« Alternate Universe Editorial - NY Times September 12th 2001. | Main | The 12th Memorial Day of Deceased Kim Il Sung… Kim Jong Il, Why Did He Disappear? »

Bumper Sticker Wars

I was out this weekend on the coast, and as we all know the closer you get to the coast, the closer you get to the world of “Blue culture”. Visiting “Blue culture” cities is to me like visiting another country. They speak in their own language, they have their own way of doing things.

I noted a few interesting bumper stickers in the parking lots I passed through.

What if everyone voted?

Well, I suspect what would happen is that you would lose by an even larger margin than you already are. Apparently, the point to this one is that they would have won if only more people cared enough to get out to vote for the leftist side.

What is it about the left that makes them wish to insult their own side as an attempt to get more people to take their side? If I call you a lazy fool, does that make you want to say “ wow, this guy is smart?” What is it about the left that requires that they live in the illusion that everyone is on their side, yet they are confronted daily with evidence that everyone is not on their side?

They love democracy, right up to the point where the people tell them to take a hike. Then of course, everyone is a moron, or worse a dupe of the corporate world.

I read the bumper sticker and immediately thought of Robert Kennedy Jr. I watched Charlie Rose this weekend, he had an interview with Robert Kennedy Jr. I want to highly emphasize JUNIOR here, because the man and the crowd he travels in have made this weird sort of “cargo cult” out of his sainted father and his likeness, even to the point that older guys like Charlie Rose love to say “Robert Kennedy” and then conveniently forget to say “…junior…” as if it would result in the old man himself reanimating on the spot.

Robert Kennedy JUNIOR is like Frank Sinatra JUNIOR. I don’t care how drunk you are or what time of the morning it is in Vegas and I dont care whos name is on the Marquee, it’s not “the old man” up on stage and no amount of makeup or bright lights is going to change that fact. He may look like RFK and he may sound like RFK, but unlike his sainted old man, Robert Kennedy JUNIOR is so devoid of charisma he sucks whatever charisma there is out of the air like a Shaper Image Ionic Breeze sucks pollen and dust mites out of the air.

But I digress...

Anyway, On Charlies show, RFK Jr. was going on and on and on and nearly breaking out in tears over the fact that there was no ‘fairness doctrine” on the radio airwaves and as a result people weren’t hearing all about how the fact that illegal immigrants were here because we all decided to not join unions. It was pathetic. It was do devoid of leadership and ideas that it just reeked of failure.

"People would vote for us if they werent so stupid and if they didnt listen to that damn Rush Limbaugh..."

Oh, Naturally.

As far as I could tell from RFK JUNIOR, illegal immigrants and lack of union membership were caused by Rush Limbaugh and Roger Ailes and with just a little bit of government oversight provided by you-know-who, we could all return to the golden age of Democratic one party rule, where we would all work for the AFL-CIO, get shift differential down at the Ford plant and drive a big four door De Soto while we socked it to the "fat cats on Wall Street".

Well, that would get more people out to vote, but I don’t think it would go the way that my bumper sticker person would really want it to go.

What if everyone voted?

Ah, sleep - perchance to dream...

Bush Lied. People Died.

I love this one. I love the simplicity. There’s something about a rhyme that attracts the small minded and petty. My guess is that too many leftists smoked pot while reading Dr. Seuss books and the effect of that is that they think that any rhyme is subversive, intelligent and powerful. This little ditty is supposed to be like garlic to a vampire, it’s supposed to make me curl up in a ball and cry. It actually makes me laugh, every time I see it.

Lets take a look at each part of the “littlest subversive sentence in the world”

Bush Lied.

Gee, I thought the case made by “moveon.org” in the 90’s was that “everyone lies”? Oh wait, it was “ everyone lies – about sex”. Yeah that’s right. So it seems the argument being made here is “Bush lied - about Weapons of Mass Destruction”, or another way of putting it is “ Saddam never had any weapons of any sort except for the ones we sold him and Rumsfeld personally signed for when he met with Saddam, oh and that Nuclear reactor that the Israelis bombed? That was just a big Disneyland style prop, no way that could have ever been a nuclear reactor, even though the French in the person on Jacques Chirac himself sold it to Saddam. And what about those half a million Iranians and Kurds that were killed with Chemical and biological weapons? Well, since they were just brown people being killed by other brown people, who really cares about them anyway? Oh, and Saddams cousin? “Chemical Ali”? Apparently, he’s just a big fan of Aerosmith, Why assume it has something to do with being a genocidal manic who enjoyed shelling Kurdish villages full of women and children with Mustard gas? And what about all those shells that were actually found? Pay no attention to those things because they have the wrong serial numbers".

