Comments on: It Takes A Man …

By: james huggins

james huggins — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 12:33:17 +0000

Yes, yes I was for it before I was against it. Mercer has brought me around to her way of thinking, on this particular subject. However, I was never personally soft on immigration and never will be. Also I will never take cheap shots at the troops like many participants of this blog. As I’ve said many times, because I have no answer of my own, “What do we do now”?

By: Daniel

Daniel — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 04:23:44 +0000

I like his last question:

The second is for those commentators, like Mr. Farah and myself, who originally supported military action at one point but have since withdrawn their support for it. Should you have supported the only anti-war Republican presidential candidate in 2008, and, more importantly, are you willing to oppose all of the pro-war candidates whose names will be put forward for the Republican nomination in 2012?

I hope to see that Glenn Beck and Joseph Farah will stand by their recently realized imperial skepticism when Sarah Palin or whatever other Republican figure starts beating the war drum.

By: Derek

Derek — Sun, 08 Aug 2010 19:17:09 +0000

I think most people welcomed action against Afghanistan, but not in the way it turned out. Most folks envisioned us going in and killing Al Qaeda by bombing and overrunning their camps, you know the famous ones with the monkey bars. I don’t think we expected, nor desired, to take over that nation and attempt to administer it like a US territory.

By: Myron Pauli

Myron Pauli — Sun, 08 Aug 2010 16:56:14 +0000

Well, the good news is that you (and myself and a few others) were correct back in 2002. The other good news is that others are coming to recognize that.

The BAD NEWS is that many of the neocon types or leftish-hawks will either (a) invent a pseudo-history as has been done with Vietnam and 1938 “Munich” or (b) come up with some measly mouthed nuance (like John Kerry) how their pro-war stance would not have been the disaster that Bush’s was. And the irony is no matter how many times these politicians and “pundits” get it wrong, they will be treated as sages (by or be part of) the “mainstream media”. Get it right – and you are an extremist quack. Get it wrong – you are a New York Times columnist!

By: David Smith

David Smith — Sun, 08 Aug 2010 00:47:58 +0000

Paradigm shifts are typically unsettling and painful. I was one of those conservatives who enthusiastically supported both moves into Afghanistan and then into Iraq, all the time thinking it was all part and parcel of defending kith and kin.

How could I have been so blind?

If we were serious, really serious about defending ourselves from invasion, whether from Islam or the Third World, our borders would be shut down, illegals deported. But what backbone does a mere propositional nation have? What do we really believe in beyond abstractions leading to some supposed utopia?

Yes, hats off to you, Miss Ilana, Mr. Buchanan, Mr. Raimondo, et al. who were consistent from the beginning. But Brothers Day and Farah have my respect for publicly admitting they were wrong. May their tribe increase!