Monday, February 12, 2007

We're not here to blame anyone ... OK, it's the liberals.


Even when I pick on the intellectual cesspool that is the Blogging Tories, I try to avoid the really low-hanging fruit -- the scum de la terre, as it were. And not too many of the BTs hang any lower than Dr. Roy, who's made an entire career out of linking approvingly to the most dishonest, disreputable wankers in Wankerdom.

One of the doctor's latest pieces is, once again, an embarrassment to the English language as he says nice things about disgraced neo-con hack Dinesh D'Souza. But that's not why we're here. Yes, it's nauseating enough when anyone suggests that D'Souza has "an interesting column," but there's a bigger issue here.

Note how D'Souza asks the fundamental question:

... why did the guys who did 9/11 do it? Five years after this event, it’s not an unreasonable question. To ask it is not to “justify” the attacks any more than to ask whether British appeasement of Hitler prior to his invasion of Poland “justified” that invasion. Explanation is not the same as justification.

Wow. I mean ... wow. So D'Souza is seriously suggesting that we make an attempt to understand why the 9/11 hijackers did what they did, but that in no way is excusing them for their actions -- we're simply after understanding.

I say "wow" because, in case you've forgotten, asking that same question only a few years ago was the most despicable, treasonous thing you could have done, as you can read here:

... Still, Defending Civilization elicits amusement in at least four ways. First, it is laughable how little one had to say on an academic campus after 9-11, ideologically speaking, to make it into the ACTA's little black book. Here are some of the ACTA's entries, presented verbatim as evidence for Defending Civilization's thesis of rampant academic anti-Americanism:

...

"We need to think about what could have produced the frustration that caused these crimes. To have that kind of hatred is a phenomenon we will have to try to understand" - Director of the Program on International Intelligence at the Woodrow Wilson School's Center for International Studies, Princeton University

Good lord, what have we here? Apparently, one earned a place on ACTA's shit list back then simply by suggesting that we need to understand the terrorists' motivations, and nothing more. And for that, one is publicly labelled as a danger to academia, and Western civilization, and so on and so on.

My, how times have changed.

Now, in 2007, it seems perfectly acceptable to ask that very same question, as long as you follow it up with the right answer. Why did the terrorists attack? Um, was it because of the U.S.'s foreign policy? AIIEEEEEEEE!! Traitor! Traitor! SHRIIIEEEEEEEEEK!!!

OK, um .... was it because of the liberals? AIIIIEEEEEEEE!! Tra ... whoa, uh, yeah, that's it. It was the liberals. And the leftists. And the gays. And Hollywood. Yeah, that's the ticket.

Isn't it amazing the difference a few years make? After all, it's totally unacceptable to start assigning blame for something like 9/11. Oh, you want to blame the liberals? Well, hell, why didn't you say so? We're good then.

And pay no mind to all that previous rationalization. That's all so ... so ... 2002, know what I mean?

UNNECESSARY CRUELTY: It's so juvenile but, what the hell, into the wayback machine for some infantile Dr. Roy from back in May of 2006:

Many stations in the southern US both POP and country stations still won't play Dixie Chicks music. The Chicks have learned nothing. Their new single "Not ready to Make Nice" has come in at 36th position much lower than usual for this group. Maines ,their lead singerr [sic] had said in 2003 she was ashamed President Bush was US President"

Well, isn't this a revolting development?

Dixie Chicks rule Grammys
Controversial group sidesteps politics as it picks up five awards

... it was the Dixie Chicks who wound up stealing the show, raking in five Grammys, including song of the year, record of the year and album of the year.

The band was reluctant at first to use the stage last night as a platform for its well-known opposition to the war in Iraq. But by the time the group accepted the evening-closing album-of-the-year award for Taking the Long Way, singer Natalie Maines suggested that members of the Recording Academy were clearly using their votes as a show of support, if not political expression, in favour of a band that has received death threats after its initial criticism of the U.S. President at a concert in Britain in early 2003...

Grammy highlights

Record of the year: Dixie Chicks,

Not Ready to Make Nice

Mmmmmmmmm ... crow.

5 comments:

thwap said...

i typed something as a blogger but it don't appear up at last check.

shorter version: yep. looking at the impact of Western foreign policy is still bad, but looking at the contribution of sex, drugs n' rockn'roll is semi-okay.

Zorpheous said...

Off topic here for a second CC, but after a length consultation with Jason from the ThePolitic, it has been been desided that when referring to our friend and fellow blogger, Kathy Shaidle, we should no longer refer to her using the "C" word (no not "C"onservative, the other "C" word).

Instead, please refer to Kathy as follows;

Kathy Shaidle, a narrow-minded fundamentalist who's unflinching allegiance to the Vatican blinds her to the hatefulness and bigotry she espouses on a regular basis.

We would like to thank you for co-operation on matter ;-)

Adam C said...

I'm starting to like D'Souza. I'm just wondering how long it will take people like Dr. Roy to realize that he's pointing out that they share their value system with Osama bin Laden.

Ti-Guy said...

How long? Never. Conservatives are masters at ignoring and never remarking on the things that reveal them to be incoherent.

"Dr." Roy uses the term "fiberal" in his writing. He's as crazy and Dinesh D'Douche.

Jose said...

I don't think D'Souza is entirely off base. There's a grain of truth in what he's saying. Osama is a reactionary who is in part rebelling against a very sucessful secular culture (of which he was a part of) in favour of a reactionary religious fantasy past that never exsisted.

But dogmatic religious far right conservatives have to jimmy the interpretation because to a lesser extent they share the same mindset. They're simply don't share it with anywhere near the same level of intensity.

Better to blame Liberals.