Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Thursday, January 18, 2007
Jonathan Garthwaite :: Townhall.com Columnist
Enemy At Home
by Jonathan Garthwaite
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


Bestselling author Dinesh D’Souza sat down with Townhall.com to discuss his recently released book, The Enemy At Home – The Cultural Left and Its Responsibility for 9/11, where he shows the connection between the cultural left’s attack on traditional American values and the growing hostility by Muslim extremists towards the United States.
 
Townhall.com: When did you first recognize the inherent connection between our “enemy at home” and our enemies abroad? And what ultimately compelled you to write this book?
 
DSOUZA: Initially I did not see the connection because, like a lot of other conservatives, I was trapped in Samuel Huntington’s “clash of civilizations” model. If you adopt this then there are only two sides: us and the Muslims. But when you realize that our side is divided into left and right, and their side is divided into traditional Muslims and radical Muslims, then the equations change. The Islamic radicals and the American left are polar opposites in the kind of society they want. One wants sharia and the other wants a libertine society with abortion on demand and gay marriage. And yet, the two have a common interest in defeating Bush’s war on terror.
 
This book grew out of a study that I began after 9/11 on the Islamic thinkers who are shaping radical opinion in the Muslim world. I realized that what these people were saying was entirely different than the motives ascribed to them by both the American right and the American left.
 
TH: How do you distinguish the “cultural left” from the Democratic Party and liberals in general? Who are the most influential and most damaging leaders within this movement?
 
DSOUZA: By the cultural left I mean the left wing of the Democratic Party. I am referring to people like Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, Barney Frank, George Soros, Michael Moore, Noam Chomsky, and Cindy Sheehan. I also want to include various left-wing organizations such as the ACLU, moveon.org and so-called human rights groups like Human Rights Watch. There are also some Republicans who take a left-wing stance on foreign policy and social issues, and so they too fall into this camp.
 
TH: Why is the cultural left so reluctant to fight the terrorists and export “a more liberal set of values, such as self-government, minority rights, and religious tolerance?” How have cultural relativism and multiculturalism affected this reluctance?

DSOUZA: It might seem at first glance that the cultural left should be in the forefront to fight radical Islam. The reason is that Bin Laden and the Islamic radicals are so illiberal. They despise women’s rights and gay rights. I think we all know what they would do with Hillary Clinton or Barney Frank. Even so, the cultural left has shown itself extremely reluctant to support Bush’s war on terror. They aren’t just against the Iraq war, they are against the Patriot Act, and the telephone surveillance program, and the invasion of Afghanistan, and the sanctions proposals against Iran’s nuclear program. In short, they want Bush’s war on terror to fail. And this means that they want the Islamic radicals to succeed.

Why? The reason actually has nothing to do with cultural relativism or multiculturalism. It has everything to do with domestic politics. Basically the left hates Bush more than it hates Bin Laden. Bin Laden is a foreign threat, but Bush is a domestic threat. In the last couple of decades the left-wing agenda has become increasingly dominated by social and sexual concerns. So who threatens abortion rights in America? Not Bin Laden, Bush. Who is blocking gay marriage? Not Al Qaeda, Bush’s court appointees. While Bin Laden wants sharia in Baghdad, Bush and the religious right are, in the leftist view, trying to impose sharia in Boston. Consequently the left is quite willing to ally with the lesser evil, the Islamic radicals, in order to defeat the greater evil, Bush and the conservatives.

TH: What is wrong with the conservative attitude towards September 11 and the War on Terror? What illusions have stood in the way of victory?

DSOUZA: Somewhat like the mosquito at the nudist colony, I’m not sure where to begin. The right is still trying to find “liberals” in the Muslim world. News flash: there aren’t any. Not enough to count. The right has also been trying for several years now to convince the liberals and the left that Bin Laden and the Iranians don’t really like them. I think the left already knows this. Yet we have not seen a crowd of leftists rushing over to our side. Obviously the left is pursuing a different strategy.

Even the conceptual conservative underpinning of the war on terror is suspect. The Islamic radicals aren’t enemies of modernity. They aren’t against science, they aren’t against capitalism, and today they aren’t even against democracy. Why should they be? When you have free elections in the Muslim world, the Islamic radicals have a good chance of winning. Look at Hamas. Look at the success of the Muslim Brotherhood candidates in the Egyptian parliamentary elections. And while Bush goes around calling for democracy, do you think he would for one minute entertain the thought of allowing a free election in Saudi Arabia, an election the Bin Laden guys might win.

TH: What does the cultural left seek to gain from an American withdrawal from Iraq and a losing the War in general?

DSOUZA: The same thing that the left gained from Vietnam. We say America lost the Vietnam war, and this is true, but the left won the Vietnam war. The left wanted America to accept humiliation and withdraw, and America accepted humiliation and withdrew. Not only was this a stunning foreign policy victory for the left, disabling America from seriously intervening abroad for almost a generation, but Vietnam also paid other dividends. A whole generation of liberal Democrats, the so-called Class of 1974, swept into Congress. Moreover, the antiwar movement greatly fortified the counterculture. It strengthened the feminist movement, the gay rights movement, and the sexual revolution. So Vietnam was not only a foreign policy success but also a political success and a cultural success.

TH: What does the military war against the terrorists abroad have in common with the cultural war with the left at home? Why is it that we cannot win the war against Islamic radicalism without first defeating the cultural left?

DSOUZA: Consider the war in Iraq. This war is tough going in Iraq. But it is even tougher going in America. The war is being lost not on the streets of Baghdad but right here in America. It is the cultural left that is doing Bin Laden’s work for him. There is no way that Bin Laden could persuade America to give up on the war on terror and get out of Iraq and the Middle East. Fortunately for Bin Laden he has a whole political movement in the United States that is dedicated to exactly this objective. So how can Bush expect to win over there when he is losing over here? In Vietnam the military won the Tet Offensive, but here in America it was portrayed in the media as a humiliating defeat. In fact, Tet became a symbol of American failure. So Bush had better wake up to the fact that he is facing two enemies, an enemy abroad and an enemy at home

TH: In The Enemy At Home, you deny the now-familiar claim that radical Islamists hate us because of our freedom and you argue that their hatred is “not a product of ignorance but of familiarity.” How do these conclusions change the way we fight this war of two fronts?

DSOUZA: My concern is not so much with the radical Muslims as with the traditional Muslims. The radical Muslims we have to fight. There is no alternative. But we have to persuade traditional Muslims. Why? Because traditional Islam is the recruiting pool for radical Islam. It’s not good if we kill a hundred Islamic radicals and 200 traditional Muslims sign up the next day. So we have to address traditional Muslim concerns about America. The radicals are telling them that America is a fount of global atheism, that America fosters family breakdown, that American values corrupt the innocence of children. I think it is foolish to dismiss these concerns entirely, because there is a grain of truth to them. Not all of America is like this, but it is the America that has been promoted by the cultural left, and it is the America that most Muslims see through the images of our popular culture. I think America could improve its image among people in traditional cultures, including Muslim cultures, if we showed them “the other America”: the people who go to work every day and look after their families and abide by traditional values and go to church on Sunday. Many foreigners have no idea that this America even exists.

TH: Why shouldn’t Americans immediately dismiss Islamic criticism of our culture in your newly-defined “clash of civilizations” between liberal and conservative values?

DSOUZA: Right after 9/11 there was a tendency to come together as a national tribe and write off any criticism of America and focus on destroying the enemy. That was an understandable and healthy response. But the moment of national unity hardly lasted. Pretty soon the country was divided in exactly the same way it was before 9/11. In fact, Bush’s Iraq war became a rallying cry for the opposition. So to go around today talking about a “clash of civilizations” between America and Islam is pure foolishness. What common culture unites Bush and Michael Moore? I would suggest that, in terms of core values, Bush has more in common with Ali Gomaa, the grand mufti of Egypt, than he does with Michael Moore. Traditional Jews, Muslims and Christians differ theologically but morally they are very similar. So when the American left allies with the radical Muslims, the most sensible response is for American conservatives to find common ground with traditional Muslims.

TH: What is the best advice you can offer concerned conservatives who want to win the fight against both radical Islam and the cultural left? How can conservative citizens best combat these two enemies?

