The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

‘And the War, Tragically, Continues’

Posted on | August 22, 2010 | 37 Comments

Frank Rich’s latest idiotic idea is that Fox News coverage of the Ground Zero Mosque controversy has thwarted U.S. anti-insurgency efforts in Afghanistan.

No, seriously. He actually devoted 1,572 words to making that absurd argument.

This inspired Rob Long to script a scenario:

I can see it now: the flickering firelight in a dark cave somewhere on the border of Pakistan and Afghanistan; the hum of a gas-powered generator; a static-filled, snowy image on the tiny television. On the rickety table, a letter of surrender addressed to General Petraeus. A Taliban terrorist leader is about to sign the letter. His pen is poised over the paper.
And another Taliban terrorist stops him and points to the TV. “Did you see what they called us on Hannity?”

Yeah, that’s a comment on my latest Ricochet contribution, so please read the whole thing. 

Throngs of lovestruck blog groupies will thank you for it.

Category: Aghanistan, Fox News, New York, New York Times, Ricochet

Comments

37 Responses to “‘And the War, Tragically, Continues’”

  1. Thomas L. Knapp
    August 22nd, 2010 @ 11:37 pm

    Frank’s column is indeed idiotic to the extent that it claims the demagoguery on Cordoba House will in any way decrease the chance of US “victory” in Afghanistan — because it’s impossible for that chance to go below its current and perpetual level of zero.

    I think he’s also wrong in asserting that the anti-Cordoba-House demagoguery won’t affect the 2010 and 2012 elections. It will affect both those elections, and elections beyond. Just as Father Coughlin et al produced a reaction that helped cement Democratic power in place in the 30s, later formalized for 40 years as a Democrat majority in Congress from the 50s to the 90s, Sarah Palin et al are once again leading the GOP into the political wilderness for the long term with their happy horsehit.

  2. Thomas L. Knapp
    August 22nd, 2010 @ 7:37 pm

    Frank’s column is indeed idiotic to the extent that it claims the demagoguery on Cordoba House will in any way decrease the chance of US “victory” in Afghanistan — because it’s impossible for that chance to go below its current and perpetual level of zero.

    I think he’s also wrong in asserting that the anti-Cordoba-House demagoguery won’t affect the 2010 and 2012 elections. It will affect both those elections, and elections beyond. Just as Father Coughlin et al produced a reaction that helped cement Democratic power in place in the 30s, later formalized for 40 years as a Democrat majority in Congress from the 50s to the 90s, Sarah Palin et al are once again leading the GOP into the political wilderness for the long term with their happy horsehit.

  3. kansas
    August 23rd, 2010 @ 12:00 am

    The Times editorial also stated this about Tom Delay

    “But many of Mr. DeLay’s actions remain legal only because lawmakers have chosen not to criminalize them.”

    Are these people all idiots? They sure seem to be able to churn out tons copy.

  4. kansas
    August 22nd, 2010 @ 8:00 pm

    The Times editorial also stated this about Tom Delay

    “But many of Mr. DeLay’s actions remain legal only because lawmakers have chosen not to criminalize them.”

    Are these people all idiots? They sure seem to be able to churn out tons copy.

  5. Randy Rager
    August 23rd, 2010 @ 1:20 am

    Father Coughlin’s views never enjoyed a 65% supermajority with the American public, so:

    BWHAHAHAHAHA!

    And that’s all the rebuttal that little bit of idiocy deserves, although a generous person would also point out that Father Coughlin’s ideological enemies were not America hating Muslims out to erect a victory monument on whatever would have passed for Ground Zero back then, so there’s that, too.

    We have a very good chance of victory in Afghanistan, but not with a Democrat as Commander-In-Chief. So we have at least two, maybe 6 years before we can start winning.

  6. Randy Rager
    August 22nd, 2010 @ 9:20 pm

    Father Coughlin’s views never enjoyed a 65% supermajority with the American public, so:

    BWHAHAHAHAHA!

    And that’s all the rebuttal that little bit of idiocy deserves, although a generous person would also point out that Father Coughlin’s ideological enemies were not America hating Muslims out to erect a victory monument on whatever would have passed for Ground Zero back then, so there’s that, too.

