Liberals March For Life, Liberty
& The Pursuit Of Crappiness
By Ron Marr
Published 01. 25. 03 at 7:01 Sierra Time
What a grand time those protesters had in San Francisco and Washington, DC. They wore their tie-dyed t-shirts and granny glasses. They chomped vegetarian jerky and gulped soy milk. They enjoyed a group hug and chanted of how they "ain't gonna' go to war no more." They voted George W the personification of the Anti-Christ (though some claimed he stole that election too) and his fellow conservatives the minions of Hell. In vomiting their litany of hackneyed causes and imagined affronts, the protesters took time to catch a breath and condemn the war with Iraq.
That we're not yet at war with Iraq is merely a piddling detail which would never hinder the wholly altruistic motives of those who enjoy plastering their SUV's and solar powered rickshaws with stickers philosophizing that "you can't hug a child with nuclear arms."
It appears most of the peace-loving, anti-war protesters hate a lot of things that have nothing to do with war. They hate logging, mining, ranching, farming, work, guns, meat and microwave ovens. They don't know why they hate these things, but then again neither do they know why they are protesting a war that has yet to begin. They simply want to be noticed, to feel connected to something that allows them to forget that their numbers consist of the boring and the bored. After all, venting spleen at a "Republican war" is much cooler than hanging out with a peer group of affluent, post-adolescents who engage in feverish debate over the oppression of endangered rain-forest beetles.
Watching these celebrations of tolerance, diversity, peace and poor hygiene made me think I had inadvertently stumbled into a "Billy Jack" film festival. For a second there I wanted to run out and see if I could find a bottle of Boone's Farm wine. A 1968 vintage "Strawberry Hill" would be nice, although I would also accept a jug of TJ Swann "Summer Nights." Such low-alcohol restoratives are of vital importance if one wishes to share the altered perspective of the protesters.
Organizers claimed there were 500,000 latter-day pacifists in DC, but even liberal newspapers scoffed at such a figure. 20,000 to 40,000 was a more reasonable accounting, and I'd guess half of those were DC locals who dropped by in hopes of free goodies. The lure of a table-top roaster-oven full of Little Smokies is a powerful attractant. People like going to freak shows, especially if they offer complimentary Vienna Sausages.
These "peace" shindigs are silly, and I suspect that the "grass roots" roots origins so widely heralded by the press are a total fabrication. Remember that "grass roots" anti-gun movement called the "Million Mom March?" You know, the one that turned out to have huge corporate backing, with the corporations in question tied to the Democratic National Committee? Several pieces of evidence lead me to believe the anti-war movement is of the same lineage.
Most of the marches and protests are only ostensibly about a war with Iraq. Once the speech-making and chanting starts, it's all about a hatred of Bush. And, who wants to taint his reputation the most, particularly as we approach a 2004 Presidential election? I note there were no "grass roots" protests against Clinton when he sent troops to Bosnia. Talk about a non-threat to US security. Milosevic's forces were armed with out-dated weapons, picks and shovels. Saddam has biological agents which could turn New York or LA into a pestilent graveyard.
The Democrats uttered not a peep about the former, because one of their own was in office when the hostilities commenced. But, when a President from the other side of the aisle confronts a sociopath who presents a true danger, they scream from the roof-tops. Do you really want to tell me the liberal motive is something other than partisan politics?
There will always be legitimate protests against war, and I'm fully in support of the expression of free speech. Most of the protesters seem blind to the fact that speaking out in such a way would get them jailed, tortured and butchered in Iraq, but I'm not going to crucify a person for being ignorant. Many protesters, when interviewed, often exclaim that America under Bush is a dictatorship, again missing the point that airing those same views in a real dictatorship would lead to the obliteration of them, their families, their property and likely even their stuffed animals. They plead that a war with Iraq will be a violation of human rights, oblivious to the fact that Saddam Hussein and the Muslim fanatics who attacked our shores drop their own citizens in the meat grinder every day. Those living under the rule of Saddam and militant Islam have only the rights to kneel, obey and die.
But perhaps I'm too harsh on the protesters. Even though their views are misguided, those who receive a visceral reaction from thoughts of war are still entitled to their opinion. In their own way, they are rallying around the flag.
