Posted by
CPT on Tuesday, April 24, 2007 5:22:44 PM
An illustration of how politics can (and should) end at the "water's edge
This
endorsement by Austin Bay of a self described "progressive" attitude towards the Iraq conflict really points out the crassness of our political class. Particularly the posturing "anti-war" donkeycrats and others claiming the "progressive" label.
The most telling question asked by the liberal Bay references is this; "Did I miss the part where it was progressive not to fight medieval religious fascists?". The same could and should be asked by today's conservatives, particular those who claim libertarian or "classical liberal" attitudes. *
Did I miss the part where it was liberal/libertarian not to fight medieval religious fascists?*
As we have pointed out before, the most vociferous *
anti-war progressives* claim the most socialist/collectivist of
liberal political agendas. Yet, ironically, should the Islamic radical types WIN these same pro-homosexual, pro-
abortion, pro-women's equality people would be the
FIRST ONES KILLED (or maimed, imprisoned, tortured etc.) by the fundamentalist and fascistic Islamic radicals.
One simply has to confront the *
REAL* driving motivations of the
Islamic radical threat to see how liberal *
delusional tolerance* threatens the collectivists themselves much more than conservatives and Christian believers. It is the liberal/socialist's driving ambition for power to control all of us for *
our own good* which they believe they grasp better than we unwashed masses.
An interesting parallel in that Islamo-fascists seek to control us all to make us live according to sharia while the
collectivist/leftist activists seek to control us all to make us live according to their secular/humanist religion.
While having the same end game in mind, if you locked one of each type in a room they'd be
SURE to kill each other forthwith.