Loony Left Impugns Its Own Patriotism

Often I find things I would like to comment on. This one was sent to me by one of my readers, Jack, and by the BlogMama, Mamamontezz.

I decided it was just fine the way it is so I won't be commenting. I encourage everyone to read this entire article. When you hit the bottom of this window click on Continue Reading for the rest of the article.

Enjoy SlagleRock Out!

Article Published: Saturday, July 03, 2004 - 6:20:52 PM PST

Daily News.com

Loony Left impugns its own patriotism
By Jan Golab

I first heard "patriot" used derisively when I was a Vietnam War protester in the 1960s. "Patriot" and "flag-waver" were terms used to denigrate those we perceived as knee-jerk supporters of an immoral war. We felt we were the true patriots. We hated Nixon, because Tricky Dick portrayed us as anti-American. How dare he impugn our patriotism?

As it turned out, Nixon didn't need to smear anybody. When Jane Fonda went to North Vietnam, I knew immediately that the anti-war movement should condemn her. By giving aid, comfort and hope to the enemy, she had crossed a clear line between dissent and treason. So did many of my fellow dissidents who disrupted the Democratic Convention in 1968. I was shocked to hear Tom Hayden and others declare support for a communist victory in Vietnam. By failing to stand up to the radical left, the anti-war movement allowed itself to be defined by it.

Thirty-two years later, it feels like deja vu all over again.

Today's anti-war crowd becomes indignant when they are called unpatriotic. But whose fault is it they get tarred with that brush? Too many among them have adopted the rhetoric of the lunatic left -- America is "the real enemy" -- and coronated Michael Moore as their hero.

Whole lies, half-truths, false presumptions, ignored facts, faulty logic, snide innuendo, unflattering handpicked film footage, all deliberately packaged to denigrate the president and the war effort, do not amount to an act of patriotism. (Yes, I saw the film.) It also violates the basic American value of truth and fairness. No newspaper or magazine today would publish such a shameful hatchet job about anyone. (I know, as I've been a magazine journalist for 30 years.)

Saddam Hussein, the greatest tyrant of our time (2 million dead, and counting -- unmentioned in Moore's film) doesn't need to produce propaganda anymore, because he's outsourced the job to the American left. Indeed, Hezbollah has offered to help promote "Fahrenheit 9/11" in the Middle East. Most recently, Moore has compared the insurgents who are cutting off American heads in Iraq to the Minutemen in the American Revolution -- the real patriots. "Their numbers will grow and they will win," he says.

How's that for encouraging the enemy?

One of my college roommates in 1969 had a dirt-bag friend who crashed on our couch once for a few days. I told him I wanted the slimeball out of the house. "He's cool, man!" My roommate exclaimed. "He smokes dope, he likes the Beatles, he hates Nixon -- he's a bro', man."

I told him: "Charlie Manson smokes dope, listens to the Beatles and hates Nixon, but he's not my 'bro', man."

When your only criterion for "brotherhood" is a shared hatred, you will embrace slime. Nixon didn't need to run against McGovern. He ran against Jane Fonda, Tom Hayden, Abbie Hoffman, Bernadine Dohrn, The Chicago 7, The Black Panthers, the bomb-throwing Weather Underground and the SLA -- and Manson. He ran against the anti-American lunatic Left the Democrats should have thrown out of their house.

Today's anti-war activists should do the same with slimeball Moore, but instead they heap him with praise and awards. Moore's wacky conspiracy theories are as rooted in reality as Manson's belief that he was starting The Revolution.

Here is what John Kerry needs to say if he hopes to win in November:

"My fellow Americans, you know I am critical of President Bush. But I am not running for president because I share in some irrational and pathological hatred for the man. I am running because I believe I will make a better president. So I will not embrace propagandist Michael Moore simply because he hates President Bush and wants him defeated.

"While Mr. Moore's film makes some interesting points, it is not a fair or honest presentation of the facts. It is, in fact, deliberately unfair. It promotes conspiracy theories that are paranoid and don't make any sense. I believe President Bush acted hastily in Iraq, that he failed to deploy better diplomacy or gather a wider coalition. But to accuse him of sending our troops to die solely to enrich oil interests is both unfounded and unconscionable. It is a loathsome and unsupported charge, far worse than claims made by Clinton-haters about the death of Vince Foster.

"I refuse to embrace this man and thereby politicize the war in such a way that my rhetoric becomes ready-made propaganda for the enemy, to be used as a tool for the defeat of our troops and their great, noble effort."

Will Kerry have the courage to make that speech? Not likely. So whose fault will it be if he gets tarred by the same brush that tars Michael Moore?

I keep a picture on my bulletin board that was taken during one of the war protests at California State University, Northridge, this year. From the picture alone, you couldn't tell if it was taken in 1972 or 2004. A dozen angry students are shouting. One of them carries a sign that reads: "Imperialism needs Racism & War. Fight the real enemy."

Perhaps many of the students in the picture realize that the war in Iraq is not imperialistic or racist and that America is not the real enemy. But will they confront the sign carrier and give her a history lesson? Will anyone in the anti-war left brace her with the truth? No, they won't. Yet those same students will bristle if anyone accuses them of being unpatriotic.

So whose fault is it if people get that impression?

I keep the picture because it reminds me of what went wrong in the '60s (the lunatic left). Osama bin Laden probably keeps the same photo on a bulletin board in his cave to inspire him and encourage his followers.

Many of the people who are against the war and our president are indeed patriotic. But the horrible truth is that many of them are not. Today might be a good day to reflect on which group one belongs to.

During this momentous time of the inescapable great divide, two very different camps will be celebrating today. One will be rooting for our victory in Iraq, the historic liberation of 25 million Iraqis and the establishment of a free nation in the Middle East. The other camp will be rooting for defeat, hyping our failures, chortling over "Fahrenheit 9/11," bloviating their conspiracies and their hate.

I'll be watching fireworks with the flag-wavers. The patriots.

Jan Golab is a San Fernando Valley resident and author of "The Dark Side of the Force: A True Story of Corruption and Murder in the LAPD."

Posted by SlagleRock at July 6, 2004 07:30 AM