N.Y. TIMES BLABBERMOUTHS-A PERSPECTIVE

Michelle Malkin posted another blabbermouth story put out by the New York times. The story lets us know that Bush is rushing precision guided bombs to Israel. She then poses a hypothetical story to go along with that one entitled "U.S. Speeds Up Atomic Bomb Delivery for Use on the Japanese." Finally the "what if" question is assumed here.

First things first. What's that old saying, "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me?" I've always had faith in the I.Q. of the Bush administration. In fact, no one becomes president without some sort of reasonable intelligence. Voters may sometimes helplessly play the fool. Presidents play the fool to appease or deceive. Even Bill Clinton possessed an above average intelligence. I'll give him that much. He also possessed an unusual amount of "how can we screw em today" charm as well. Surely Bush took precautionary measures to keep the Times from divulging secrets again. (I happen to believe he knew a lot more than he's letting on about the first traitorous incident. He may possibly have set the Times up. Let's hope he's on top of this.

Furthermore, we often like to draw a comparison between today's war time attitudes and those of WWII. "What if we acted this way back then? What if we constantly battled Roosevelt until he withdrew all our troops from the Pacific and Europe?" "What if more loose lips took to the streets back then?"
I think we are committing what philosophers call the "straw man" fallacy here. We assume contemporary hippie-dippie liberals would not act the same in 1945 as they do today. We're arguing against a false assumption. One needs to look at this current generation's character. They emerged from the dropped out, turned on flower children of the 60's. The press today represent these folks and a sort of blue blood class used to spending daddy's money. They attend the finest schools, get prestigious degrees, and set out from there to change the world. They grow up much slower than the WWII bunch. They rarely learn the meaning of selflessness. There's no need to. In Joe Walsh's words, "life's been good to them so far." Contrast that with the WWII generation. Most of that group grew up with very little in the way of possessions. They lived in small homes, with sub par heating. Many barely got through high school if that far. They lived through a terrible economic depression. They began working at a young age. My father, a WWII veteran, was born in 1920. He began picking cotton at the ripe old age of 6 years. He had to borrow a suit for his high school graduation ceremony. He borrowed a glove to play on the high school baseball team. He never traveled outside of the Dallas Texas area (his home) until he joined the navy in 1940. His generation lived like that. They understood sacrifice and the meaning of "love thy neighbor as thyself." Recent generations care more about their Prada shoes and Gucci hand bags than they do those who can't afford shoes. Many fall prey to WWII revisionist history teachers. They grow up thinking our cruel commanders needlessly dropped the A bomb on those poor, helpless Japanese. Therefore, they go through life believing a half truth about the war, never understanding the context for America's actions.

If history repeated itself with our current generation things would remain the same as they are at this moment. The New York Times would continue its loose lips policy. The Dixie Chicks might continue to question the need for patriotism. And, the Liberal politicians would call Roosevelt the worst president ever. Then again, maybe history is repeating itself.

Comments

[Keith]

I don't get it. If your father served in World War II, you're part of the baby boom generation that you criticize. Yet the baby boomers voted for Bush.