DSOUZA: People often come up to me after my lecture and say, “I am a student” or “I’m a citizen” and “What can I do to fight the war on terror?” My answer is: fight the left at home. It is the left, the enemy at home, that is fighting to weaken the resolve of the American people and thus undermine Bush’s chance to win the war on terror. I conclude my book “The Enemy at Home” with several specific suggestions for how conservatives can thwart the left both here in America and abroad.

The Enemy At Home – The Cultural Left and Its Responsibility for 9/11 is available at local booksellers and Amazon.com.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0385510128/ref=nosim/townhallcom

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Jonathan Garthwaite is the editor-in-chief of Townhall.com.

Be the first to read Jonathan Garthwaite's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

Excellent!
Many of us have been saying for a long time that the left is our countries enemy! I will be buying this book!

Thank you Dinesh D'Souza!

Goshawk
We seem to keep the same hours!

I'll buy the book too and we can compare notes later!

CC
What part of the country are you in? I'm in California (temporally) and unfortunately.

Good article, overall.
Interesting article.

D'Souza indicts Bush vision of democracy in the mideast with this quotation: "..when you have free elections in muslim world, Islamic radicals have a good chance of winning..look at Hamas(in Palestinian territory) and Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt..Bush goes around calling for free elections, but would he tolerate free elections in Saudi Arabia where Bin Laden guys might win.."?

And, another D'Souza quote: "the right is still trying to find 'liberals' in the Muslim world...News Flash: there aren't any..or not enough to count anyway".

This was an excellent article in many respects. I agree with D'Souza that the left does abhor this president more than it does the radical Islamism of Bin Laden. And that is extremely disconcerting for all Americans.

I disagree with D'Souza when he claims that traditional Islam has a great deal in common with traditional Christianity and Judaism, and I base that upon one of D'Souza's own quotes above...that "the right is still trying to find 'liberals' in the muslim world, and in fact there aren't any"...'liberals' in this context supporting the tolerance and respect of dissent characterized by democracy.

I am not sure how much common ground conservatives in America can find with traditional muslims, unless those muslims step up and denounce the extremists, renounce any expectation of adopting Sharia law in the United States, and work with law enforcement in apprehending the radicals in our midst. Until then, there will be no common ground.

I don't believe Islam, as it presently exists, is compatible with the the tolerance and respect of dissent required in a democracy.

9/11 and the Boston Tea Party
To understand 9/11 you need to understand the historical nature of political violence. 9/11 was not the "fault" of anyone or any group specifically, but its germination can be found in the writings of Ben Franklin in 1726, when he was 23 years old.

In fact, even Osama quotes Ben Franklin. "Neither a borrower nor lender be."

The use of debt as a political weapon, with the leverage of the currency, along with the desire to raise taxes for war, has long turned the citizens of a country against its leaders.

In the case of a global economy, what we are witnessing is global rebellion. While the scale is different, the issues are the same. Politicians (and Osama is a politician-general, much like Washington was) assign blame, rather than attempt to understand the nature of the conflict.

Like the old saying, "keep you friends close, keep your enemies closer." This latest work of historical amnesia would seem to understand neither the Left nor the jihadist. My writing have diagnosed the thinking of Osama, and he confirmed them in his "Letter to America" in November of 2003 (althouh I didn't know of its existence until much later.)

In many ways the attack on America is a reflection of the Left and Right's inability to have a respectable dialogue with one another. Not only can we not talk to each other, we cannot talk to the world.

Americans play a game of "winner take all" in both politics and business, therefore everyone else must play the same way.

It is as Christ said: The Love of Money is the Root of all Evil.

Until Americans are willing to love one another more, and their 401K less, then we will find ourselves in perpetual war. We reap what we sow, the same as everyone else.

http://www.behappyandfree.com

The left is the problem
If the left weren't fighting us, the war on terror would be over in a second.

As for the alliance between the left and the reactionary Muslims, this is Nazi-Soviet pact number three. The first Nazi-Soviet pact ended badly for the left. The Nazi invaded the Soviet Union.

The second Nazi-Soviet pact, which occurred between leftists and reactionary Muslims in Iran in the 1970s, ended badly for the left. Iranian women suddenly found themselves horribly repressed.

There's no reason to think this third pact will work any better for the left, not that one can tell them this. But while it may not be so clear here in America that Muslims aren't a distant enemy, that should be obvious in Europe after the murder of Theo van Gogh. Yet, leftists there continue to think of conservatives as the enemy.

Summing it up
Dsouza says:

"In short, they want Bush’s war on terror to fail. And this means that they want the Islamic radicals to succeed."

And,

"Why? The reason actually has nothing to do with cultural relativism or multiculturalism. It has everything to do with domestic politics. Basically the left hates Bush more than it hates Bin Laden."

If you start with that, everything that's happened and is happening is explained.



You people just don't get it
You rabid right-wingers just don't get it do you. The country is tired of propaganda and spin and pure party politics like this. They are tired of this kind of cartoonish rhetoric:

Townhall: "What does the military war against the terrorists abroad have in common with the cultural war with the left at home? Why is it that we cannot win the war against Islamic radicalism without first defeating the cultural left?"

Can't you people figure out that it is exactly this kind of rhetoric is exactly why Obama is becomming so incredibly popular. He represents a return to when America came first, not party. Rhetoric like this frightens people. When you start calling the other party "the enemy", it sounds like you guys want to mow us down with machine guns.

The whole premise of this book is so silly it's hard to take it seriously. As if American Imperialism sponsered by the right wing of this country has nothing to do with why the Islamists hate us.

Please. This sillyness will probably sell well with the right wing crazies, but it's never going to wash with the moderates. You people are pidgeon wholing yourselves into a small camp of radical extremists.

Hey, come to think of it, keep it up nutjobs. At the rate you're going you're never going to win another election.

Phylo out.




Phylo Se Fizer
LOL!

THAT is funny having lived through the Clinton years.

Liberal spin like: "That depends on what you definition of "is" is."

That Velcro-Fly Clinton was impeached for an affair when in reality, it was for perjury and suborning perjury.

Blathergate memos...who can forget that.

And geez, who can forget Al Gore's screech to count EVERY vote, even as he worked to exclude 15,000 military absentee ballots.

http://www.boycottliberalism.com/Toptenlies.htm

Actually Phylo, there's 33 there. (honorable mention)

just watched it Kim
And it shows colbert to be his usual smart@ss, cut you off jerk he is when he has no facts to portray. All he does it make an idiot of himself with innuendo and double-speak.

Dinesh has never said to stone homosexuals or that liberals plan to destroy the US or planned 9/11. Only a moron who would twist his ideas into such.

Are you and your moonbat friends actually suggesting that the media is largely supportive of the traditional family? LAFF.


DavidM
I wonder what Kimbat felt when noted limo-lib and rabid moonbat Alec Baldwin stood up on Leno and shrilled thay Henry Hyde AND HIS FAMILY should be stoned to death.

I love liberal tolerance and love.

Phylo
The left hates Bush more than it hates bin Laden.

That is what's "silly".

Unfortunately, it's also catastrophically dangerous.

I used to think the left wouldn't recognize America's enemies unitl one of them bit us in the a$$. Now I ralize I was wrong. We've been repeatedly bitten and the left still doesn't know who the enemy is.

Sorry I over-estimated you.

wiseone
Check my blog for a comparison of what liberals say about Bush and the USA and what our enemies say.

It should remove ANY DOUBT that liberals hate America.

Keep It Up Nutjobs
I couldn't have said it better myself.

The radical right is marginalizing itself into obscurity. The sooner, the better.

Oh, and Gunny, Clinton hasn't been president in over 6 years. Your Clinton tantrums are really very amusing though...

wolfy
He was the last lib-weenie President. And hopefully, the last for a LONG LONG time.

BTW, wolfy, the word "spin" was created to describe the creative lies, er, press releases emanating from the Clinton WH.

Hey, did you ever stay in the Lincoln Room when Willie was the POTUS or didn't ya have 150,000 dollars to spare?

