Ted Rall, a shrill comic strip creator and a columnist has posted an unbelievable column on Karl Rove and the Valerie Plame case: (HT: Michelle Malkin)
The right points to critics like Michael Moore, yours truly, and Ward Churchill, the Colorado professor who points out the gaping chasm between America’s high-falooting rhetoric and its historical record. But these bête noires are guilty only of the all-American actions of criticism and dissent, not to mention speaking uncomfortable truths to liars and deniers. As far as we know, no one on what passes for the “left” (which would be the center-right anywhere else) has betrayed the United States in the GWOT. No anti-Bush progressive has made common cause with Al Qaeda, Hamas, the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan or any other officially designated “terrorist” group. No American liberal has handed over classified information or worked to undermine the CIA.
Michelle Malkin points to Lynne Stewart, who has been convicted of aiding and abetting terrorists
After a seven-month trial, progressive New York attorney Lynne Stewart was convicted today on charges of conspiracy to aid and abet terrorism. Her co-defendants Mohammed Yousry and Abdel Sattar were also convicted. They all face 20 to 40 years in jail.
Now, lets look at the other great Americans he points to, Ward Churchill and Michael Moore, before we get to the greatest American, Ted Rall.
Ward Churchill first said that “more 9/11’s are necessary” because ‘states’ were unwilling to listen to opposing viewpoints.
Then, on June 29th, Bill O’Reilly received audio of Ward Churchill advocating lower ranking soldiers to “frag” their officers: The Political Teen has the video
For those of you who do, as a matter of principle, oppose war in any form, the idea of supporting a conscientious objector who’s already been inducted [and] in his combat service in Iraq might have a certain appeal. But let me ask you this: Would you render the same support to someone who hadn’t conscientiously objected, but rather instead rolled a grenade under their line officer in order to neutralize the combat capacity of their unit?…Conscientious objection removes a given piece of cannon fodder from the fray. Fragging an officer has a much more impactful effect.
Then, let’s look at a quote that was written by Michael Moore on his official website:
The Iraqis who have risen up against the occupation are not insurgents or terrorists, or The Enemy. They are the REVOLUTION, the Minutemen, and their numbers will grow – and they will win.
Lastly, Ted Rall. We only have to go a little deeper into his article to find one of the most outrageous political hyperbole one could ever hope to see:
If Newsweek’s report is accurate, Karl Rove is more morally repugnant and more anti-American than Osama bin Laden. Bin Laden, after all, has no affiliation with, and therefore no presumed loyalty to, the United States. Rove, on the other hand, is a U.S. citizen and, as deputy White House chief of staff, a high-ranking official of the U.S. government sworn to uphold and defend our nation, its laws and its interests. Yet he sold out America just to get even with Joe Wilson.
Osama bin Laden, conversely, is loyal to his cause. He has never exposed an Al Qaeda agent’s identity to the media.
How could one even start to try to make an argument that killing 3,000 Americans is less “anti-American” than a report that Karl Rove leaked Valerie Plame’s name? How is killing 3,000 civilians somehow less morally repugnant than knowingly releasing a CIA agent’s name?
None of the people Rall mentioned are shining examples of progressive dissent, himself included. Churchill supports killing military officers as a means to stop war, Moore just doesn’t think our soldiers are good enough to win, and Rall tries to morally equate releasing a name of someone who was so low key to 9/11 hijackers. Sick.
You can visit Art Green’s blog “Conservative Eyes” for commentary from a neoconservative’s point of view.Powered by Sidelines