Monday, August 23, 2010

OK This Is Getting Silly

I am as fatigued about the Ground Zero mosque debate as the next guy BUT some of the arguments that have been coming out of the mouths from the supporters of the mosque couldn't be more intellectually dishonest. Now from the Left, opponents of the mosque are branded as ideologically Conservative Nazi sympathizers, madmen bombers or this doozy: that opposition is actually helping Al-Qaeda recruitment??? I really can't swallow this insipidness that becomes branded as conventional wisdom when they repeat it enough on the mainstream media outlets.

My favorite is of course the parallel to Nazi sympathizers, CNN uses pictures of Father Coughlin in the link above. He of the famous radio sermons of the late 20's and through the Depression. First off do lefties know he was a committed LEFTIST? One of the great liberal myths was that Father Coughlin's preachings were from the right of the spectrum. They are being disingenuous (or more likely just ignorant of history) with you if they say that. This was a man who praised the "New Deal" as "Christ's Deal" and that the choice was simply "Roosevelt or Ruin" during his first campaign for president. It was only when he started to oppose FDR in 1934 as not doing enough that he began to be seen as a "right-winger", but that is just a typical fascist ploy of marking anything that does not agree with them one hundred percent as "right-wing". Especially when you take into consideration Coughlin's formation of the NUSJ, hardly considered a classically liberal organization. This went on all during the 1930's, if you opposed FDR you were a right-winger. People like J.T. Flynn, a muckraking journalist at the time, was labeled a leader of right thinking for no other reason than he was a relentless FDR critic. He was a left leaning columnist for the New Republic (the bible of Progressives since the turn of the 20th Century) that denounced FDR for moving in what he perceived as a rightward tilt. There is a lot more to that story and for space reasons I will just leave it to others to do, Alan Brinkley is a good place to start.

The bringing up of Timothy McVeigh by some is quite interesting. Once again it is another twist of logic. He considered himself agnostic and did not bomb the Murrah building in the name of some sort of Christian ideology as some on the left have purported. He was if anything a white supremacist national socialist. He was an angry white guy so he must be a right winger, is how the Leftist string of logic goes. Just an odd leap for the Left to make to disagree with the opponents of the mosque/cultural center. But as noted above, with Coughlin and Flynn, a typical one. The people who commit terror like the WTC, the embassy bombings, and numerous other instances have done so specifically in the name of Islam.

Look we can have disagreements about this but to see the arguments now being used on the Left, it kind of smacks of reaching for something, anything that will stick. It is to us, the opponents of the mosque, that the Imam and his people have questionable motives since he continues to avoid meaningful questions. If it truly is about building bridges and outreach, why the insistence in continuing to avoid even listening to alternatives? The longer they show obtuseness toward prevailing American public opinion, the more it looks like their intent is a political statement in name of Islam NOT outreach or tolerance.

I really do hope to put this to rest very soon because this is a debate that will not further issues that really are at the root of an ailing economy. I will be happy again to discuss health care, tax policy and economics in the coming months leading to the mid-term election. At the same time I cannot ignore the continuing of specious arguments by those on the Left over the mosque.

In related lefty intellectual dishonesty, here is George Will dressing down Robert Reich on history and the typical liberal tropes about the Depression. BTW note Will's restraint while Reich is talking...he is great:



Will does slightly exaggerate, Hoover increased spending 88%...not quite doubling. Almost though.

0 comments:

Post a Comment