Replies

For some time, I was wondering about that, too.

I don't think the Madrid precedent would work here.

The biggest difficulty I have is the general one. I think the nation is divided between those that still remember, and even know, what it has been thus far (the culture, the Constitution, free markets, individual responsibility, morals according to Judeo-Christian tradition, etc.) and those that do not even know it but want something new (revolutionaries of all sorts --- feminists, socialists, etc.). We got here as a result of growth of the second part. To predict any outcome, therefore, one needs to know quite precisely by how much the second part exceeds the first.

You suggest, for instance, that Spanish-style attack would have an opposite effect here. Twenty years ago, I'd say that you are correct without any doubt. Today, I am not so sure. Just a few years ago, could you envision that, in the midst of war against militant Islam, the country would seriously entertain a presidential candidate named Hussein who studied in Muslim schools and spend his formative years in the world-largest Muslim country? People would think you insane if you suggested that as recently as late 1980s. It's happening today.

So, returning to the scenario you propose, I am not so sure. Sep 11 has failed to unite the country, and one half of it only increased its self-hatred. Our future First Lady only now feel some pride for her country. Why would another attack have a different effect?

You may be correct, sadly. This country is pretty much divided in half, roughly speaking. About half remember the capitalist, Judeo-Christian ethics, and the other half desperately seek "change" with not a thought as to the possible ramifications.

There are some things on which I can somewhat agree with the "second part" about change; I do think we should have open dialogue with all the tyrants, despots and would-be demagogues of the world. But it is not the humble dialogue that Obama would host. I would welcome them to talk at any time, and then I would assertively remind them that we are watching them closely, and that we would not blink an eye to put umpteen cruise missiles into every possible orifice if they should so much as reach for their war keys. Thanks for the pleasant tea, remember that you are dead men walking, please do come again.

I don't think that the "second part" can logically understand the patient and persistent enemies of America. Their idea of "change" is centered on more hedonistic and local agendas. Everyone gets a "living wage" and universal healthcare, no more morality over science and let's all go down to the pub for a pitcher and hot wings. Change, baby!

It just may be that the "second part" is now greater than the first. We live in interesting times. The Tree of Liberty is looking parched.