Category Archives: Media Criticism

The Dark Day

…that brought out the worst in Britain. Note that the know-nothing anti-Americanism continues in comments there.

I was in San Juan, Puerto Rico, getting ready to head to the airport to fly back to California, when I saw the second plane hit on television, and knew instantly that we were at war, and probably against Islamism. I didn’t bother to go to the airport, because I was pretty sure that all flights would be grounded shortly, and I turned out to be right.

When Patricia got home from work, she said that many of the Puerto Ricans she worked with were shocked, but that many of them were actually happy that it had happened, and thought that we had it coming. Their resentment of the country that had provided them with a higher standard of living than any of their neighbors for decades quickly came to the fore. As Mark Twain said, a dog will not bite the hand that feeds him — this is the principle difference between a man and a dog.

Winning The Battle Against Al Qaeda

losing the war against Jihad.

It’s as though, ten years after the start of the war, we had killed Hitler, but left Nazism intact.

[Afternoon update]

Who has won the war against terrorism? Not the West.

[Anniversary morning update]

I don’t really have any profound thoughts on the ten-year anniversary, but Reason has a lot of thoughts from Reasonites. But I agree with this — we’re still falling:

to me, those airplanes are still falling, those buildings are still falling, those people are still falling. They will always be falling, forever falling in my mind. And we are falling along with them, still falling, ten years later.

At the time, I was stupid enough to hope that losing three thousand Americans to a sneak attack by the Muzis would be the catalyst that would reignite the American Spirit. I thought it was our Pearl Harbor. I thought that we as a nation would finally sweep aside the bullshit, the weasel words, the lies, and the ideas behind the lies, and deal with reality as it exists. I thought were finally going to shrug away the spiritual rot of the past fifty years and cure ourselves of our cultural and political madness.

Yes, I had those hopes, too. But I’m not as pessimistic as Bruce is.

Mark Steyn is also his usual anti-pollyannaish self:

What of the 23rd Psalm? It was recited by Flight 93 passenger Todd Beamer and the telephone operator Lisa Jefferson in the final moments of his life before he cried, “Let’s roll!” and rushed the hijackers.

No, sorry. Aside from firemen, Mayor Bloomberg’s official commemoration hasn’t got any room for clergy, either, what with all the Executive Deputy Assistant Directors of Healing and Outreach who’ll be there. One reason why there’s so little room at Ground Zero is because it’s still a building site. As I write in my new book, 9/11 was something America’s enemies did to us; the ten-year hole is something we did to ourselves — and in its way, the interminable bureaucratic sloth is surely as eloquent as anything Nanny Bloomberg will say in his remarks.

In Shanksville, Pa., the zoning and permitting processes are presumably less arthritic than in Lower Manhattan, but the Flight 93 memorial has still not been completed. There were objections to the proposed “Crescent of Embrace” on the grounds that it looked like an Islamic crescent pointing towards Mecca. The defense of its designers was that, au contraire, it’s just the usual touchy-feely huggy-weepy pansy-wimpy multiculti effete healing diversity mush. It doesn’t really matter which of these interpretations is correct, since neither of them has anything to do with what the passengers of Flight 93 actually did a decade ago. 9/11 was both Pearl Harbor and the Doolittle Raid rolled into one, and the fourth flight was the only good news of the day, when citizen volunteers formed themselves into an ad hoc militia and denied Osama bin Laden what might have been his most spectacular victory. A few brave individuals figured out what was going on and pushed back within half an hour. But we can’t memorialize their sacrifice within a decade. And when the architect gets the memorial brief, he naturally assumes that there’s been a typing error and that “Let’s roll!” should really be “Let’s roll over!”

Meanwhile, Al Qaeda has found a new haven in Pakistan (or as the president would say, Pahkeestahn). It’s hard to be optimistic.

[Update a few minutes later]

I’d like to agree with Jake Tapper that this is the most idiotic thing that anyone has said about the occasion, but it’s rivaled by Paul Krugman’s vileness, who (as Professor Jacobson notes) does us the favor of giving voice to what the loony left is thinking. And lest we think his derangement a recent occurrence, recall what he wrote back in the day: “In the years ahead Enron, not Sept. 11, will…be seen as the greater turning point in U.S. society.”

Yes, he really wrote that.

Meanwhile, Iowahawk sums up the day pretty well, I think: “The one enduring lesson of 9/11 and its aftermath: PC kills.”

But it’s a lesson that our so-called leaders haven’t learned.

[Update a while later]

What to say to the totalitarian left on 9/11.