    We have a very good chance of victory in Afghanistan, but not with a Democrat as Commander-In-Chief. So we have at least two, maybe 6 years before we can start winning.

  7. Thomas L. Knapp
    August 23rd, 2010 @ 1:53 am

    “We have a very good chance of victory in Afghanistan”

    The only chance of “victory” in Afghanistan is nuking the place until it glows, then sowing radioactive salt from aircraft over its entire area.

    That seems like a pretty hollow definition of “victory.”

    If “victory” is defined in terms of “counterinsurgency” or establishing a western-style democracy whose writ runs border to border (or over any significant territory in between borders), then the chances of it were zero from the start, remain zero, and will never rise above zero.

    One of the reasons why points up the big problem with Long’s scenario above: There’s no “Taliban leader” with the authority to “surrender” anything more significant than a few willing henchmen and a rug with some AKs rolled up in it. If 100 “Taliban leaders” surrendered in one day, there’d still be a thousand in the field and the 100 would be replaced by newly self-promoted “leaders” within 24 hours.

  8. Thomas L. Knapp
    August 22nd, 2010 @ 9:53 pm

    “We have a very good chance of victory in Afghanistan”

    The only chance of “victory” in Afghanistan is nuking the place until it glows, then sowing radioactive salt from aircraft over its entire area.

    That seems like a pretty hollow definition of “victory.”

    If “victory” is defined in terms of “counterinsurgency” or establishing a western-style democracy whose writ runs border to border (or over any significant territory in between borders), then the chances of it were zero from the start, remain zero, and will never rise above zero.

    One of the reasons why points up the big problem with Long’s scenario above: There’s no “Taliban leader” with the authority to “surrender” anything more significant than a few willing henchmen and a rug with some AKs rolled up in it. If 100 “Taliban leaders” surrendered in one day, there’d still be a thousand in the field and the 100 would be replaced by newly self-promoted “leaders” within 24 hours.

  9. Thomas L. Knapp
    August 23rd, 2010 @ 1:59 am

    “Father Coughlin’s views never enjoyed a 65% supermajority with the American public”

    True.

    You act like it’s a good thing that the American public has become significantly more evil and authoritarian in the last 70 years.

  10. Thomas L. Knapp
    August 22nd, 2010 @ 9:59 pm

    “Father Coughlin’s views never enjoyed a 65% supermajority with the American public”

    True.

    You act like it’s a good thing that the American public has become significantly more evil and authoritarian in the last 70 years.

  11. Randy Rager
    August 23rd, 2010 @ 2:20 am

    Ah, the hoary old myth that insurgencies are unbeatable combined with the equally ridiculous myth that Afghanistan is the graveyard of empires.

    BWAHAHAHAH!

    Either alone would be an unimpeachable statement of your incompetence, but together, why, they’re pure comedy gold!

    As for your ridiculous statement that moral opposition to a radical Muslim victory monument at Ground Zero equals evil, well, maybe so, maybe so.

    Or maybe Americans are a damned sight smarter and better informed than you. Is your ego so bloated that you cannot even consider such a thing, or is it simply that your mind is too dull?

  12. Randy Rager
    August 22nd, 2010 @ 10:20 pm

    Ah, the hoary old myth that insurgencies are unbeatable combined with the equally ridiculous myth that Afghanistan is the graveyard of empires.

    BWAHAHAHAH!

    Either alone would be an unimpeachable statement of your incompetence, but together, why, they’re pure comedy gold!

    As for your ridiculous statement that moral opposition to a radical Muslim victory monument at Ground Zero equals evil, well, maybe so, maybe so.

    Or maybe Americans are a damned sight smarter and better informed than you. Is your ego so bloated that you cannot even consider such a thing, or is it simply that your mind is too dull?

  13. Thomas L. Knapp
    August 23rd, 2010 @ 2:55 am

    Randy,

    “Moral opposition” to something that nobody has proposed (a radical Muslim victory monument at “Ground Zero”) is not evil.

    Political opposition (e.g. the attempt to impose the force of government to suppress property rights and religious freedom) to the project that has actually been proposed (a moderate Muslim cultural center two blocks from the far outside edge of “Ground Zero”), is evil, anti-liberty and quintessentially un-American.