150,000 for an overnight stay? I think that beats the Ritz/Carlton eh? Did that include free interns for a "turndown" service?

wiseone
The problem with your(and the author's) charaterization that

>The left hates Bush more than it hates bin Laden.<

is that you assume, erroneously, that there is some kind of consensus thinking among the left, or even what constitutes the left. It's collectivist mumbo jumbo. It's as meaningless as saying that

The right wants to nuke the Middle East and kill all Muslims.

It's ridiculous categorizations and polarizations that have weakened this country. There is nothing positive to take away from this article.


I'm not so sure
I haven’t read this book and I don’t intent to unless I can get my hands on a free copy. I will comment from what I gathered in “What’s so great about America”. D’Souza not only fails to understand American culture, he showed a grave lack of understanding about the Indian where he was raised. It was a difficult to read because every 3rd page contained a gross misinterpretation of an historical event or a complete historical inaccuracy. This man’s business appears to be telling a particular audience exactly what it wants to hear. As such and based on his comments displayed here, I can see no deviation from this course.

Gunny Once Again:
Wahhhhhhhhh... Clinton.

As if this makes Bush look any better to the whopping majority that has already made up their minds that this president is a tard. Really Gunny, get a new shtick.

Phylo out ... of his mind
Phylo, you say, "The whole premise of this book is so silly it's hard to take it seriously. As if American Imperialism sponsered [sic] by the right wing of this country has nothing to do with why the Islamists hate us."

How often do I have to refute this nonsense?

1. The murder of Theo van Gogh had nothing to do with American imperialism (or Imperialism, if you wish).

2. Terrorist attacks by Muslims on India have nothing to do with American imperialism.

3. Terrorist attacks by Muslims on Buddhists in southern Thailand have nothing do with American imperialism.

How many counter-examples do I need to come up with before you abandon that ridiculous claim?

Kimbo and Phylo
You always know when someone nailed the truth...Kimbo calls them stupid, stupidity, etc.
Phylo, it is the left that is politicizing our national security. Example: leading up to the elections the Demos were whining that we did not have enough troops in Iraq. So, now Bush is sending more troops and now the Dems are saying, "No way!" i.e. oppose whatever Bush does. POLITICIZING. You do sound like a skit from Saturday Live when you talk about "American Imperialism". Name one country we have taken over (you know like the Soviets did).
And finally......
Yes folks, Phylo IS definitely OUT!!!
(I can't believe she uses that sign off)!

Colbert
Colbert does an excellent job of lampooning O'Reilly. Nothing more. Sort of like LD on these threads...I find both of them hilarious.

Incredible....
I saw this little opportunist on Paula Zahn last night.

What an idiot he is. And what fools you people are who believe his rot.

Point proven
After going back through and reading peoples posts here, Dinesh's point has been proven!

The UK tapes inside Mosques
The UK tapes, secretly taken inside Mosques, shows the Muslim Cleric bashing homosexuals and women who show "skin."

Now, homosexuals and women showing skin have been around since the beginnig of time. I think what D'Souza is saying (correctly, IMHO) is that the far-left culture want to elevate homosexuals to have marriage rights and the far-left culture elevates the likes of Larry Flynt to "champion" of first amendment rights. This is where the clash of cultures exist.

as a sidebar: Although I can't recall his name, before the Iraq war, an Iraqi official appeared on CNN and said he did not fear George Bush because the American political left would fight Bush. The guy was psychic or had a great understanding of American politics.

wolfy
What's the matter wolfy? Can't stand comparisons huh?

Yeah, Bush has screwed the pooch in a number of places, the frigging southern border most of all. You won't find any rubber-stampers of BUsh here like you find people like you and idiots at DU for Clinton.

We bring up Clinton in comparison since he was the last Lib POTUS.

Were you as outspoken when Clinton was putting troops in harm's way for no return (haiti still a sh*thole, Bosnia, still there, Kosovo, still there, East Timor, still there) and shooting off missiles into other people's countries (Sudan) to cover his little issue with Willie Jr and a BBW?

I'd like to know.

I do not necessarily agree with all that
Dinesh says but he is right about the Rabid Left. They would gladly help Bin Laden if they thought it would hurt President Bush. They do not give a rip about National Security when it means giving up a chance to hurt the GOP.
It is so true that Power Corrupts, and having absolute power, or the desire for absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Pelosi, Frank, Kennedy, Leahy, Boxer, Rangel, and Gore are all corrupt. They have no conscience. They are like rabid dogs looking around for someone to bite. Then they will spread their disease to the innocent.
You can shoot a rabid dog and stop it's reign of terror. Unfortunately you cannot do this with these clowns.

I'd like to know...
Gunny, do you ever stop obsessing about Clinton?

GunnyG writes:
"You won't find any rubber-stampers of BUsh here..."

You don't even LIE well.

I've seen this D'Souza character promoting his book a couple of times on TV. He's just another extremist right wing squeaky toy. Let's see how long it is before his book ends up in the $1 bin.


Even people with half a brain aren't buying this garbage any more.

Jane
>it is the left that is politicizing our national security<

Iraq has nothing to do with our national security unless you think being in a position to protect some of the largest oil fields in the world directly affects our national security, which very well may be correct.

Whatev
Have you done any serious reading on Vietnam?

Le me give you a few facts.

1. The Tet Offense of 1968 was crushed so severely by the US/SVN forces that the VC were no longer a threat and would not be for the rest of the war.

2. Three NVA divisions of hard-core regulars were annihilated by Marines and Army forces in Hue City and in the Central Highlands.

3. Chronkite called that a loss.

4. The NVA were unable to mount another serious offense until the Easter Offensive in 1972. Even WITHOUT massive US troop support, the SNV forces and US airstrikes crushed the NVA yet again. They would not be able to mount another offensive until 1975.

5. In 1975, the SVN was still able to holdback the NVA and gain ground in several areas but the lack of support from the US, both moral and financial, caused the loss of will.

6. General Giap's memoirs bear out the fact that the NVA were THROUGH in 1968 but they gained courage from the anti-war idiots back in the states and THAT kept them in the fight. (Try reading it.)

7. Your sentence of:

"And yes, there were mass atrocities and deaths in the aftermath of our withdrawal. But that likely would have occured anyway, had we stayed another 10 years."

was simply too stupid to respond to. Someone else can try to untangle that twisted logic.

Nice...
TAP001 writes:
"You can shoot a rabid dog and stop it's reign of terror. Unfortunately you cannot do this with these clowns."

The radical right wonders why they can't get any traction with the American people. Having wet dreams of killing the majority is getting you all nowhere fast.

Dinesh, spare us this baloney
When I read columns on Daily Kos, I'm amazed how much I disagree with them. I shake my head in disgust or just laugh. I do the same here.

Maybe that's because I'm a centrist.

Let's see...

D'Souza seems to place "President Bush's War on Terror" on a pedestal, with those who are against certain aspects of it or are against the way it is being implemented as being inadvertantly aligned with radical terrorists.

D'Souza: "In the last couple of decades the left-wing agenda has become increasingly dominated by social and sexual concerns."

Uh, Dinesh, I gotta tell ya, so has the right-wing agenda. It's pretty much an even battle. The pro-choices have great influence itn the Democrat party, the pro-lifers have great influence in the Republican party. Pretty much equal. Same with gay rights issues.

D'Souza: "In short, they want Bush’s war on terror to fail. And this means that they want the Islamic radicals to succeed."

Yes, Dinesh, everything is in black and white. Against the war? Criticize the strategy? Concerned about some provisions in the Patriot Act? That means you automatcally want Islamic radicals to succeed. Regardless of the reason why you oppose those things.

D'Souza: "A whole generation of liberal Democrats, the so-called Class of 1974, swept into Congress. Moreover, the antiwar movement greatly fortified the counterculture. It strengthened the feminist movement, the gay rights movement, and the sexual revolution."

The Class of 1974 swept into Congress for the most part because of Watergate. People voted for who they wanted and to keep in line with their changing beliefs. Then, of course, we had years such as 1980 (The Reagan Revolution) and 1994 (The Contract With America).

D'Souza: "Consider the war in Iraq. This war is tough going in Iraq. But it is even tougher going in America."

This statement is unbelievable. Tens of thousands of Iraqis are dying. Hundreds of thousands are fleeing, either to other parts of Iraq or out of the country. Their infrastructure and utility system is a mess.is shot. Their government is incompetent and corrupt. No, Dinesh, the Iraqis are having a tougher time than we Americans.