Get this through your heads, you hippies. Saddam used every weapon he had at his disposal, and he saved the very best weapons for use against Iraqi civilian populations. The war in Iraq was not the equivalent of a major pot bust that goes terribly wrong and instead of arresting the neighborhood drug dealer it results in the SWAT team breaking down the door to old granny Whitebread house and breaking her extensive Franklin mint plate collection.

What Saddam had or didn’t have at the time was of almost no consequence. What was of consequence was his track record. Now, given that he’d invaded every single one of his neighbors and bought every weapon of mass destruction that could be purchased on the open market and as the Kurds will surely testify; used them to kill civilians in mass numbers, thereby qualifying as “Weapons of Mass Destruction – and Used them”, can we not dispense with the idiocy of “there were no Weapons of Mass Destruction”? Because as long as Saddam was alive, and had easy access to cash, and a wanton desire to kill as many people as he could to maintain his power, it was just a matter of time. How long should we have waited? Until he had a bomb? or until he fired it at Jerusalem?

President Bush did not invade Iraq to capture a warehouse of atomic bombs. He decided only that it was necessary to hold the UN accountable in its resolutions against Iraq and thus, an invasion and occupation and conversion to Democracy was necessary. Those of you who said that “Bush should’ve finished the job in 92!”. Guess what boys and girls, you got your wish! Those of you who are saying that its impossible to change an Arab country into a modern democracy should look to the Kuwaitis who are now an Arab Democracy, with women in power. Yet it was the worlds “progressives” and John Kerry specifically who voted against stopping Saddam in Kuwait. Invade a UN member state? No consequence! Had we taken their council in 1992 what would the middle east look like today? What would the world look like today? Peaceful? Hardly.

Well that’s the “compassionate left” for you, always willing to let the little brown people of the world die just to make a political point now and then about the futility of life.

Now that we’ve had fun with the first part, lets tear into the second part:

People Died.

Did people die because President Bush took action, or because the worlds left chose to take the path of inaction instead? Are people dying in Darfur because we are killing them or because of worldwide indifference? Did people die in Uganda, Cambodia, Zimbabwe because we in the west killed them with military action or because we in the west choose to look the other way?

Or did we kill them with something else?

Did people die in Iraq or Afghanistan or because we killed them, or because other people let them die? Or worse, are there still people who wish them to keep on dying, just so long as we don’t have anything to do with it one way or the other?

If you were to put a set of 5 gallon drums of kerosene in your garage and take the tops off, is it the aimless smoker who wandered by who actually set the house on fire or is it someone else? Who is really to blame?

What the people of the left refuse to recognize is how their ‘dissent” has made the war go on longer and be more bloody than it needed to be. What the left refuses to recognize is how their direct actions have killed millions, not with weapons, but with indifference or worse, outright support of al-queda and its goals.

We could have stopped Saddam in 1998 or Osama, or Zawahiri. We chose not to. Democrats voted for “Regime Change in Iraq”, but then chose to do nothing deliver it. Europeans voted for human rights, and then traded for Oil with Saddam.

And people died, and kept on dying, long before Bush ever decided to even be Govenor of Texas.

What happened in the 1990’s was not peace, but war deferred. War deferred is war intensified. We can thank the left and its romantic notions of “the peace dividend” for the world we face today.

Yes, “People Died”.

And the left helped create the world that killed them. In Darfur, Zimbabwe, Uganda, Cambodia, Congo, Iraq, Syria, Palestine the left has created the conditions that have lead to war, to genocide, to the destruction of civilians and civilization.

The left makes a fetish out of every rebel, believing them to be legitimate against the crushing oppression of western civilization. The left will sanctify the monsters, hoping that one of them will finally “get even” against the hated and terribly unjust world we live in. So what if millions of innocent people are caught up in the tank treads of another tyrant like Hugh Chavez, Fidel Castro or Kim il Jong in the process?

It’s the cause the matters, right? So what if a few people get hurt along the way.

Bush lied? Maybe.
People Died? Yeah. And you helped kill them, hippie.

Iraq is Arabic for Vietnam

And I suppose Afghanistan is Pushtun for Korea.

