Predictably, the main-stream media are all a-dither about the apparent taunting of Saddam Hussein immediately prior to his well-deserved hanging death. According to the perpetually outraged liberal media, George Bush, who had nothing to do with Saddam's death sentence or his execution, should condemn the taunts.
Why? Why should George Bush have anything to say about Saddam's execution at all? He had nothing to do with it. It would be akin to asking Britney Spears to comment the genocide in Darfur. Why?
Why aren't the whining media liberals upset about the thousands of rapes, murders, gassings, tortures, and executions that occurred during Saddam's 30 year reign? They don't care about that. They just want the American President to make some meaningless gesture to make them feeeeel better.
No wonder the media love the United Nations...it's an organization obsessed with symbolism, gestures, and feelings rather than results and substance.
5 comments:
But you comment on everything...
(and an American (!) accusing UN for being obsessed with symbolism - hey, that's pretty funny!)
1. Is there something wrong with commenting on everything?
2. From the derisive way you talk about "an American", I would guess you are either a Canadian desperate for relevancy, a resentful citizen of a dying, Islamocentric European Socialist State, or a liberal Democrat who believes Americans are the cause of all suffering and misery in the modern world.
I will concede that many Americans are interested only in symbolism over substance, but those Americans are liberals, and as such deserve only contempt and mockery.
1. Nothing. Could be nothing wrong in asking Bush or Britney Spears then?
2. From your anticipation of my origin I wonder who's acceptable in your world? Except extreme (US) patriots, NEOs and rednecks I mean.
Everyone is acceptable...everyone that is who gives honest opinion and commentary based on logic and reason.
The unacceptable would include those who reflexively regurgitate liberal dogma regardless of it's departure from reality, and those who dismiss the opponent with name calling because they cannot compete in the arena of ideas.
The exception would be liberals who debate using their wacky dogma, but do it in a funny way...I like to laugh.
Do you accept other logics than yours? They do exist you know.
Post a Comment