History will again prove them wrong
Published June 06, 2004
A common theme of mine, and something I strongly believe in is that the modern Democratic party and the majority of the current liberal movement have been, and continue to be on the wrong side of history.
In the case of Ronald Reagan, history has shown that he helped tear apart the communist Soviet Union, making the world a safer place. Millions have been freed from the shackles of Communism with a lot due to President Reagan's persistence in ridding the world of Communism.
Many of the fundamental ideas he held are similar to our current President. President Bush, just like Reagan, believes the enemy he is fighting is an 'evil empire', one that we as a just nation must fight.
President Reagan, just like Bush does now, believed that it is the role of The United States to plant the seed of democracy throughout the world. Doing so will only make the world a safer place.
But people like John Kerry were then on the wrong side of history, as I believe that they are again now on the wrong side of history. They don't see the big picture of what we are doing. They don't see now that by planting Democracy in a middle eastern Muslim nation we are creating feedom, a freedom which will make a safer place for us and our children.
Just look at this memo from Senator Kerry's office from the Reagan era. Was he right? No.
This entry also available at The Nap Room
- History will again prove them wrong
- Published: June 06, 2004
- Type:
- Section: Culture
- Writer: Tom Bux
- Tom Bux's BC Writer page
- Tom Bux's personal site
- Spread the Word
- Like this article?
- Email this
Save to del.icio.us
Comments on this articleComments
Right on, Michael Croft.
But people like John Kerry were then on the wrong side of history, as I believe that they are again now on the wrong side of history. They don't see the big picture of what we are doing. They don't see now that by planting Democracy in a middle eastern Muslim nation we are creating feedom, a freedom which will make a safer place for us and our children.
Actually. They are on the right side of history. If you look at the past. So a democratic Muslim Iraq, will make us safer? Hmmm. Al Queda thrives in Germany, Africa, Spain, the U.S., (did you hear they just found what was going to be a training camp in Oregon?), Canada, the Phillipines, etc. Al Queda is everywhere, including in democratic countries where it is alive and well. So Al Queda can't get funding by Saddam anymore. They get it from everywhere else, including unknowing American consumers. Far more people hate us now than ever before. A warning is out that an attack of major proportions is set for this summer, apparently. Intelligence still isn't good enough to know where, when, why or how. Why isn't intelligence good enough yet? Cuz we're fighting an enemy, infiltrated throughout the world, with tanks. You don't get much info with a tank.
Ah, yeah. A safer place for us and our children. I swear to God, the bar is so low for this president, how can I have faith anymore in the American people? What's happened to this country? Where did the ability to think for ourselves go? Half of the country could get decimated in a nuclear holocaust, this president will appear on tv and ramble on about 'staying the course', and people will fall at his feet for doing such a good job.
The entry reads like far Right boilerplate to me. As Michael so accurately points out, the facts belie Tom Bux's opinion. If anything, the GOP's stances are a bellweather of what is overcome against their resistance. Nor do I buy the claim Reagan destroyed the Soviet Union. It imploded mainly for internal reasons. The horrible, frightening Evil Empire was more a thing of myth than reality all along. Now that the USSR is gone, the Right needs new 'evil' countries, so. . . .
I have been too busy to blog some of the things I clip and save lately. However, this photograph is so telling I want to share it whether I get around to blogging the entry or not.
I don't really have much to say here except, Tom--"history" doesn't do anything all by its lonesome. History is written by historians--and historians (even me!) have their biases.
Dave
Bob Woodward: "How will history judge the war in Iraq?"
President Bush: "It won't matter; WE'LL ALL BE DEAD."
(Fer once -- I'm with Bush.)
BTW: Please explain how MX Missiles, B-1 Bombers, anti-satellite systems, SDI, and the Tomahawk Missile are prepared to stop a 19 guys who get on airplanes with box-cutters?
PS: Hope those systems include a setting for "Crop Duster" and "Briefcase".
Thanks in advance,
Shark
This type of "more spending is better" in defense thinking is no better than "more spending is better" in social welfare policy. Indeed, many military leaders thought that some of the systems listed were more DOD bureaucratic boondoggle than anything else -- weapons designed by committees. Take the B-1 for example. Has is even been used in either of the wars with Iraq? No. And for good reason.
Try again.
Add your comment, speak your mind
(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/16291)
Now, it's just lazy to say "if a new idea makes conservatives get angry, then it's a good idea." I fight that impulse whenever I hear Vernon Robinson ads. It's better to have some arguments in mind other than 'c'mon, did you listen to what that loon said?'.
In general, I think it's worthwhile to have conservatives around, because they help progressives and liberals by making us build strong arguments for good policy and making us focus on what's important.
However, it's hard to believe that, having been wrong on so many issues in the past, the conservatives would suddenly come into the right just now. Why should I trust conservative thought when the historical tradition it comes from has such a miserable track record?