    I didn’t say that insurgencies are unbeatable. I said that victory, as defined in current US COIN terms, against the particular set of insurgencies in the particular venue, is impossible. Big difference.

  14. Thomas L. Knapp
    August 22nd, 2010 @ 10:55 pm

    Randy,

    “Moral opposition” to something that nobody has proposed (a radical Muslim victory monument at “Ground Zero”) is not evil.

    Political opposition (e.g. the attempt to impose the force of government to suppress property rights and religious freedom) to the project that has actually been proposed (a moderate Muslim cultural center two blocks from the far outside edge of “Ground Zero”), is evil, anti-liberty and quintessentially un-American.

    I didn’t say that insurgencies are unbeatable. I said that victory, as defined in current US COIN terms, against the particular set of insurgencies in the particular venue, is impossible. Big difference.

  15. Randy Rager
    August 23rd, 2010 @ 4:14 am

    You have your definitions, and I can see they make you happy. As happy as any Libertardian loser ever gets, anyway. But out here in the real world, well, your definitions make you look like rather the idiot.

    What you thought you said bears little to no resemblance to what you actually said, but that’s a hallmark of Libertarian thought, and always has been. Your premises differ so radically from reality that you have severe difficulty communicating with real human beings, and you always will.

    Poor little bugger.

  16. Randy Rager
    August 23rd, 2010 @ 12:14 am

    You have your definitions, and I can see they make you happy. As happy as any Libertardian loser ever gets, anyway. But out here in the real world, well, your definitions make you look like rather the idiot.

    What you thought you said bears little to no resemblance to what you actually said, but that’s a hallmark of Libertarian thought, and always has been. Your premises differ so radically from reality that you have severe difficulty communicating with real human beings, and you always will.

    Poor little bugger.

  17. Randy Rager
    August 23rd, 2010 @ 4:27 am

    In the interests of compromise, I propose the following:

    We let the Cordoba Center (a triumphalist name if there ever was one, and if you had the historic knowledge of a mayfly I would not have to explain this to you) be built just as soon as the backers rebuild the Bamiyan Buddhas that were destroyed by the Taliban.

    Until that happens, you could try being not quite hypocrite, eh?

  18. Randy Rager
    August 23rd, 2010 @ 12:27 am

    In the interests of compromise, I propose the following:

    We let the Cordoba Center (a triumphalist name if there ever was one, and if you had the historic knowledge of a mayfly I would not have to explain this to you) be built just as soon as the backers rebuild the Bamiyan Buddhas that were destroyed by the Taliban.

    Until that happens, you could try being not quite hypocrite, eh?

  19. Randy Rager
    August 23rd, 2010 @ 4:37 am

    The ability to edit my own comments sure would be nice, for those times I forget to plug in a word like that missing “the” there in the last sentence.

    Make it happen, Smitty!

    😛

  20. Randy Rager
    August 23rd, 2010 @ 12:37 am

    The ability to edit my own comments sure would be nice, for those times I forget to plug in a word like that missing “the” there in the last sentence.

    Make it happen, Smitty!

    😛

  21. Thomas L. Knapp
    August 23rd, 2010 @ 6:16 am

    Randy,

    The entire problem is with the phrase “we let.”

    This is America. You don’t get to “let” (or not “let”) adherents of this or that religion practice said religion or build facilities in which to practice, or from which to promote, that religion.

    If you don’t like it, pray pack your trash (including perhaps a history of Cordoba, seeing as how you’ve obviously never cracked one open and probably should) and move your ass to Pyongyang or some other place more congenial to this notion of yours that others’ religious practices, building projects, etc. should be subject to your irrational whims.

  22. Thomas L. Knapp
    August 23rd, 2010 @ 2:16 am

    Randy,

    The entire problem is with the phrase “we let.”

    This is America. You don’t get to “let” (or not “let”) adherents of this or that religion practice said religion or build facilities in which to practice, or from which to promote, that religion.

    If you don’t like it, pray pack your trash (including perhaps a history of Cordoba, seeing as how you’ve obviously never cracked one open and probably should) and move your ass to Pyongyang or some other place more congenial to this notion of yours that others’ religious practices, building projects, etc. should be subject to your irrational whims.