D'Souza: "The war is being lost not on the streets of Baghdad but right here in America. It is the cultural left that is doing Bin Laden’s work for him. There is no way that Bin Laden could persuade America to give up on the war on terror and get out of Iraq and the Middle East. Fortunately for Bin Laden he has a whole political movement in the United States that is dedicated to exactly this objective."

Many of us who criticize "President Bush's War on Terror" aren't coming from the Cutural Left. Many criticize it because we disagree with the idea that Iraq was as much of a threat at Bush had said, and that it would have been better to focus elsewhere. That it could create tension and fighting between Shia and Sunni Muslims. that it could strengthen the hand of Iran. That it could result in (to quote you) creating 200 radical Muslims who were formerly tradition after we kill 100 radical Muslims.

D'Souza: "So how can Bush expect to win over there when he is losing over here?"

Winning or losing isn't about Bush. It's about the Iraqis.


The issues we face are much more complicated than the blabber D'Souza espouses.


How to Change to Winning then
A great interview that accurately reflects reality. How do we convince a majority of Americans? Many voters and citizens act as mall and media tranced sheople. Happy to not care as long as their cable works and they buy their no-fat lattes.

Developing a way to win the hearts and minds of those who benefit most from freedom at home is the key.

Talk about Iraq at http://amfree.blog-city or my townhall blog.

WWJD
How does Jesus command that his follwers bring the heathens into the fold?

Love they enemy and be fishers of men. To be missionaries and set the example.

By setting itself up to be "at war" with the left, the right has moved away from Jesus.

Immediate threats may require regrettable war. But culture wars are inherently about the heart and soul. The culture wars cannot be won by both sides beating each other over the head with clubs, metaphorically or otherwise.

God says we are made in his image. That means that when Jesus tells us that missionaries must provide the example and wait for sinners to come to them of their own free will, then that is the wining strategy, for the culture wars.

A carnal existence will utimately lead to a hollow spiritual one. When the time comes for a hollow person to reach out for help, Christians must be there.

What kind of example is the "Christian right" setting. This article is exemplary of that example. It is an ugly one. Well guess what. A sinner looking for redemption sees no choice if all examples are ugly.

Christians must be the example, they must be the light and the way. Jesus commands that Christians must be humble about their righteousness for this reason. For Christians who are arrogant in their righteousness are indistinguishable from the devil's on arrogant troups. The devil's workers will never be humble because they are to weak to practice patience.

I grew up in a very religious area, one where people looked out for each other, did for each other. It was a Methodist neighborhood. John Wesley was a very humble man. Do all the good you can, in all the ways you can, with all the means you have John said.

By fighting the devil on the devil's turf we humans are sure to fail. Jesus gave the path. That path is to be fishers of men, not conqueror's in a culture war.

To the extent that laws need to be passed then it should be done. But with grace. The manner in which the Christian right is conducting itself with respect to gay marriage is very arrogant and condescending, without humility and grace.

Christians need to get back on the path Jesus laid out or they will fail in battle with the devil. Love thy enemy, be missionaries. Confront the culture wars with love, not hate. If the downtrodden only see hate they will despair and be lost forever.




driveby
Amen.

Mow us down......
Phylo Se Fizer writes:

Can't you people figure out that it is exactly this kind of rhetoric is exactly why Obama is becomming so incredibly popular. He represents a return to when America came first, not party. Rhetoric like this frightens people. When you start calling the other party "the enemy", it sounds like you guys want to mow us down with machine guns.

To paraphrase an old movie "looks aren't deceiving. Of course, since the 2nd Amendment has been repealed, that will not be possible

Fond thoughts of federalism
D'Souza's interview reinforces my belief that we must seek a greater role for federalism (the phrase states' rights carries way too much baggage).

The philosophical differences between the right and left are so basic and profound that it's becoming impossible to coexist. If Massachusetts can essentially govern itself and Texas the same, perhaps there's hope, yet.

As D'Souza brilliantly points out, a major reason the left has been worse than obstructionist on the war is their fear and loathing of Bush and anything resembling a traditional domestic policy. Perhaps if the states have great control over domestic affairs, we can become more unified on foreign policy. If each side can see an advantage to its objectives, maybe the idea of greater federalism can gain momentum.

Otherwise, it's going to be impossible for any Republican president to wage a war. Already, my isolationist streak is becoming wider and brighter, because we can't sustain anything more than a quickie such as the Gulf War (and even that was bitterly opposed, as you'll recall).

Also, the importance of seriously developing alternative fuels (as well as domestic sources of oil) is growing massively important, for the reason stated above.

Nutters
A quote from Phylo Se Fizer “It sounds like you guys want to mow us down with machine guns”. Now that’s not a bad idea! Oops did I say that out loud :-)


You can't reason with a Communist.
Trying to reason with a Communist is like argueing with a dog or a cat.
Communists fail to understand human nature.
They think everyone will be satisfied with exactly the same. They see human greed every day and can't see how it applies to Communism. Every day they see lazy people on Welfare and still can't understand how people will not strive for excellence without reward.
Communism has FAILED everywhere it has been tried yet there are still those who want Communism for America.
Communists live in some kind of abstract dream all their own and as you see today, they fly into a rage whenever someone points to their folly.
The Communists among us are the ones who willingly collaborate with IslamoNazis to harm America.
Their opposition to this artical gives them away.
They are exposing themselves here and now.

rabid right-winger
"You rabid right-wingers just don't get it do you. The country is tired of propaganda and spin and pure party politics like this. They are tired of this kind of cartoonish rhetoric:"

You're kidding right? We have more spin with Pelosi, Kennedy, Frank than a washing machine


"Can't you people figure out that it is exactly this kind of rhetoric is exactly why Obama is becomming so incredibly popular. He represents a return to when America came first, not party. Rhetoric like this frightens people. When you start calling the other party "the enemy", it sounds like you guys want to mow us down with machine guns."

Well if the shoe fits in terms of "the enemy" then wear it.

As for Osma Obama, he is anything but like our founders...Our founders didn't promote abortion on demand, hate the military, and the list goes on...

"The whole premise of this book is so silly it's hard to take it seriously. As if American Imperialism sponsered by the right wing of this country has nothing to do with why the Islamists hate us."

Obviously you truly don't have a clue...We aren't in Iraq to impose our values well at least the right wing values as you so put it...Maybe you would be much happier if we gave them abortion on demand, Larry Flynt, Hollywood's value system...The reason the Islamics hate us has little do with right wing but a lot to do with they think we have a immoral and perverse society...They see the hypocrisy in our nation...Of course never mind their own hypocrisy


"Please. This sillyness will probably sell well with the right wing crazies, but it's never going to wash with the moderates. You people are pidgeon wholing yourselves into a small camp of radical extremists."

You'd like us to think that most of America is left...Don't confuse the domination of media with left wing propaganda as a sign that most of America is left.

"Hey, come to think of it, keep it up nutjobs. At the rate you're going you're never going to win another election."

If dis-liking abortion on demand, gay marriage, seeing our enemies brought to justice, hating left wing judicial activism, understanding our true foundation as a Nation founded upon Judeo-Christian values means I'm a nut-job then put me into a pecan pie now. But if I'm a nut then the left must be tree from which the coconut fell


sjmiller05
Careful. You'll be banished to Siberia.

My buddy uses the term: lamppost liberals.

Where is the "Fairness Doctrine" now?

While the Left is proposing a returning to the restrictive "Fairness Doctrine," the ones who are really suffering from the lack of fairness are the conservatives.

Why, for example is CBS not required to have a positive report from Iraq for each negative story?

Why is Bravo required to balance their pro-homosexual programming with shows that reveal the negative side of homosexuality, such as the spread of disease and the prevalance of masogeny amoung homosexual men?

Why is Georgy-Porgy Stephanopolis not required to give equal time to Conservatives?

How about The View?

How about that gray-haired old gal who promotes sex toys on "Oh?" Shouldn't she be required to give equal time to advocates of sexual purity?

And why stop at the media?

Don't many colleges and universities belong to the people? Why is it that they are not required to hire as many Republicans as Democrats? Why are they not required to hire a member of the John Birch Society to balance every member of the American Communist Party?