I just wish it wasn't the French one.
& The Pursuit Of Crappiness
By Ron Marr
Published 01. 25. 03 at 7:01 Sierra Time
What a grand time those protesters had in San Francisco and Washington, DC. They wore their tie-dyed t-shirts and granny glasses. They chomped vegetarian jerky and gulped soy milk. They enjoyed a group hug and chanted of how they "ain't gonna' go to war no more." They voted George W the personification of the Anti-Christ (though some claimed he stole that election too) and his fellow conservatives the minions of Hell. In vomiting their litany of hackneyed causes and imagined affronts, the protesters took time to catch a breath and condemn the war with Iraq.
That we're not yet at war with Iraq is merely a piddling detail which would never hinder the wholly altruistic motives of those who enjoy plastering their SUV's and solar powered rickshaws with stickers philosophizing that "you can't hug a child with nuclear arms."
It appears most of the peace-loving, anti-war protesters hate a lot of things that have nothing to do with war. They hate logging, mining, ranching, farming, work, guns, meat and microwave ovens. They don't know why they hate these things, but then again neither do they know why they are protesting a war that has yet to begin. They simply want to be noticed, to feel connected to something that allows them to forget that their numbers consist of the boring and the bored. After all, venting spleen at a "Republican war" is much cooler than hanging out with a peer group of affluent, post-adolescents who engage in feverish debate over the oppression of endangered rain-forest beetles.
Watching these celebrations of tolerance, diversity, peace and poor hygiene made me think I had inadvertently stumbled into a "Billy Jack" film festival. For a second there I wanted to run out and see if I could find a bottle of Boone's Farm wine. A 1968 vintage "Strawberry Hill" would be nice, although I would also accept a jug of TJ Swann "Summer Nights." Such low-alcohol restoratives are of vital importance if one wishes to share the altered perspective of the protesters.
Organizers claimed there were 500,000 latter-day pacifists in DC, but even liberal newspapers scoffed at such a figure. 20,000 to 40,000 was a more reasonable accounting, and I'd guess half of those were DC locals who dropped by in hopes of free goodies. The lure of a table-top roaster-oven full of Little Smokies is a powerful attractant. People like going to freak shows, especially if they offer complimentary Vienna Sausages.
These "peace" shindigs are silly, and I suspect that the "grass roots" roots origins so widely heralded by the press are a total fabrication. Remember that "grass roots" anti-gun movement called the "Million Mom March?" You know, the one that turned out to have huge corporate backing, with the corporations in question tied to the Democratic National Committee? Several pieces of evidence lead me to believe the anti-war movement is of the same lineage.
Most of the marches and protests are only ostensibly about a war with Iraq. Once the speech-making and chanting starts, it's all about a hatred of Bush. And, who wants to taint his reputation the most, particularly as we approach a 2004 Presidential election? I note there were no "grass roots" protests against Clinton when he sent troops to Bosnia. Talk about a non-threat to US security. Milosevic's forces were armed with out-dated weapons, picks and shovels. Saddam has biological agents which could turn New York or LA into a pestilent graveyard.
The Democrats uttered not a peep about the former, because one of their own was in office when the hostilities commenced. But, when a President from the other side of the aisle confronts a sociopath who presents a true danger, they scream from the roof-tops. Do you really want to tell me the liberal motive is something other than partisan politics?
There will always be legitimate protests against war, and I'm fully in support of the expression of free speech. Most of the protesters seem blind to the fact that speaking out in such a way would get them jailed, tortured and butchered in Iraq, but I'm not going to crucify a person for being ignorant. Many protesters, when interviewed, often exclaim that America under Bush is a dictatorship, again missing the point that airing those same views in a real dictatorship would lead to the obliteration of them, their families, their property and likely even their stuffed animals. They plead that a war with Iraq will be a violation of human rights, oblivious to the fact that Saddam Hussein and the Muslim fanatics who attacked our shores drop their own citizens in the meat grinder every day. Those living under the rule of Saddam and militant Islam have only the rights to kneel, obey and die.
But perhaps I'm too harsh on the protesters. Even though their views are misguided, those who receive a visceral reaction from thoughts of war are still entitled to their opinion. In their own way, they are rallying around the flag.
I just wish it wasn't the French one.