  23. Randy Rager
    August 23rd, 2010 @ 2:28 pm

    “Agree with me or get the fuck out”? What a charming worldview. Didn’t Stalin say something similar to Trotsky, and then send a killer after him anyway?

    I’m going nowhere, and since a majority of Americans agree with me on this one I feel safe in turning that one right around on you. Since you love mosques so much, why don’t you go live in some third world Muslim shithole?

  24. Randy Rager
    August 23rd, 2010 @ 10:28 am

    “Agree with me or get the fuck out”? What a charming worldview. Didn’t Stalin say something similar to Trotsky, and then send a killer after him anyway?

    I’m going nowhere, and since a majority of Americans agree with me on this one I feel safe in turning that one right around on you. Since you love mosques so much, why don’t you go live in some third world Muslim shithole?

  25. The Fedora Takes Over Ricochet
    August 23rd, 2010 @ 1:24 pm

    […] for Guest Contributor this week is Robert Stacy McCain. Stacy’s posts have already led to some nice cross-bloggination and some brisk conversation in the comments. Conversation is Ricochet’s mission, so […]

  26. Thomas L. Knapp
    August 23rd, 2010 @ 9:31 pm

    Randy,

    I don’t love mosques.

    As a matter of fact, I don’t particularly like Islam. So far as I can tell it was the invention of a warlord who decided that a good way of establishing and expanding his hegemony was to have God on his side, who decided that that entailed reducing the number of gods from the many of pre-Islam pagan Arabia to one, and who noticed that the Jews and Christians already had monotheism lying around, just waiting to be tailored to suit his needs.

    What I do like is the freedom of individuals to take up any damnfool superstition they find attractive, to gather with others who share that superstition, and to build centers where they can gather to gab about that superstition, without adherents of the global religion — The Cult of the Omnipotent State — having any authority to stop them.

    I like that freedom because I consider The Cult of the Omnipotent State to be more dangerous than any of those other damnfool superstitions, and especially so if it identifies itself and merges its forces with one of the damnfool superstitions as opposed to others.

    I also like that freedom because I just may harbor some damnfool superstitions of my own and prefer to be free to entertain them free of fear of molestation at the hands of the mob.

    As far as “agree with me or get the fuck out” is concerned, no — it’s “abstain from attempting to force everyone else to agree with you or get the fuck out.” That bar is closed. You don’t have to go home, but your pitchfork can’t stay here.

  27. Thomas L. Knapp
    August 23rd, 2010 @ 5:31 pm

    Randy,

    I don’t love mosques.

    As a matter of fact, I don’t particularly like Islam. So far as I can tell it was the invention of a warlord who decided that a good way of establishing and expanding his hegemony was to have God on his side, who decided that that entailed reducing the number of gods from the many of pre-Islam pagan Arabia to one, and who noticed that the Jews and Christians already had monotheism lying around, just waiting to be tailored to suit his needs.

    What I do like is the freedom of individuals to take up any damnfool superstition they find attractive, to gather with others who share that superstition, and to build centers where they can gather to gab about that superstition, without adherents of the global religion — The Cult of the Omnipotent State — having any authority to stop them.

    I like that freedom because I consider The Cult of the Omnipotent State to be more dangerous than any of those other damnfool superstitions, and especially so if it identifies itself and merges its forces with one of the damnfool superstitions as opposed to others.

    I also like that freedom because I just may harbor some damnfool superstitions of my own and prefer to be free to entertain them free of fear of molestation at the hands of the mob.

    As far as “agree with me or get the fuck out” is concerned, no — it’s “abstain from attempting to force everyone else to agree with you or get the fuck out.” That bar is closed. You don’t have to go home, but your pitchfork can’t stay here.

  28. Randy Rager
    August 24th, 2010 @ 3:14 am

    And above all, you love to hear yourself talk.

    Try and exile me. Just try.

    You fucking dolt.

  29. Randy Rager
    August 23rd, 2010 @ 11:14 pm

    And above all, you love to hear yourself talk.

    Try and exile me. Just try.

    You fucking dolt.

