the truth or even balance from the news media that is supposed (I never believed that anyway) be the custodiet of Ipsos Custodiet ….
      And the hilarious thing about this if that when they slander us we actually pull back and examine whether it is true or not before we respond.  This causes us to lose the conversational initiative and we lose the argument because we drop out of the conversation.
      Except for those wild characters in talk radio, etc, we have no one to speak for us.  The GOP is corrupt and unwilling to speak out for fear of losing their pork barrel.  And as much as people rail about Fox, it is nowhere near as manically partisan and MSNNBC.  For every Glenn Beck there are 10 in MSNNBC as bad or worse (however not many people watch them so …)
      It was actually good to see all this come out because it shows that every statement they make is about getting and keeping power.  Their ideology is a convenient means to an end.  They have no honor, no soul.  In short they are worse than the Jihadists since at least they mostly believe in something.

  • I realized that the left regards those of us on the right as evil and to be defeated utterly by any means necessary.

    LarryM: I know that the Marxist Left and the New Left are that way and have been that way, but it seems to me that liberal Democrats are now that way too and once upon a time in the fifties and early sixties they weren’t. But I was just a kid then and perhaps it was just a child’s impression.

    • There used to be this once common species called classical liberals who were all about freedom and liberty.  There were pretty much driven out the socialist left.  All that is left of that group went to either neo libertarians or neo conservative categories.
      I was one of them until 2001
      Alas poor Yorick.