[Update a few minutes later]

Thoughts on 9/11 and the foreseeable future:

Many illusions were challenged on September 11. One illusion concerns the fantasies of academic multiculturalists, so-called. I say “so-called” because what goes under the name of multiculturalism in our colleges and universities today is really a polysyllabic form of mono-culturalism fueled by ideological hatred. Genuine multiculturalism involves a great deal of work, beginning with the arduous task of learning other languages, something most of those who call themselves multiculturalists are conspicuously loath to do.

Think of the fatuous attack on “dead white European males” that stands at the center of the academic multiculturalist enterprise. As a specimen of that maligned species, one could hardly do better than Pericles. Not only is he a dead white European male, but he is one who embodied in his life and aspirations an ideal of humanity completely at odds with academic multiculturalism. He was patriarchal, militarist, elitist, and Eurocentric, indeed, Hellenocentric, which is even worse.

The good news is that Pericles survived September 11. The spurious brand of multiculturalism that encourages us to repudiate “dead white European males” and insists that all cultures are of equal worth may finally be entering a terminal stage. Figures like Edward Said and Susan Sontag, Harold Pinter and Noam Chomsky continue to bay about the iniquity of America, the depredations of capitalism, and so on, but their voices have been falling on increasingly deaf ears. The liberal media began by wringing its hands and wondering whether the coalition would hold, whether we were fair to “moderate” members of the Taliban, whether the Afghans were too wily for Americans, whether the United States was acting in too “unilateral” a fashion. On Christmas Eve, in a masterpiece of understatement, The Wall Street Journal ran a story under the headline “In War’s Early Phase, News Media Showed a Tendency to Misfire.” “This war is in trouble,” quoth Daniel Schorr on NPR. At the end of October, R. W. Apple warned readers of The New York Times that “signs of progress are sparse.” Et cetera. Every piece of possible bad news was—and is—touted as evidence that we may have entered a “quagmire,” that we are “overextended,” “arrogant,” “unresponsive” to the needs and desires of indigenes. It is too soon to say which way the rhetorical chips will ultimately fall. But, as of this writing anyway, a constant string of victories has the liberal pundits frustrated and baffled. They had been waiting for a repeat of Vietnam, and the Bush administration disobliged by giving them a conflict in which America was in the right and was winning.

I mocked them mercilessly at the time, including the odious Sunera Thobani.

[Update a few minutes later]

Related thoughts from Bruce Bawer:

The divisions that ensued after 9/11 weren’t any one person’s, or party’s, fault. If we’d had a president who had dared to speak the truth about our enemies and about the ideology (which is to say theology) that motivates them, and had done so eloquently and stirringly and repeatedly, à la Churchill — instead of pretending that all religions are by definition good and that the hijackers had “betrayed” their faith (as if it were the job of any American president to judge who was or was not a “good” Muslim) — it might have made a huge difference. Such an assertive, informed response might have helped to overcome the ideological depredations of Michael Moore, Gore Vidal, Oliver Stone, and others, which did such appalling damage. But perhaps not. Perhaps the poison of multiculturalism — the fear of acknowledging that our enemies were, in fact, our enemies — was simply too potent. In the years after 9/11, politicians, journalists, professors, and schoolteachers alike cowed millions of Americans into being scared of even saying, flat out, why those people had piloted those planes into those buildings. In doing so, they crippled our ability to respond in a strong, unified, and self-assured way to a threat that did not end that day but that is ongoing.

But too many remain in denial.

[Late morning update]

I forgot the appropriate description of Krugman. Make that former Enron advisor Paul Krugman.

“An Umitigated Litany Of Failure”

Obama’s scorecard.

Obama's Scorecard

As many commentators have noted, there is an aroma of fear hovering about the White House these days: the stale, acrid scent of panic. Some of us have known all along that Obama, the community organizer miraculously elevated to the U.S. Senate for a few months before he erected some Greek columns and talked his way into the U.S. Presidency, some of us, I say, have known all along that he hadn’t a clue. Now it seems that even he is getting uncomfortable inklings. In the beginning Obama emitted an aura of that some identified as an aura of confidence; really, it was an aura of entitlement — along with what the President himself a while back identified as “bluff.” Are you the sort of person who likes empirical reminders?

I don’t think he is.

And why is the press uninterested in Obama’s Lincoln gaffe? Because it’s Obama, and not Mike Huckabee. Or Sarah Palin.

Happy Recovery

To Moe Lane. And this is also my response when some moron accuses me of “hate.”

I don’t know about the rest of you, but Jeffrey here of the Los Angeles branch of California State University has given me one Hell of a testimonial, thanks to his desire to see my wife made a widow and my children orphans. I’ll remember this the next time that I wonder – as all bloggers and writers do, honestly – whether I’m making a difference. Clearly, I am – because they hate me. They really, really hate me. This is such a pick-me-up I almost don’t need the next pain pill.

