i wonder what the left wing pundits would have said during the height of our country's civil rights movement. Would they have the gall to call African American voters risking their lives to cast a ballot just
Voting matters. Democracy matters. Back in the sixties there were many people, i'm sure, who said that African Americans didn't want to vote, and couldn't be trusted to participate in Democracy. Those people were called Klansmen.*
Are the nay-sayers in the media, who refuse to see the democratization of Iraq as a good thing, any different than old fashioned racists?
_______________
1
When the trolls try to claim that the Iraq election wasn't credible due to low Sunni turn-out, ask them if they gave a rat's ass about the low white voter turn-out in post-Apartheid South Africa........
http://polipundit.com/index.php?p=6221
Posted by: reagan80 at January 31, 2005 01:54 PM (OCwpD)
2
He wasn't just a member. He was a recruiter.
Posted by: Casca at January 31, 2005 04:32 PM (cdv3B)
3
Count on the Senile Klansman from West Virginia to add his vehement voice to that of the Shrill Clawless/Toothless Bitch from California and the Fat Bloviator from Massachusetts.
Hell, there were no WMD's and Bush lied, while Kerry was in Cambodia, Gore invented the Internet, and Clinton did not have a sexual relationship with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky.
At least Joe Leiberman has his head screwed on right on this one. Sure easy to find a Statesman amongst the rabble.
Posted by: shelly at January 31, 2005 05:57 PM (fLlQ8)
4
Joined? The guy was a friggin Grand Dragon or something wasn't he?
Posted by: Pursuit at January 31, 2005 06:37 PM (VqIuy)
5
"Are the nay-sayers in the media, who refuse to see the democratization of Iraq as a good thing, any different than old fashioned racists?"
Actually, Anna, they are different in one very big way--the racists of the civil rights era were at least strongly patriotic. It's hard to doubt that Southerners of the time were staunchly pro-American and pro-military.
The new media is neither. That's the big difference.
Posted by: Robbie at February 01, 2005 07:24 AM (AAqv2)
6
i can't agree that patriotism, without a belief in the core principles of equality on which this country was founded, is any kind of patriotism at all.
Posted by: annika at February 01, 2005 07:35 AM (UcDXJ)
7
Boy. Those two situations-- Iraq and African American voting rights --are really different.
Far be it from me to speak for all the left wing pundits, but the situation I'm concerned might come about is actually more of a Rwanda-type thing, where a minority ruled with the help of colonial interests until the political winds shifted and the United Nations initiated an imperfect program of nation-building to democratize the country with the effect that the majority took power-- and eventually started a program of genocide against the former ruling minority.
I mean, that's just me. But I guess the rest of the left-wing pundits could be no different than old fashioned racists.
Posted by: Joshua at February 06, 2005 04:38 PM (GnjQ6)
8
Joshua, there will not be a program of genocide. If the Shi'ite decided to kill Kurds or Sunnis (or even Kurdish Sunni's) they would probably have to kill some of their own family members. The country is not divided into the three sections the MSM reports.
Annika, I think Thomas Paine would agree with you.
Lieberman is usually right!
Posted by: Mike at February 23, 2005 09:17 PM (N3BlJ)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