Vietnam – The Bad War, The proof of the imperialistic designs of the west on the little people of the world, and proof that the west cannot win any war, anywhere. Proof at last of the futility of life. El Salvador – Vietnam. Nicaragua – Vietnam. Grenada- Vietnam. Panama- Vietnam. Bosnia, uh, no. Run by a Democrat, must be ok. Kuwait – Vietnam. Anytime anyone lifts a rifle, its Vietnam. The spooky scary war that makes homeless wretches out of all men. If you look hard enough, World War II was Vietnam.

You see, we cant win, “Charlie” proved that to us.

There’s a sickening laugh that accompanies this bumpers sticker that sounds like “tee hee, lookie here what I see, isn’t this funny”?

Well its not. Here’s what I see when I think of Vietnam. 50,000 Americans killed, a nation brought to the brink of civil war. That’s our side. What’s on the other side? 7 million killed after we abandoned them, concentration camps and the removal of human and civil rights for an entire nation. The nations of Cambodia and Laos were turned into a genocidal graveyard, all while the world turned its back. Not because we fought, but because we stopped fighting.

Because we made a commitment to protect people and then walked out on it when they needed us the most. It isn’t fighting in Vietnam that haunts us in our nightmares, its that we ran away and abandoned the people who lived there and the shame of that act that haunts us all.

Say what you want about what we did or didn’t do in Vietnam, but when Pol Pot was converting 8 million people to fertilizer in Cambodia, no one raised a finger, no one said a word. The left and its all so important UN stood by and sanctioned Pol Pot and we said nothing.

The left looks at “Vietnam” the way Al Bundy looked at the high school football championships. It was a moment of glory to be revisited in times of nostalgia. For most of the left, Vietnam was something to protest against a way to define “us and them”, but for many people, Vietnamese people, it was where the “west lied, and people died” it was where we abandoned them to the tyranny of Communism.

Vietnam was a moment of shame, brought on by a culture of defeatism and nihilistic anti-heroes that abandoned all that we in the west have lived to believe in for over 2000 years.

“Protesting Vietnam” in a democracy safe here at home was not heroic. It doesn’t take heroism to live in the protection of a constitution and laws and a culture that believes in dissent. It takes heroism to fight an enemy who is determined not just to kill you but to destroy your family and wipe out any measure of your existence. This is what the South Vietnamese faced. This is what we left them to do. This is where we failed them.

This is our shame. The shame was in making a commitment and not keeping it.

Yet the left is hopeful that the same will be true of Iraq, actually hoping and wishing and praying that Iraq comes to the same fate as Vietnam as if it was a good thing, ignoring all of the history of what actually happened after we left them to fight alone with our damnable inaction. Vietnam should be a warning to the left of the consequences of failure, but instead they are attracted to the hope that Iraq might turn out to be Vietnam.

By Iraq turning into a “new Vietnam” their worldview holds water; they feel relevant and worthwhile and to the left, that’s all that really matters. So what if 7 million more people die in the process? It’s all about how you feel and your self worth that matters the most to the left.

So what if a few people get hurt in the process?

Should we leave Afghanistan to the Taliban? Should we leave Iraq to the Sunni Baathists? Would “the war” be over if we did, or would it get worse? And if “the war” were to get worse as a result of these actions, then who would be have to blame?

Ask yourself this; “When have the romantic leftist notions of peace and a pacifistic world ever resulted in anything but death and mayhem for civilians around the world, and why does anyone anywhere give them any more credence than that given to Hindu snake charmers?”

Gore/Liberman – Overlayed with a “John Kerry for President” sticker.

On a Volvo, naturally. What I found interesting is that the Lieberman part of the Gore sticker was overlayed with the Kerry sticker, so it actually said “ Gore Kerry for President ”. Accidental placement? Oh, I don’t think so. What I also found interesting is how John Edwards and his contribution to the Democratic side denote neither a feeling of nostalgia or a rebuke as Lieberman now suffers.

John Edwards – “The man who never was”.

Posted @ July 09, 2006 02:39 PM | Current Affairs

Posted by: Alan at July 9, 2006 03:28 PM

Posted by: EvilDave at July 9, 2006 05:42 PM

Posted by: roberto at July 9, 2006 09:44 PM

Posted by: xbalanke at July 10, 2006 12:06 PM

Posted by: Romeo Bravo at July 10, 2006 04:51 PM

Posted by: fred at July 10, 2006 05:29 PM

Posted by: Shane at July 10, 2006 06:23 PM

Posted by: Paul T at July 10, 2006 07:42 PM

Posted by: Assistant Village Idiot at July 10, 2006 09:13 PM

Posted by: Mary in LA at July 11, 2006 12:16 PM

Posted by: Jay Ostrander at July 11, 2006 08:48 PM