Posted on 09/24/2009 4:55:31 AM PDT by Tolik
http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/victordavishanson/index:
Just a partial list. Much more at the link: http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/victordavishanson/index
Ping !
Let me know if you want in or out. Links:
FR Index of his articles: http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/victordavishanson/index NRO archive: http://author.nationalreview.com/?q=MjI1MQ== Pajamasmedia: http://pajamasmedia.com/victordavishanson/ His website: http://victorhanson.com/
As smart as I find VDH to be, this statement is a bit jolting. Who is he REALLY talking about here? Pat Buchanan? Who in their right (or left) mind thinks there was anything wrong with the Anglo-American effort in WWII? There were some aspects of its execution that could have been done better, but overall it went about as well as could be expected, and was vitally important to beat Nazi Germany.
Anyone who disputes that really is on the fringes, and I'm not sure there's an easy label to put on them.
Fringes indeed. The problem with them is that they are more vocal and everybody can send e-mails.
The really odd thing is that while America is beginning to quietly chuckle at the Obama poses and rhetoric flourishes, Obama is still as convinced as ever of his "divinity"...and that is cause for even more worry about his sanity.
Certainly, most of those of us on the right have always laughed about Obama's narcissism but there has been little discussion of what will be the upshot of that malignancy.
Eventually, Obama will either unravel...or dig in his heels (in an effort to continue the charade regarding his divinity). Either way, I suspect we are in for real trouble.
Just wanted to repeat that for emphasis. It seems to be something that is controversal these days.
Well he is full of it about LGF. The guy is as marxist as Bozo.
I predict this is not the antidote. There is a radical sickness and the patient (America) is too weakened. Reason is a privileged position and appreciated by only a strong few — emotionalism appeals to the masses and is easier to produce by the master manipulator Obama. Obama works his crowd, works his magic to seduce America and that will have to run its course like any love sickness runs its course. The question is will America survive as we know it or will it look its been ravaged by the illness or made over to look like a unwholesome whore painted over, sold on feeling high but brought low. Reason can be used only up to a point in the best of times and with rational people. We are beyond that point: Obama has been ushered in by a wave of emotion that stills lapses up on the shores of American souls. It ain't going away any time soon.
What we see is not something that just started. It’s how the culture evolved. Left-stream-media feeds it and of it. How many times did we see a TV camera zooming into somebody screaming the lungs off with a sympathetic comment exploring the outrage, and absolutely not interested to zoom into people discussing without killing each other. If you are outraged, then you must have reasons, so you are right. If you are not outraged, then well, we are not interested in your story.
Who screams the loudest, gets noticed.
“If it bleeds, it leads” - isn’t it a favored expression of the news editors?
To support this with recent examples: the left was in a permanently outraged mode the whole 8 years, with sympathetic coverage by the left-stream-media.
Enemies of the West borrowed this Leftist trick and exploit it very well. Let’s look at the Israel’s struggles, for examples. Exaggerated claims of massacres are instantly on the front pages, debunking gets buried deep down, if it even published. Cooperation between Arabs and Jews in the daily life is not interesting neither.
Or lets take all publicity and daily count of American casualties in Iraq. When they got greatly reduced - where is the news? All the construction and cooperation between Iraqi and Americans - no news there neither.
And back to Joe Wilson. As much as I think that it goes contra the American tradition of decorum when the President speaks, and as much as I don’t want to see President Palin’s speech being interrupted every 10 seconds, I should point out, that no alternative action by the congressman would’ve concentrated the debate and been so effective as his outburst. Sad, isn’t it? So, I can’t fault him too much. Accidentally (I don’t think he was so shrewd to calculate this), he advanced the cause of highlighting Obama’s lies like nothing else would.
My conclusion. I don’t want conservatives to be a party of permanently outraged as the left did. Long-term its not conductive. But exceptions from the rule - and its very important: as long as they stay exceptions - can be a good tool.
University administrators worship private money, and then among themselves scoff at the capitalism that created it. Campus elites, looking at a benefactor, are fascinated how someone — no brighter than they are — made so much money, even as they are repelled by a system that allows those other than themselves to have pulled it off. No wonder that Obama seems enchanted by a Warren Buffett, even as he trashes the very landscape that created Berkshire Hathaway’s riches. No president has raised more money from Wall Street or has given it more protection from accountability — while at the same time demagoguing it as selfish and greedy.
Its good that VDH has pledged himself to anti-racism and intermarriage and all the good stuff, but he needs to put down the spliff and put his mind into logically interpetting what exactly is meant by “anti-racism”, and what the good liberal friends of his mean by it.
As smart as I find VDH to be, this statement is a bit jolting. Who is he REALLY talking about here? Pat Buchanan?Almost monthly I am smeared by the far far right for defending the Anglo-American effort in World War II or support for the melting-pot tradition of racial integration and intermarriage.
Pat Buchanan is the only one I know of who writes from that position.Who in their right (or left) mind thinks there was anything wrong with the Anglo-American effort in WWII? There were some aspects of its execution that could have been done better, but overall it went about as well as could be expected, and was vitally important to beat Nazi Germany.
On the fringe, indeed. But there is a lot of talk in academia, where VDH resides, that we were wrong to fight World War II the way we did, by partnering with Stalin, because we supposedly fought that war to liberate Poland and eastern Europe from the Nazi, and then turned them over to the Soviets; the Germans only wanted what was taken from them at the end of WW I; the British and France wanted to maintain their stranglehold of hegemony over Europe, and a rise of German power was a threat to that hegemony, but we had no dog in the fight...etc. For some people, the United States has never done anything right, and there is an amazing amount of loony revisionism going around that most people never see, most of which ignores the Holocaust (surprise!) but I am sure VDH is exposed to regularly. I don’t even want to think about the melting-pot stuff. It makes my head hurt.
bump
Now that one's gonna leave a mark. As I have stated repeatedly, Bush's problem wasn't that he acted unilaterally, it was that he attempted to bring the UN in and didn't jump when they backtracked on their earlier resolutions. Their hatred wasn't for a cowboy, it was for an apostate.
This is one of those random-notes columns that doesn't really have a central theme, but it seems clear to me that VDH is still a little too fond of the MSM's take on the hysteria and unreason present in those who oppose 0bama's programs. Taking Pat Buchanan seriously as a historian is a waste of time, and proposing that his is any sort of mainstream thought on the antecedents to the Second World War is simply a dry hole. It isn't really even useful as a straw man.
As for Charles Johnson, I prefer to let that gentleman speak for himself. What has happened to him is at least partly a function of him taking the same sorts of things seriously that VDH appears to. The radical fringe on the Right is far, far more marginalized and irrelevant than that same fringe on the Left. There isn't an equivalency, there isn't even anything close to one.
Take a look at Charles Johnson’s website. Maybe you have no idea of how good it used to be. And how he told Robert Spencer (Jihad Watch) to drop dead and BTW Charles designed the original Jihad Watch website
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/
Johnson has alienated most of the older anti-Jihad websites. He has mostly reverted back to liberalism
I don’t expect VDH to be aware of this history
I found the thing with Spencer alarming - sudden swervings like that are not the sign of a healthy individual. Maybe he always was more liberal than I thought but if so I've been laboring under a misapprehension for a long time. I favor the "he changed" theory but if it's true I do not know why.
So then we agree...
My guess is living in LA, Charles also always had liberal friends and business associates. He reverted back due to group pressure. Everyone can be unconscious of this. You move a little bit each day
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