The funny part? I don’t hate them. Because hate makes you stupid.

Which actually explains much of the Left pretty well. It’s a chapter in the book I’m working on. And yes, I too am happy to be hated by the right (that is to say, the left) people.

Jane Fonda’s Crush

on Che:

In case you read Town Hall, Ms. Fonda, here’s some consolation, honey: “I used to call him El Gallo (the rooster)”recalled Carlos Figueroa who was Ernesto Guevara’s adolescent friend in Alta Gracia, Argentina. “I’d be visiting him and eating in his family’s dining room and whenever the poor servant girls would enter Ernesto would promptly grab her and force her to lay on the dining room table where he’d have rapid intercourse with her. Immediately afterwards he’d throw her out and continue eating as if nothing had happened.”

“Es un gallo—un gallo! (He’s a rooster!—rooster”) complained a scowling Berta Gonzalez a few years later upon emerging from her Mexico City bedroom summer of 1955. This was shortly after his Motorcycle Diary trip, when the hobo Ernesto Guevara was scribbling unreadable poetry and mooching off women in Mexico City, where he met Fidel and Raul Castro. Berta Gonzalez was a Cuban exile in Mexico at the time.

Gallo, as you might have guessed, is a common pejorative by Spanish-speaking women against men who terminate carnal encounters prematurely.

If only that were the least of his crimes. Here’s how Cuba treated real feminists:

They started by beating us with twisted coils of wire recalls former political prisoner Ezperanza Pena from exile today. “I remember Teresita on the ground with all her lower ribs broken. Gladys had both her arms broken. Doris had her face cut up so badly from the beatings that when she tried to drink, water would pour out of her lacerated cheeks.”

“On Mother’s Day they allowed family visits,” recalls, Manuela Calvo from exile today.” But as our mothers and sons and daughters were watching, we were beaten with rubber hoses and high-pressure hoses were turned on us, knocking all of us the ground floor and rolling us around as the guards laughed and our loved-ones screamed helplessly.”

“When female guards couldn’t handle us male guards were called in for more brutal beatings. I saw teen-aged girls beaten savagely their bones broken their mouths bleeding,” recalls prisoner Polita Grau.

The gallant regime co-founded by Che Guevara jailed 35,150 Cuban women for political crimes, a totalitarian horror utterly unknown—not only in Cuba — but in the Western Hemisphere until the regime so “magnetic” to Barbara Walters, Andrea Mitchell, Diane Sawyer, Jane Fonda, etc. Some of these Cuban ladies suffered twice as long in Castro’s Gulag as Alexander Solzhenitsyn suffered in Stalin’s.

Their prison conditions were described by former political prisoner Maritza Lugo. “The punishment cells measure 3 feet wide by 6 feet long. The toilet consists of an 8 inch hole in the ground through which cockroaches and rats enter, especially in cool temperatures the rat come inside to seek the warmth of our bodies and we were often bitten. The suicide rate among women prisoners was very high.”

But they got free health care.

My Talk With Alan Boyle

For those people who foolishly thought that the Republican debate was more important than my conversation with Alan Boyle tonight, the podcast is up now.

[Update]

It’s all ME, ME, ME, over at Cosmic Log tonight.

So if you’ve had enough of me, don’t go there.

[Thursday morning update]

Related thoughts from Rick Tumlinson.

[Update a few minutes later]

Man, many of the comments over at Cosmic Log are typical, in their rampant ignorance and straw men.

Operation Gunwalker

…explodes into the heartland:

what Codrea has dubbed as “Gangwalker” appears to be another attempt to provide guns to criminals in order to generate more gun crime and then more calls for gun control.

The biggest difference between the two operations at this early date only seems to be that Gangwalker is a purposeful attempt to create the deaths of American citizens in order to pursue the administration’s fanatical anti-gun agenda.

American deaths, for political gain.

Think about that claim for a minute, and what that would mean.

Operation Fast and Furious (and the suspected operations in Texas and Florida) was reprehensible and more than likely calculated to raise the level of violence in Mexico, sacrificing the lives of law enforcement officers, soldiers, and civilians in order to pursue a policy goal. It wasn’t until an American agent died that whistleblowers finally arose and cried out. It was as if Mexican lives meant less than American lives … and in this sick political calculus, maybe that was exactly the mindset.

But if Gangwalker is what it appears to be, then we are staring down a president, attorney general, secretary of Homeland Security, and key members of the Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security gone entirely rogue.

If Gangwalker and Gunwalker are two sides of the same insidious coin, we’re looking at the very definition of “high crimes and misdemeanors.”

Yeah, but then I would have thought that perjury and subornation of perjury via threats and bribes by someone who swore to see that the laws were faithfully executed were as well…