Wednesday, May 11, 2005

It Depends On What The Meaning of “is” is.

The Happy Lefties at the S&S march merrily along the Bill Clinton path in today’s editorial. By putting words never spoken into President Bush’s mouth they completely change the meaning of what he said during his recent trip to commemorate VE day.

It is yet another attempt to show their complete disdain for the President and to paint him as an idiot:

The S&S contends: “…President Bush, preferred to dwell on the war's aftermath -- namely the grim Soviet occupation of Eastern Europe.”

I can’t wait to read what they offer as proof.

They continue: “Americans and their president would do well to cut the Russians a little slack on this point. Consider for a moment a nation that has now lost its empire, its stability, its ideology and much of its pride. What remains are memories of its greatest moment, purchased with the deaths of 27 million of its people.”

I should feel sorry for Russians because they no longer have Eastern Europe under their thumb? I should feel bad that their ideology (Communism) has been thrown on the ash heap of history (As President Reagan predicted it would be)?

Do you suppose the Russian people wish to have the old empire and ideology back? Do the pointy-headed intellectuals on the S&S editorial board believe Russians long for a return to the KGB and gulags?

No slack given.

Update: I’m still waiting for proof of the first contention.

We move on: “But on the commemoration of Hitler's defeat, the American president suffered moments of profound naiveté.”

See, he’s stupid.

And then there was this: “…he told a Dutch audience that the crack Nazi war machine had been "brought down by a coalition of armies from our democratic allies and freedom fighters from occupied lands [emphasis mine] and underground resistance leaders [who] fought side by side with American G.I.'s."

Nice quote, but I’m still waiting for proof of contention no. 1.


But wait, there's more: Well, not quite. The forces of freedom did not defeat Hitler; the forces of antifascism did. Russia had never known freedom, certainly not under Joseph Stalin's murderous heel. The Russians knew only the agonies of invasion, starvation and desperation in their remarkable reversal against the German occupiers [emphasis mine]. Theirs was the central plot in the fight against Nazism, and by far the most brutal.

These people really believe we’re stupid. They try to prove their point by proving W’s and don’t think we’re smart enough to catch it.

W spoke of “freedom fighters from occupied lands” and the fools from the oak-paneled room talk of the Russians’ “remarkable reversal against the German occupiers.”

Exactly who in the hell do these morons think W was referring to? Are they completely incapable of drawing a logical conclusion? And, even if he wasn’t talking about the Russians…THE SPEECH WAS GIVEN IN HOLLAND, YOU IDIOTS. THE AUDIENCE WAS NOT RUSSIAN. IF YOU WANT TO TAKE HIM TO TASK FOR WHAT HE SAID, WHY DON’T YOU OFFER THE WORDS HE SPOKE TO A RUSSIAN AUDIENCE? BECAUSE IT WOULDN’T SERVE YOUR GOAL OF SHOWING THE PRESIDENT TO BE AN IGNORAMUS.

By the way: No proof yet for number 1.

Let’s move on: "For Bush to suggest that the main lesson of the European war was that "there's no power like the power of freedom, and no soldier as strong as a soldier who fights for that freedom" disrespects the Russian reality: Red Army soldiers attacked the Germans ferociously because retreat also meant death."

Let’s just edit his comments then "there's no power like the power of freedom, and no soldier as strong as a soldier who fights for that freedom. Except maybe those who fight because the other option is to live under a dehumanizing system in which the State controls every aspect of your life and any attempt to speak out for individual rights is met with swift and severe punishment including imprisonment and, in millions of cases, death. In fact good old Joe Stalin killed more Russian citizens than died in WWII. God what a soulless bastard that guy was.”

So, where’s the proof of the post-war dwelling on the part of W?

The end of the regurgitation: “His [Putin’s] challenge now is to better understand the present. Russia cannot -- should not -- try to reclaim its Soviet past. The collapse of the Soviet Union was not, as Putin recently suggested, "the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century," but instead the century's greatest opportunity. The thousands of red flowers that adorned the Kremlin this week should honor the past with a vow not to repeat it.”

Finally the proof I’ve been…hold it. That was written by the pointy-heads.

Maybe they'll get around to substantiating it tomorrow.

No comments: