.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Thursday, February 24, 2005

Warnin' the Moolahs

Great moment with Bush at the Dais in Mainz, talking about Iran. “We will work with them to convince the mullahs that they need to give up their nuclear ambitions,” the President said, pronouncing “mullahs” as an elongated moo-lahs, and of course, “nuclear” as nucular. These Bushisms fill the left half of the political spectrum with contempt. “What an ignoramus. What an embarrassment. What a rube. Turn it off. I hate him!” But if you have ears to hear, the message is perfect: Bush is not talking to his prissy western opposition (even when visiting a country completely unified in prissy opposition). As with the State of the Union speech, his audience is the oppressed peoples of the world, and the message is constancy.

The left half of the political spectrum makes it a point of pride to pronounce the names of other peoples and places as the natives do. If you hear someone say “El Salvador” with the stress on "dor" instead of "Sal," you know he is a Democrat. A Republican looks askance and thinks: “Aren’t you American? That’s how they pronounce it in El Salvador. That’s not how we pronounce it here.” Bush goes even further. He talks Texas, and knows that everyone who talks American will approve.

To give up the way you talk is to assume a submissive posture. It is bending to the foreigner’s claim of right. Bush doesn’t bend, which is exactly what the oppressed peoples of the world love about him. He says he wants to help them to free themselves, and they believe him, because his constancy is constantly on display. “He’s a unilateralist cowboy” shriek the Euro-Democrats. “He’s coming” think the huddled masses.

Good 'un.
Wasn't quite sure where to put this, I'm sorry if this is in not the right place. But I believe that as we are at war with Islam and Muslims. All enemies living within our borders are a danger to our society and should be treated like any other enemy alien. Such as the Japanese in WWII.

I think we should start by interning all adult Muslim males in facilities similar Guantanamo but obviously on US soil. This is justified by the fact we are at war and we have a great deal of the enemy living amongst us who are a serious threat to our national security.
While I completely agree with the very wise assessment you've made, the anonymous commenter's input was... unAmerican.

What we did to Japanese civilians during the war was a mistake that did not befit the character of a free people, even during wartime.

We need to retain our American identity of tolerance (I'm not talking about tolerance in the stupid, vapid, left-leaning sense where you tolerate gay scoutmasters taking your boys on a three-week tour of coastal France) of all people, no matter their religion or their race.
I respectfully disagree with you that this is un-American.

Is protecting our national security un-American? Make no mistake where Moslem loyalties lie. It is not with the United States it is with the 'Umma' and their Moslem brothers overseas.

Make no mistake these people are a grave threat to our society and freedom.

When a suicide attack occurs within our boundaries perpetrated by one of our own 'citizens' only then will this country wake up to the great danger these backward savages represent to our nation.
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?