June 8, 2006

I was with him for a few minutes...

I watched Michael Berg's interview on CNN. His son was allegedly killed by al-Zarqawi and CNN's Soledad O'Brien was shocked that Berg wasn't happy the terrorist was dead. I was with him there. He pointed out the obvious, that the continued killing and celebration of killing gets us nowhere. That celebrating the death of another human being isn't good for us. That killing other people doesn't replace lost loved ones.

I liked that part.

But then he went off the bridge. Started calling Bush the real terrorist, and even said that Saddam, while not a nice guy, was better than Bush.

That is not good for anyone. Well, I stand corrected. The right loves it when leftists say stuff like this. It allows them to ignore us all.

I understand Berg's point. Bush has rather carelessly caused the lives of thousands. But in no way is he the same as someone who kidnaps innocents and beheads them on television. As morally problematic as the invasion is--as is the secret prison system or torture of Iraqis, it is not the same thing as terrorists who execute innocents or walk into a pizzeria with a bomb strapped to their backs. It's stupid, and irresponsible and wrong. And it undermines everyone who has incredibly legitimate complaints about this President and this war.

But even with this stupidity, it pales in response to what the right spews out on a daily basis. Consider the blonde dingbat. You know who I am talking about. Not only has she
"stated: 'My only regret with [Oklahoma City bomber] Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building.' [New York Observer, 8/26/02]


stated that the debate over former President Bill Clinton should have been 'about whether to impeach or assassinate.' [High Crimes and Misdemeanors: The Case Against Bill Clinton (Regnery, 1998)]"

but she also supported freaking apartheid. How unhinged do you have to be to support apartheid?

And yet, as I meant to say yesterday, her immoral and horrible statements will get her more press, more sales, and more appearances on cable news. Everyone wrings their hands and says, "I can't believe she said that" and then has her on to say it again.

I am telling you. We have lost the ancient punishment of shunning. People like her should be shunned. They should be ignored. Allowed to say whatever she wants to, but not recognized, not asked to be interviewed.

We should turn our backs on people like her and move on. It is actually what we should to do terrorists too. The correct punishment for McVeigh would have been obscurity in prison for life. Lambasting al-Zarqawi's dead face on world tv does little more than cement him as a martyr.

Bring back the shunning.


Greek Shadow said...

Why is it that when the right winger say outrageous things it gets them more attention, but this man goes to far and it marginalizes the left? Talk about a double standard!

Streak said...

gs, you are speaking to the converted here, there is no doubt in my mind there is a HUGE double standard. But the right has won the rhetorical battle at this point--so the "liberal media" mantra wins.

For now.

grandma1 said...

I saw Matt Lauer interviewing that stupid gal. TV seems to love dump blonds, Elizabeth on the View is saying some of the same dumb things. It's funny they get so much TV time when authors like Michelle Goldberg doesn't get a blimp.