Fairness from the Left?

I will believe it when I see it.

Vietnam -- brilliant point
One more thing: The following is brilliant, one of those things that you know intuitively, but I've never seen it expressed so clearly:

TH: What does the cultural left seek to gain from an American withdrawal from Iraq and a losing the War in general?

DSOUZA: The same thing that the left gained from Vietnam. We say America lost the Vietnam war, and this is true, BUT THE LEFT WON THE VIETNAM WAR (caps my emphasis). The left wanted America to accept humiliation and withdraw, and America accepted humiliation and withdrew. Not only was this a stunning foreign policy victory for the left, disabling America from seriously intervening abroad for almost a generation, but Vietnam also paid other dividends. A whole generation of liberal Democrats, the so-called Class of 1974, swept into Congress. Moreover, the antiwar movement greatly fortified the counterculture....


validation
On cue, Phylo and Kimberly come out of the woodwork to validate D'souza's points. It's interesting how the left is so concerned with our image abroad, yet because they control so much of the media, they fail to recognize their role in projecting the image of immorality the rest of the world has of America. In fact, they want to hang America's poor image on conservatives.
Oh, Wolfy "The Road to 9/11" accurately spells out Clinton's role in the war on Islamo-Nazis. He was AWOL. Even Dick Morris, who praises him on other issues, fesses up and nails him on this one. Even those with half a brain get that one.

False Idols
When God says have no other Gods before me he is talking about the Bible.

The Bible is the word of God, not Dinesh's book.

God has already defined the enemy, it is the devil.

By erecting a false devil, "the left", Christians are naming an enemy before the one defined in the Bible.

The left is a spiritual term and cannot be worldly defined. For example, Massechutessetts has a Republican governor and the lowest divorce rate in the country. Massechutessetts has one of the highest attendence ratings of any state in the Union for going to Church weekly.

Where is the spiritual divide of who is "left" and who is "right" for the citizens of Massechutessetts? If a citizen of Mass. attends church every Sunday but votes for Ted Kennedy, what are they?

God defines the spiritual world and commands that no other book be put before the Bible. No God before him. Redefining the devil as "the left" is raising a false idol. God has already declaured spiritually who the enemy is.

The people of Mass., and indeed everywhere, must be judged spiritually by one God in the Bible. If they are doing the devil's work they are sinners who can be redeemed by being brought the word of God.



GunnyG you be careful
There is a new moon tonight and you know what to expect!

MyOpine
I have trip flares and motion detectors to stop Kimberly stalking me.

Nothing worse than gazing out of my sunroom porch and seeing those beady red eyes of hers in the woods glaring at me!

Thank God the sunroom has tempered glass and strong locks!

drivebyposting- you can't shut me up
drivebyposting writes: Thursday, January, 18, 2007 10:39 AM
WWJD
***********************************

What Would Jesus Do?

"Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. (Matthew 10:34- NASB ©1995)

The Left is very fond of telling us to shut up, because it is not "loving," as if that was the only thing Jesus taught.

They use this to convince Christians that they ought to shut up and let them take over our country and replace our once exemplary culture with an unrecognizable very non-Christian one.

Do not listen to anyone who tries to take the words of Christ out of context in order to trick you into keeping your mouth shut.

Nuttier Than A Squirrel Turd
Is abortion on demand like Comcast Digital Cable With On Demand?

You guys are loopy. And this one:

"... the prevalance of masogeny amoung homosexual men ..."

What? I burst out laughing at that one. Where do you people come up with this stuff?! It sounds like you never get out. Let me see if I can be more clear:

You folks are the MINORITY. With good reason, only about 3 of every 10 Americans follow your crazy line of reasoning. Why? I haven't the foggiest idea. But as long as you keep spewing hate for your fellow countrymen and alienating 60 - 70% of the population with your loon ball propaganda, no one, and I mean NO ONE, will take what you have to say seriously in 08.

As it is, the republican party is in shambles and you folks aren't helping.

utahnotmormon
You wrote that to say "The left hates Bush more than it hates bin Laden" is as meaningless as it is for the left to say "The right wants to nuke the Middle East and kill all Muslims."

But it is not.

There is no significant evidence, maybe none at all, that the right wants to nuke all muslims, so save your straw dogs for your next leftist hatefest.

On the other hand, there is plenty of evidence that the left, 'collectively', as you put it, does hate Bush more than bin Laden.

It includes all of the tantrums, lies, and refusals to acknowledge the legitiamcy of Bush's election that went on BEFORE 9/11.

It includes comparisons to Hitler, movies about assassinating Bush, books about assassinating Bush, contests at liberal 527's for campaign ads in which a proposed ad depicting Bush as another Hitler came in 2nd.

It includes Harry Reid bragging that the Senate Democrats had just "killed" the Patriot Act. It includes plots to impeach him for imagined offenses. It included a thorough bogus CIA "mission" by the hbby of an anti-Bushie in the CIA to find an excuse to call Bush a liar regarding yellow cake in Africa. It includes exaggerations and outright lies about the treatment of prisoners at Gitmo, including an elected Democrat member of Congress who, upon finding no abusses at Gitmo during a personal inspection, fantasized publicly that the torture must be going on on US Naval vessels.

It includes liberal lawyers being charged and convicted for helping accused terrorists communicate with their terror cell buddies. It includes the NY Times informing terrorists how the administration is tracking them. It includes attempts by the left to stop the administration from using wiretaps to fight terrorism.

It includes whining, crying, complaining, and b*tching about Bush doing the same things you praised Clinton for doing.

It includes outright lies presentd as factual news that Bush shirked his ANG duty. It includes the preposterously impudent declaration by high school kids and community college drop-outs that Bush is "stupid" even though he is the first President ever with an MBA, and that MBA is from Harvard (during the Clinton "boom" the Harvard MBA was luaded as the most desirable and in-demand qualification there was for the "new economy"). And he can fly a jet. If you think the armed forces entrust fighter jets to dummies try just getting into the program sometime, let alone getting your wings for jets.

The domestic left's hatred for Bush is mirrored for all to see when terrorists, including bin Laden himself, start making speeches in which DNC talking points are recited and warning us what will happen to us if Bush and the Republicans continue to win our elections.

I am tempted to say "Don't make me laugh" but this is far too serious for humor. Your entire state of denial was already displayed for you by Phylo before you ever posted when Phylo complained about "right-wing" "rhetoric" after calling us "rabid".

Ring me up when you're really ready to comply with all the same 'rules' you want to hang on "rabid right wingers."

Puke

Mountain Rose
Jesus whipped the money-changers in the temple right?

Well, let's just pretend that libs are the money-changers and spank em!

And since I'm not a religious man per se, I don't CARE WWJD, I care about WWGGD!

Mountain Rose

"Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. (Matthew 10:34- NASB ©1995)"

Did Jesus command humans to convert sinners at gun point? Or command humans to kill them if they refuse?

What is the way to salvation for sinners?

What is the responsibility of those who are saved to sinners?

To your quote I would simply say that taking the Bible out of context, whether it is hanging the Ten Commandments in courtrooms or your posting here is something God had very strong words about.

When was the last time someone distributed the Bible in public to you with only one chapter? One verse? I submit to you that is because the Christian community understands how God's word is to be distributed.

As a student of the Bible ultimately one must be able to understand and convey that understanding as I have done here. When someone disputes that very human understanding the correct answer is that everyone must read the Bible and come to grips with their understanding.

No one human has the right interpretation.

Your quote taken out of context has no meaning. I would advise you to go back to the verse and chapter and contemplate the context and the meaning.



Anyone know if
D'Souza has ever debated for real with Noam Chomsky? I mean, rather than just calling him names behind his back? It sure would be interesting...

wolfy - it takes one to know one
wolfy writes: Thursday, January, 18, 2007 11:52 AM
"Nuttier Than A Squirrel Turd
Is abortion on demand like Comcast Digital Cable With On Demand?
You guys are loopy. And this one:
"... the prevalance of masogeny amoung homosexual men ..."
*******************************

Having been the victim of masogenist gays who are prevelant in Hollywood management, I would say that I have first-hand knowledge of this.

In fact, in show business, we have a name for this phenomon: we call it the "Gay Mafia."

