CollegePundit

If I'm linked, I'm awesome!

Friday, April 29, 2005

Zell Miller Ill

Zell Miller excused himself from a speech Thursday afternoon when he said he felt ill. According to his wife, he had shown some flu-like symptoms during the week and, in a move that surprises absolutely no-one who has known him for five minutes, would not stay in bed. He's in stable condition, and released a statement to that effect.

Without missing a beat, the Democratic Underground is all over this with (mostly) ill-will wishes and absolutely snarky comments about him. Zell Miller rose to fame (or infamy, depending on who you ask) when he came out as an ardent supporter for President Bush's re-election, breaking with Democrats. Zell Miller gave a decidedly southern-style hellfire speech at the Republican Convention in New York, criticizing the Democratic party for being like wet noodles when it comes to national security. Zell Miller was replaced in January by a Republican after announcing he would not run for re-election, completing the term of Democrat Paul Coverdell after he passed away.

Zell Miller was relentlessly criticized for breaking with party lines in his support of the President, but it wasn't just a token "Oh, I support him instead of Kerry" sort of deal - he campaigned hard for President Bush. The liberal pundits (my personal favorite blind-to-reality budgy being Susan Estrich) were aghast at the idea that someone would dare break the cardinal rule of the Democratic party, with that being you don't ever support a guy with an (R) after their name - its all loyalty to the party, all the time. Don't defy the Groupthink! It's almost funny that the Democratic party still doesn't realize that people like Zell breaking rank isn't a fluke - its indicative of a problem that needs to be looked at seriously. Zell Miller didn't break with the Democrats solely because of John Kerry's rather immature behavior following his return from Vietnam - although, to be sure, that was likely a big factor in Zell's book - but rather that they didn't have a clear vision for defending this country from terrorism, and for taking the fight to the terrorists abroad instead of just swatting flies at home.

The Democrats lost, wholesale, on the prime basis of appearing and acting weak on defense - never something they were good at establishing publicly, but defenitely failing to sell the deal last November. It wasn't Zell Miller's fault for their losing - he was telling them what was wrong publicly, and they did and said the wrong things. They only have themselves to blame when they can't accept the idea that maybe, just maybe, they are wrong on a few things and changing tacks a little bit would improve their chances at election. Instead its bogeymen and finger pointing, hollering about the Republicans (or, "Repugs", "Repukes", or whatever childish DU term they could toss out) being Nazis and every other doom-and-gloom proclamation they could make. Funny how they so eagerly toss out the Nazi label when they demand rigidity thats borderline insane out of the members of their own party. But hey, what do I know - I'm just a Repug.
|

Wednesday, April 27, 2005

Sacre bleu! Explodeeng Frogs!

Zat bastard Schroeder has been after us gallant French for zo long-uh! He ees tryeeng to keel us!

Ah ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaa!

I couldn't stop laughing at the absurdity of the idea of exploding amphibians. Its...its just too much. I mean, it is horrible that they're dying that way (who would want to explode?), but Charles Johnson doesn't help me take this seriously by suggesting that this may be an amphibious form of protest against German colonialism.

Easy money says its pop rocks that are doing this to them. Either that, or the Seagull Example, where the frogs consume seltzer tablets, swell up, and...well, you know.
|

Monday, April 25, 2005

Coming Soon: Schiavo, the Musical

Pardon the sardonic humor, there.

I know its been covered before, but I wanted to weigh in on the "blockbuster" of a play in Britain that covers the life of Rachel Corrie, a radical from the International Solidarity Movement. She was killed in 2003 by running in front of an Israeli Army bulldozer that was demolishing an area of the Gaza Strip. The ensuing hoopla would have been worthy of a circus - fingers were pointed, press statements were made, and Rachel was made into a martyr for being an idiot and standing in front of a bulldozer (apparently under the expectation that the driver could develop X-ray vision, see her there, and suddenly stop on a dime). Rachel's work for the ISM, a Pro-Palestinian (and waaaay Anti-Israel) "right of return" group, would have largely ended there ignominiously, were it not for a bunch of vultures.

Now they think they can somehow paper over the fact that she was a terror-enabler who was demonstrating against her country, against Israel, and against sanity by doing a play about it?! This is hardly a "fair telling" of her story to begin with - a reasonably sane person would figure out that she wasn't exactly helping mediate things between the two parties, but instead take a few thwacks at the hornet's nest to stir things up further. I mean, are we going to see positive, "we're going to tell the truth in our own way"-style plays for Hitler and Saddam Hussein next? I hear Pol Pot is really marketable, too! Or that Mugabe guy in Africa - he's a real peach, he is.

People like Corrie are indicative of a bigger problem in society - the ignorance of fact in the pursuit of one's own goals. Israel, for all the ink wasted on calling them the terrorists, is the one that is constantly extending a hand in the interest of peace. Forget about what happened in the war for Israel's sovereignty - they fought in the streets just as hard as the rest, and they came out on top, end of story. The fact that they are the ones willing to come to the table time and again to work something out says volumes about their willingness to peacefully coexist with Palestinians. The same cannot be said about the Palestinians, where the concept of a democratic Israel is completely lost on them. They are the ones that refuse to even consider anything, it is always demands that Israel do anything and everything for them. Release murderers, release terrorists, stop defending yourself against our suicide bomber dipshits - we don't want to do any of the work for our own considerations.

It was proven time and again that Israeli concessions to the Palestinians netted them nothing, so they (finally) started taking more proactive measures by pre-emptively striking against terrorist masterminds and building a wall around Palestinian settlements to reduce the number of suicide bombers that get through and murder innocent people. Israel wants to have peace - I don't think they would want the constant killing of their own people - but they have every right to defend themselves and protect their people if they have to. They were the victors in their war, they get to set themselves up however they want to. That isn't negotiable, just as it wouldn't be negotiable here for us to give up our right to defend ourselves.

Making a play about people like Rachel Corrie, who died with the dubious distinction of "helping the Palestinian cause" (how, again?), doesn't demonstrate a completely functioning mental capacity, it demonstrates a completely missed point that she isn't on the right side of things, nor was she looking at "the big picture" (or, for that matter, the same one). She was a radical loon who showed Palestinian children that it was OK to hate things for no other reason than that they are different, and to fight to have such bigoted ideas be the norm in their life and culture.

Were that play to come here, I can at least rest easy that some people would get wicked pissed off about a pro-terrorist-enabler being the subject of a play, and not lap it up like dogs. What a waste of time that thing has to be.
|