  30. Thomas L. Knapp
    August 24th, 2010 @ 3:20 am

    I wouldn’t dream of trying to exile you, Randy.

    I’ll just chide you for your lack of respect for other people’s freedom, and encourage you to move to a less free society if you hate freedom so much.

    Unless you actually come after my personal freedom, in which case I’ll beat your ass and send you home to mommy.

  31. Thomas L. Knapp
    August 23rd, 2010 @ 11:20 pm

    I wouldn’t dream of trying to exile you, Randy.

    I’ll just chide you for your lack of respect for other people’s freedom, and encourage you to move to a less free society if you hate freedom so much.

    Unless you actually come after my personal freedom, in which case I’ll beat your ass and send you home to mommy.

  32. Randy Rager
    August 24th, 2010 @ 3:59 am

    I have yet to say a single thing advocating limiting anyone’s freedom, while you’re talking about forcing me to get the fuck out. As if you have the sac to manage the task, but that’s a discussion for another day.

    I simply don’t think a mosque should be built at this location.

    You’re the fucking idiot that conflated that with violating these provocateurs property rights. In fact, you’ve been making that mistake every time you opine on the subject.

    You seem very unhappy to be an American, and very unfamiliar with the concepts involved. Perhaps you’d be happier in Canada? Australia? New Zealand? Or maybe even in Old Blighty?

  33. Randy Rager
    August 23rd, 2010 @ 11:59 pm

    I have yet to say a single thing advocating limiting anyone’s freedom, while you’re talking about forcing me to get the fuck out. As if you have the sac to manage the task, but that’s a discussion for another day.

    I simply don’t think a mosque should be built at this location.

    You’re the fucking idiot that conflated that with violating these provocateurs property rights. In fact, you’ve been making that mistake every time you opine on the subject.

    You seem very unhappy to be an American, and very unfamiliar with the concepts involved. Perhaps you’d be happier in Canada? Australia? New Zealand? Or maybe even in Old Blighty?

  34. Thomas L. Knapp
    August 24th, 2010 @ 8:53 pm

    “I have yet to say a single thing advocating limiting anyone’s freedom”

    Except for floating the absurd notion that “we” get to “let” (or not “let”) people exercise their property rights and religious freedoms in lower Manhattan.

    “while you’re talking about forcing me to get the fuck out.”

    I guess whoever said “we speak English here” didn’t have you in mind.

    “As if you have the sac to manage the task, but that’s a discussion for another day.”

    No discussion needed. I don’t go looking for fights anymore, but if you want one then feel free to consult your preferred funeral director and then come and get it.

    “I simply don’t think a mosque should be built at this location.”

    Neither do I. Um … so what? I don’t own the property. Do you?

    I’m incredibly happy to be an American as opposed to the available alternatives. That’s why I fight to keep/regain the best things about America versus those who think that we can dispense with those things and remain America.

  35. Thomas L. Knapp
    August 24th, 2010 @ 4:53 pm

    “I have yet to say a single thing advocating limiting anyone’s freedom”

    Except for floating the absurd notion that “we” get to “let” (or not “let”) people exercise their property rights and religious freedoms in lower Manhattan.

    “while you’re talking about forcing me to get the fuck out.”

    I guess whoever said “we speak English here” didn’t have you in mind.

    “As if you have the sac to manage the task, but that’s a discussion for another day.”

    No discussion needed. I don’t go looking for fights anymore, but if you want one then feel free to consult your preferred funeral director and then come and get it.

    “I simply don’t think a mosque should be built at this location.”

    Neither do I. Um … so what? I don’t own the property. Do you?

    I’m incredibly happy to be an American as opposed to the available alternatives. That’s why I fight to keep/regain the best things about America versus those who think that we can dispense with those things and remain America.

  36. Kojocaro
    September 1st, 2010 @ 9:38 pm

    yes thomas crapp is chiding someone on religious freedom this coming from the person whose side supports the mosque but insists bulding a greek orthodox church is supporting state sponsored religion

  37. Kojocaro
    September 1st, 2010 @ 5:38 pm

    yes thomas crapp is chiding someone on religious freedom this coming from the person whose side supports the mosque but insists bulding a greek orthodox church is supporting state sponsored religion