I worked for one supervisor who took all the young cute guys to lunch and tried to get them promoted ahead of the women on his crew, who were more experienced and better at their jobs thatn his little cuties.

If a straight man had done this, he would be out on his ear, but this guy was protected by all the other gays who close ranks.

When I gave responsibility to the most qualified people, some of whom were women, he gave me a bad revies, and persecuted the women. The best artist on his crew was a woman, and he deliberately blocked her promotion.

I could tell you many more stories, but I don't have the time.

But I know what I am talking about.

Some jump up and identify themselves.
See who the ENEMY WITHIN are?
They come jumping at this article with frothing mouths.
We know there are some who are wise enough to avoid exposing themselves.
This is WHAT they are!
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/printer-friendly.asp?ARTICLE_ID=44701
http://www.dsausa.org/about/history.html

Mountain Rose
Thank you so much for setting the record straight! We are told constantly that the Muslim faith is violent and supports war, just the opposite from us. You have shown that Christianity shares this quality. Yes, in your desire to demonize any opposition you have shown your willingness to slap away all you claim to hold dear.

MikeR
Mountain Rose thinks that quoting the scriptures liberally (ha ha) makes her a model of Christian virtue. Even if used to justify war, torture... well, basically whatever takes her fancy on any given day. Although I'm not a Christian, part of me hopes to be around if Jesus does come back, just to see people like her join me in an eternity of fire and brimstone...

Pathetic
D'Souza's analysis borders on being perfectly idiotic. The common enemy of the left and Islam is not an insignificant, wavering incompetent like Bush, the enemy is individual freedom. D'Souza's suggestion that the American religious right has a lot in common with traditional Muslims may be true, but that is an indictment of the religious right, not freedom.

There is a far better analysis of the union of Islam and leftism in David Horowitz's book "Unholy Alliance". He shows the history of the union of Islam and socialism through both the individuals involved and the ideas that forged the union. "Unholy Alliance" is far and away the best book on this subject and unlike "Enemy at Home" its thesis is truly original.

D'Souza, claiming to be putting forth an original explanation is actually doing little more than attempting a secular version of Falwell's initial reaction to 9-11, meaning that we were attacked because of fornication and sin.

D'Souza is not an idiot. His previous books showed fine insight into American social problems, but if this interview accurately depicts his views, then even a devout Christian would be better off buying a porno flick than "The Enemy at Home".

wiseone
Man, I wish my memory was a good as yours. I have often wondered what it would be like to have a good debate where everybody relied on facts to defend their position. After just a few days of reading the comments that are posted here, I have come to realize that the art of debate has been lost. Too bad since this is the greatest country on God's green earth. But I still hope that my grandchildren will have the opportunity of expressing themselve without the fear of retribution from an opposing opinion. We can scream our opinions at each all we want, but then one day we will be screaming in the throes of death because we did nothing about the threat that is facing our country. There is a group of people who want to kill us and will have the patience to see it done. We need to act now in decisive actions that will put an end to their hope. That should be the core of this discussion - how do we stop them from killing us? Once we decide that,then maybe we can have a debate about how to stop this threat.

drivebydorkwad
I don't recall killing people who disagree with me.

Your exaggeration makes you look like a fool.

I agree that no one human being has the correct interpretation, but that does not mean that we are given liscense to make God's word say anything we want.

We are supposed to take the Word as a whole, and not just pick out some of the Words in red, neglecting the rest.

The Bible is balanced between God's Wrath & Justice and God's Mercy and Love. If people only hear about God's love and never about His wrath, how can they know they have sins and need to be forgiven?

If we learn the totality of the teaching "Then we will no longer be infants, tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of men in their deceitful scheming. (Ephesians 4:14)

Hmmmmm- Mike-er and CritBull
don't seem to know the difference between the figuritive and literal war.

They probably think that Global Warming is real, that the Santa Clarita Valley really blew up Monday Night, and that Elvis is alive.

Oh and speaking of Global Warming, stop by and comment on my latest post. Guess what it is called?: "What about that Global Warming?"

This is not a Bible study.
Town Hall is not a bible study.

Jesus also said, blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the sons of God.

http://aibi.gospelcom.net/articles/matt59.htm

So how does one reconcile love thy enemy, thou shall not kill, blessed are the peacemakers and I did not come to bring peace but a sword?

The latter is God's role, not man's role. Man's role is to do God's will.

But, a Town Hall is not an appropriate venue for a Bible study. The danger with quoting the Bible out of context is that the Bible was meant to be understood as a whole. In my opinion Bible study is the right venue for coming to understanding God's word, especially with through prayer, something one cannot do as a group here.

I would recommend to all who are confused to go to their local church and ask any questions in a safe Bible study environment.

This is not the venue for Bible instruction.

However, this is the venue for expressing opinion.

I do not believe that usurping the devil with "the left" is God's will. I do not believe that renaming the devil as "the left" is God's will or even worse, redefining evil is God's will.

God defines evil in the Bible and puts that square with the devil. No more needs to be said about the spiritual divides.

I believe that God commanded all Christians to set a spiritual example as the path from sin to righteousness *spiritually*. This requires humility.

This is my understanding of what it means to be Christian and to have Christian charity.

I believe that Christianity is being poorly represented when hatred for the devil, hatred for the left, takes precedence over the love of God as the defining agenda.




Mountain Rose
Wasn't 2006 the warmest year since records began? It certainly was in the UK... that's getting warmer isn't it? Although that debate belongs on your blog so no more to be said here...

Critical Bill
You may find this depressing news.
Communists are considered the worst kind of Infidel because their political belief denies Allah.
The IslamoNazis don't care what your nationality is.
Don't you feel a little foolish cheering for the enemy?
OR are they really your enemy too?

MyOpine
Where have I done any cheering for "Islamofascists"? You are typical of the hysterical right - if you don't believe in "winning" this by brute force and nothing else you are supporting Islam extremists. What a load of nonsense. And I've worked in the financial sector all of my working life - I ain't a communist...

CriticalBull, GlobalWarming & ToothFairy
Critical Bill writes: Thursday, January, 18, 2007 12:46 PM
Mountain Rose
Wasn't 2006 the warmest year since records began? It certainly was in the UK... that's getting warmer isn't it? Although that debate belongs on your blog so no more to be said here...
********************************

Tell that to all the people who may still be stranded at the Denver Airport, or all the people who died of hypothermia in their own homes because the dupes in government were unprepared for a harsh winter.

It is irresponsible for people in the weather industry to tell everyone that winters are going to be mild, when the winters actually turn out to be colder than ever.

gruntmomx3
If your nickname means what I think it does, God bless you and yours and may he keep you and them safe.

Mountain Rose
You certainly set me straight with that comment. Using insults and put downs instead of facts seems to be your style; and gruntmomx3 is worried that the art of debate has been lost. I know full well the difference between figuritive (sic) and literal expressions and find your use of such rather convenient. It seems you can say anything and apply it literally then claim you were being figurative when you get called on your hypocrisy. I could be wrong though. It could be that it’s your faith that’s convenient in that you can make it up as you go along and change it at will.

This doesn't belong here but...
"global warming" is so-called because it effects the entire globe, not isolated spots. Weather forecasters have a duty to forecast locally and in the short term primarily, so those affected areas should have had ample warning. At the same time, the global picture is that the world is getting warmer. I don't understand how you can deny that - it's fact. Isolated pockets of extreme weather, cold, hot, snowy, rainy, will continue to happen just as they have done recently in Colorado and California. But that's not "global".
Apologies to everyone else for getting involved in this tangent!

Mountain Rose
Those Brits are entitled to their Global Warming.
They pay a special tax on it!

I think California should sue AlGore.
He misplaced our share of Global Warming and all the fruit trees are being damaged by the cold.

