Wednesday, February 02, 2005

The Decent into Totalitarianism

As I said in this post, although I am a liberal, I don't want to silence or eliminate conservatives, libertarians, and other voices of people who disagree with me. I think that politics is about arguing over the direction the country should take, and it can't function if there is no disagreement. However, many modern American conservatives (as well as conservatives from other countries) aren't agreeing to disagree anymore. Click permalink for the rest...

This was pointed by Kevin Drum in Delineating Dissent
....Andrew Sullivan is right to point with dismay to the final paragraph of Fred Barnes's recent diatribe in the Weekly Standard:
Senate Democrats have enough votes to block major Bush initiatives like Social Security reform and to reject Bush appointees, including Supreme Court nominees. They may be suicidal, but they could undermine the president's entire second term agenda. At his news conference last week, Bush reacted calmly to their vitriolic attacks, suggesting only a few Democrats are involved. Stronger countermeasures will be needed, including an unequivocal White House response to obstructionism, curbs on filibusters, and a clear delineation of what's permissible and what's out of bounds in dissent on Iraq.

Say what? The White House should tell us what kind of dissent on Iraq is permissible and what isn't? Is that really how these guys think?

This post spurred the following comment from a self-proclaimed moderate, Joe Schmoe ( think that's a pseudonym?)
Some of the Democrats' "dissent" on Iraq borders on treason. I think that the Bush White House has been far too easy on the Democrats with respect to Iraq.

Sen. Edward Kennedy's (D-Mass.) recent remarks are a perfect example. ("American troops are part of the problem, not part of the solution") Brit Hume asked Secretary of State Rice about them over the weekend.

From Craig (who is British)
Kennedy's speech (especially once it is backed up with a "no" vote on the budget for the military) is more adhering to your enemies, giving them aid and comfort, than Benedict Arnold could have ever hoped to accomplish.

From Walter E. Wallis
Since we know that the primary weapon the enemy has against us is the breaking of our will to continue the fight, then actions specifically to that purpose are, indeed, treason. If democrats lack the wit to disagree with policy without going over the line, that is their problem. If ONE soldier dies because of that bloviating asshole Kennedy, that is too many. Whack his peepee.


Post a Comment

<< Home