Jesus, Christians, and the muslim world
It would be great if Christian missionaries could go to the muslim world (and China) and preach the truth. Unfortunately, that is an impossibility. The muslim world KILLS those who preach the truth of the Lord. The Bible is banned throughout most of the muslim world, and those who posses one are subject to severe punishment (much worse than what liberals would call TORTURE) and horrific deaths. Kinda hard to be fishers of men when the men in question are killers of fishermen.

global warming
Let's see.....the sun has been in a period of high activity for about 15 years, and the environuts have been screaming "GLOBAL WARMING!" for about 12.....hmmmmmmmm.
Before that was a couple of decades of light solar activity and those same environuts were screaming "GLOBAL COOLING!"
These warming/cooling cycles have been documented for hundreds of years. Any effects from man are relatively minor (some of the warmest times scientific evidence have uncovered were during the Dark Ages.....those damned SUV drivers!).

To Critical Bill
Actually it was for the US only and even that is misleading. The Global Warming people just love to provide misleading headlines along with selective data. In actuality, if you look at global temperatures over the entire period of evidence (eons) we are nowhere close to the highest temperatures. In addition, if you look at it over the extreme long haul you will find that CO2 has little to do with global warming. CO2 is a poor greenhouse gas and to have significant impact the concentration would have to be so high that all air breathing life would die. See the links here. I was unable to find the graphs that go all the way back to early geologic age but they are out there somewhere.
http://abclocal.go.com/kfsn/story?section=local&id=4946238
http://www.junkscience.com/MSU_Temps/GISSglobal.html

Drivebyposting
When The Almighty said to have no other gods before HIM, He meant HIM, not a book. Worshiping The Bible is also idolatry. Worshiping The WORD (John 1) is not. The Almighty did not deliver The Bible as a book to anyone, in any form. Nor did HE authorize one person to compile or translate The Bible. Conversion comes through hearing (not reading).

The Left's moral culpability
TAP’s “rabid dog” analogy is somewhat correct. A dog with rabies can’t be cured. It has to be destroyed. There is however, another analogy. When severely hurt, a dog will continually bite itself causing further injury. Left to its own solution, it will kill itself.

Personally, I would not use TAP’s dog analogy. I think lemmings are more fitting. The lemming is “a member of a large group of people who blindly follow one another on a course of action that will lead to destruction for all of them.” This, I fear, will include many conservatives. If we leave before the mission is completed, the terrorist will come here. That’s a forgone conclusion.

But this will not be the first time the left has been the cause of “killing Fields.” Cambodia, Vietnam, Pol Pot immediately comes to mind. This is brought about by the left’s propensity to lie when the truth would serve better. Example: Many of the left persuasion posting here have opined that President Regan got us into the Iran Iraq war. That’s a lie. Even the left leaning Christopher Hitchens knows where to lay the blame, “… Jimmy Carter should never have been allowed to endorse [Saddam’s] invasion of Iran, …” Interview with Hugh Hewitt.

During his interview, Mr. Hittichens opined the left was not moral culpable for the millions of deaths in the Fareast. What a lengthy bit of poppycock humdrum rhetoric that was. That is wrong. He did get right for today however.

HH: So you believe the holocaust that would follow in Iraq from a precipitous American withdrawal would rival, or perhaps even exceed that of Pol Pot in Cambodia?
CH: It would be a very rash person who didn’t think that that worst case would be the actual one. And look, again, the awful thing is some of it’s happening as we speak. I mean, almost anyone in Baghdad now, at any rate, who has a qualification, or any money, or any education, or any resources of any sort, is already gone. Perhaps as many as a million and a half, we don’t actually know, have moved to Jordan, some of them to Syrian, some even to Iran, anywhere to get out. Life is becoming intolerable there.
HH: Well given that, and this is a key question, given that you think it’s certain that that kind of scale of horror would follow, do the people urging, whether it’s Murtha or anybody else, urging the precipitous withdrawal, will they bear the moral culpability for the slaughter that follows, if in fact, we are obliged to leave?
CH: I know that there are some Democrats who wonder about this in a responsible way, and there are others who worry about it in a more politicized way, thinking in gee, how would we avoid getting blamed if that happened. What they will do is say well, we never asked for the war in the first place, the President cheated us into it, et cetera, et cetera. But that would be a pretty tinny thing to say, if the whole of Iraqi society is denuded and driven back to year zero.
HH: So you’re saying yes, they will bear the moral culpability?
CH: Yes, they will. Yes, I think anyone who talks about withdrawal has to face this question, and indeed has to be faced with it.

Where's my Global Warming?
I mean REALLY.

Snow in Malibu?

Someone needs to turn up the thermostat as it about freezing right now where I am. This sucks.

Quick question for Critical Bill
What is the principal greenhouse gas?


For extra credit, explain why the Martian ice caps are shrinking.


You get two Snickers Bars if you can answer! :)

Dinesh D’Souza
Who would waste their money on this jack@ss? They hate us for culture. Of course islamic states would be against non muslims the same way some christians hold a grudge against Jews because "they killed Jesus" or because they don't accept Jesus as their messiah. The reason they want to kill us is because we have had a presence in the middle east for some time. Somebody mentioned earlier about predatory loans with the World Bank and IMF. Read Confessions of an Economic Hitman if you want to learn more about that. We prop us dictators, we try to kill popular leaders that don't agree with our brand of globalism, and then we wonder why people want to kill us.

Now you can't have the American public thinking that Multinationals who are in bed with our government and other governments are responsible for terrorism, that would be bad for business. So you get them to support the export of their jobs, the slaughtering of innocents, and the toppling of foreign governments that don't threaten us. Then when you have a backlash, you have dimwitted "authors" like this guy say a bunch of garbage, Big Government Republicans or as they like to call themselves "conservatives" take this propaganda as their daily bread and they have somebody else to blame because they can't admit that our post Cold War foreign policy has been an absolute disaster and a mistake. Once we didn't have fighting the Communists as a justification the world got fed up with our Empire nonsense.

So I plead to everyone, quit being so intellectually dishonest or just outright ignorant and realize that they attacked us because we attack Iraq during Gulf War I and we insist on getting involved in the Arab Israeli conflict when we have no business intervening in their border disputes.

Wake up America
Ron Paul '08

Great post, BahiaBob
That is all on tape somewhere and should be rebroadcast on the evening news.

Intended 2:06PM
The next one is good too though.

I am not a scientist
So I will not attempt to answer the questions about global warming other than to say that most scientists agree that the world is getting hotter and that man's activity is at least partly to blame. As I said, I'm not a scientist so I am happy to believe those that are.
That said, Mountain Rose blames global warming scaremongering for death and hardship in the recent cold snap. And government dupes for not being prepared. What utter nonsense; hilarious in fact. I can just imagine the conversation over the garden fence...

"So, throwing out your radiators eh?"
"Yeah.I was watching that weather channel the other night and this weather bloke says that winters are getting milder. So I thought I'd save a few bucks and get rid of the house heating system."
"Sweeeet. What's the bonfire in the back yard all about?"
"Well, winters are going to be so hot now I thought I'd save some space by burning all of my jumpers and thermal long johns. Bloke on the tv said so."

I don't want to sund callous but everyone should be well prepared for cold winters. And I thought the govrnment being held responsible was a European socialist thing, not a small government conservative thing...

Well
Global Warming does exist and it’s just that: a general warming of the global atmosphere. Warming and cooling trends have been charted fairly accurately. The point of contention is our involvement in this latest warming trend. Unfortunately, while we politicize this debate we ignore much more important related issues.


Critical Bill
Using Al Gore's invention (The Internet) I found this great link that should assauge your Global Warming fears.

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=1439

My favorite quote of the article...

Margot Wallstrom, the EU’s Environment Commissioner, takes a slightly different view, but one that’s instructive about the real motives of Kyoto proponents. She asserted that Kyoto is about "the economy, about leveling the playing field for big businesses worldwide."

Oops.

CB
"So I will not attempt to answer the questions about global warming other than to say that most scientists agree that the world is getting hotter and that man's activity is at least partly to blame. As I said, I'm not a scientist so I am happy to believe those that are."


Hokaaaay.... the ol' Appeal to Authority fallacy...


Other than some imprecision in your statement, not bad, though. It's not the world getting hotter, it's the atmosphere which is in the middle of both short and long term warming cycles. The scientists with integrity, i.e. those not grubbing for research funds at (primarily) Leftist academic institutions - funds incidentally largely granted by p.c. govt types - acknowledge that human activity MAY play a role but there is no way to quantify it. (Since human activity contributes only on the order of 2-3% of Earth's greenhouse gas emissions, and H2O which has no human component is the PRIMARY greenhouse gas, it only makes sense that the human contribution to warming is extremely minor and marginal at best, doesn't it)? The trouble is that the anti-capitalist Kyoto crowd not only claims that human activity is primarily (if not solely) responsible for the warming, but that the consequences will be catastrophic, i.e. ALL bad. This is irresponsible scaremongering, pure and simple, and is certainly not objective science.

Wolfy
Wolfy says "You folks are the MINORITY. With good reason, only about 3 of every 10 Americans follow your crazy line of reasoning. Why? I haven't the foggiest idea. But as long as you keep spewing hate for your fellow countrymen and alienating 60 - 70% of the population with your loon ball propaganda, no one, and I mean NO ONE, will take what you have to say seriously in 08

Indeed, that is a scary thought wolfy; that there is a small percent of intelligent people with ethic and moral values -- if your stats are true of course. There is a reason why societies fall. One of the early stages is that people loose their moral value system and in result create chaos without order. The left have no value system, that I can think of. They think with feeling and in return cause more damage. It seems to me that the left have a problem with critical thinking and logic, that is why this interview makes no sense to them.

Global warming
CB

"most scientists agree that the world is getting hotter and that man's activity is at least partly to blame."

Margaret Thatcher once said "Consensus is the absence of leadership."

And Rush Limbaugh pointed out just Tuesday that "...if it's consensus, it's not science."

Science is either true or it's not science. Scientific fact is not determined by a vote.

The same scientists you are so happy to believe spent about 10 years explaining to us that sea levels would rise if the the North Polar ice cap melted. This is scientifically impossible because of the law of displacement. If every ounce of North Polar ice melted sea level would remain EXACTLY the same it is today.

Global warming is liberal propaganda designed to prevent advanced industrialized economies like the US, the UK, Germany, France, Australia, etc., from continuing in the direction that has made us successful.

The progression in the US is best exemplified by the auto industry. In the 70's the car makers were told to make their emissions 95% pollution-free. They did it, and cars were still the favorite means of travel. So the environmentalists demanded they make them 99% pollution-free. To the dismay of these environmentalists, the car makers did it, and autos were STILL the favorite method of travel. So the environmentalists have now demanded that they be CO2-free.

The object here is NOT to save the planet. It is to destroy the US economy, or at least retard it so that the Third World can catch up.

These scientists in whom you invest so much faith are extrapolating a comparatively microscopic amount of data so wildly beyond what any mathematician would deem acceptable as to call into question their legitimate scientific credentials. The sun has been here a couple of million years and these guys think a sampling from 15 years can be used to predict the next 20, 30, 40, or 100. This would be unreasonable even if the data were reliably precise and accurate, of which it is neither.

The final bit of proof that this is a political, not scientific, cause, is the suggested solution; hydrogen fuel cells. The same libs that are afraid the ice caps will melt, which won't create more water and won't raise the level of the oceans, want us to use hydrogen fuel cells which, in the process of producing energy, will combine with oxygen and produce (drum roll please) MORE WATER, which WILL raise the level of the oceans. Leave it to the left to "solve" a non-problem by turning it into one.

It will also use up oxygen out of the atmosphere, which is perfect, The left is already telling us we can't exhale because that will add CO2 to the atmosphere, so the only "solution" to that is for us to have less oxygen to inhale. These brilliant leftists think of everything, even if they don't know it.

To Critical Bill
See my post on Mountain Rose's blog. Global Warming is a scam, follow the money.

Israel
D’Souza shoots around the target, but never hits the bullseye. As long as American sides with Israel, we'll not be at peace with Israel's enemies, and that includes the cultural left. It is opposed to any kind of socio-religous connection such as America and Israel, a connection created by and tied to that horrible, offensive, scarey book that the left hates called "The Bible."

bahiabob
I think you mean carbon dioxide, not carbon monoxide. CO is produced naturally by volcanic activity as well as bushfires, but Earth's natural output of CO is both highly variable and minor. CO is also created when carbon-containing fuels are burned incompletely. CO concentrations in the atmosphere are short-lived, unlike CO2, which takes longer (centuries) for the Earth to reabsorb to reach equilibrium, mostly by the oceans and ocean organisms.

you people scare me
In a comment I posted earlier I said that the right wing rhetoric was getting a bit out of hand. I said that talking about the left using terms like "war" and "enemy" is crazy; it makes it sound like you people on the right want to mow the rest of us down with machine guns.

Four people responded by saying they thought that was a pretty good idea.

I hope you're proud of yourselves Prager, Medved, Hewit and Limbaugh. Your ability to inspire hatred in your listeners is truly amazing.

Phylo out.

wiseone
OK post, but your last two paragraphs are simply false.

Global Warming Nutter Question
I was wondering if the nutters are aware of how batteries are made? Especially batteries that power hybrid and electric cars. Are they aware of the caustic chemicals and the amount of electric it takes to make these batteries? And how about the disposal of these batteries after they die. Recycling these batteries also take a lot of energy. I am assuming that the left think electric magically appears when they plug something in. I am assuming that hybrid and electric cars produce more CO2 than the avg automobile in a indirect way by producing the batteries that make them run.

Calling the other party the enemy
"When you start calling the other party "the enemy", it sounds like you guys want to mow us down with machine guns."

Well then maybe you moonbat idiots should stop ACTING like an emeny would during a war time. The way you loonylib fruitcakes act make mowing you all down sound like a great idea who's time has come.

JUST WHO's SIDE ARE YOU ON STUPID?? (and, if I have to ask that should say it all in a nutshell....)

Let's ROLL !!

Hey dumb moonbat Phylo
Make it 5. And counting...........

Keep up your LOONY lefty BS and just wait until the backlash happens. I can't wait!

tbmbuzz
My last two paragraphs were facetious, except the part about global warming being a political issue and not a true threat to the planet.

LoonLib Killer: A question
Just how would you describe the way Repubs/Cons
ACTED During former President Bill Clintons 8 years in office?

LoonLib Killer: Blind leading the Blind.
You remind me of one of the Rev. Jim Jones followers..If he told you to drink acid laced
Kool-Aid You would DO IT WITHOUT QUESTIONING WHY?


Calling the other class the enemy
When LBJ declared "War on Poverty," did he forget to distribute to us "machine guns" for the cause? Surely, noone wants to lose that war.

sjmiller05
When people do not see something they don't think it is there.
Electric cars have another little drawback that excludes their use in the very areas they are intended for.
OZONE;
Everywhere electricity passes through our atmosphere it causes an ionized field, that ionizes oxygen, O2 into ozone, O3 which reverts instantly back to oxygen upon exposure to direct sunlight. Unless you are in a confined area where ozone stings your eyes & nostrils you never notice it.
Places like the LA Basin where temperature inversions hold and concentrate smog prevent direct sunlight from reaching ozone.
Ozone is toxic in high concentrations.
I THINK .00014ppm is toxic to humans.

Phylo is spot on
I had a look on the Huffington Post today for headlines of columns that included words like war and enemy when used in reference to the right. There aren't any. While the language on most left wing threads is a little fruitier than it here (adults are allowed to use whatever words they see fit) seems to be mildly aggressive at times it doesn't descend to the levels of aggression as it does here. Certainly the headline language used by commentators on left wing sites is far less inflamatory. I know I'll face a barrage of aggression for saying that but there you go, it's the truth.
And as for whoever it was saying that global warming research scientists are clamouring over themselves for the vast riches on offer from left leaning academic bodies (the concept of which is ridiculous) do you think they pay better than Exxon? Than BP? Than Elf? Of course they don't. All research is funded by someone; to lay the blame solely at the feet of left leaning academic institutions is mindless garbage. What about the scientists who say whatever BP, Exxon or Elf pays them to say?

Donaldd
AS USUAL you don't know what you are talking about. Ozone IS PART OF SMOG
I DID NOT STATE IT WAS THE SOLE CAUSE OF SMOG.

NOW DONALDDDDD
I am very specific in my choice of words and if you intend to debate me on those words you must use my words in the same context as I use them.
When you addlib and debate with your own words it is sort of like masturbating with a keyboard.

You do that fairly often.
Is this some kind of pathetic illness?

MyOpine