An Enemy That Won't Hurt Us

[ICantSpellDawg]

Try this on for size.

Time Fights Carbon Emissions; Military Fights Evil (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/04/time_fights_carbon_emissions_m.html)
By Dennis Prager

The state of the liberal mind is on display on this week's cover of Time magazine.

The already notorious cover takes the iconic photograph of U.S. Marines planting the American flag on Iwo Jima and substitutes a tree for the flag. Why Time's editors did this explains much about contemporary liberalism.

The first thing it explains is that liberals, not to mention the left as a whole, stopped fighting evil during the Vietnam War. As I wrote in my last column, whereas liberals had led the fight against Nazism before and during World War II, and against Communism after the War, the liberal will to fight Communism, the greatest organized evil of the post-War world, collapsed during the Vietnam War. The Vietnam War did to American liberals what World War I did to most Europeans -- it rendered them anti-war rather than anti-evil.

That is why liberals have gone AWOL in the fight against Islamic totalitarianism. As during the post-Vietnam Cold War, when liberals fought anti-Communists much more than they fought Communists, they fight anti-Islamists much more than they fight Islamists. Thus, Democrats routinely dismiss the Bush administration's talk about the threat of Islamic terror as "scare tactics."

But -- and this is a primary reason for Time's cover -- liberals know that they have largely opted out of the fight against Islamists; their only passion on this matter is abandoning the war against Islamists in Iraq. But like nearly all people who believe in a cause, they know that they have to fight some evil -- after all, the world really seems threatened by something. So they have channeled their desire to fight threats to the world to fighting an enemy that will not hurt them or their loved ones -- man-made carbon dioxide emissions.

It is much easier to fight global warming than to fight human evil. You will be celebrated at Time, Newsweek, The New York Times, the BBC and throughout the media world, no one will threaten your life, there are huge grants available to scientists and others who fight real or exaggerated environmental problems, and you may even receive an Academy Award and the Nobel Peace Prize. Individuals who fight Islamists get fatwas.

The Time cover is cheap heroism. It is a liberal attempt to depict as equally heroic those who fight carbon emissions and those who fought Japanese fascists and Nazis.

Second, for much of the left, the cover reflects the primacy of environmental concerns over moral concerns. For example, the left seemed never to care about the millions of Africans who continued to die from malaria largely because of the environmentalists' worldwide ban on the use of DDT as pesticide. The same holds true for another leftwing environmentalist fantasy. Changing corn into biofuels is causing a surge in food prices throughout the world. The European Union continues this policy despite warnings even from some environmentalists that food shortages, starvation and food riots are imminent. But human suffering is not as significant as environmental degradation.

Third, the left is far more internationalist -- global, if you will -- in its orientation than national. As the Time article states, "Going green: What could be redder, whiter and bluer than that?" Whereas, for most Americans patriotism remains red, white and blue, for much of the left it is green.

Fourth, the further left you go, the more inclined you are to hysteria. From the threat of DDT to the threat of heterosexual AIDS in America to that mass killer secondhand smoke, the left believes and spreads threats that, unlike the threat of Islamic terror, really are "scare tactics."

Years from now, Time's cover will be regarded as another silly media-induced fear. But, as with Time's 1974 article warning its readers about "another ice age" and its many articles on the threat of heterosexual AIDS in America, Time will just let public amnesia deal with credibility problems. Until then, however, one fact remains: Today, conservatives fight evil and liberals fight carbon emissions. That's what this week's cover of Time is about.

Copyright 2008, Creators Syndicate Inc.

[Ronin]

wow...biased much?

my only comfort is that if the right wing base eat all the red meat that is thrown at it they´ll die for heart disease soon enough.

[Furious Mental]

Frankly it seems to me that the biggest advocates of biofuels are farmers who want enormous government subsidies. I have another gripe with that article (aside from the fact that it is a perfect example of the sort of partisan garbage that makes your country's media so positively uninspiring, and all the more so because the substantive ideological differences between your country's political parties are so minor that they wouldn't even be noticed anywhere else in the world)- Japan's WWII government was not fascist.

[Vladimir]

Sorry. Teh fight against eval turned me off the article.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Frankly it seems to me that the biggest advocates of biofuels are farmers who want enormous government subsidies. I have another gripe with that article (aside from the fact that it is a perfect example of the sort of partisan garbage that makes your country's media so positively uninspiring, and all the more so because the substantive ideological differences between your country's political parties are so minor that they wouldn't even be noticed anywhere else in the world)- Japan's WWII government was not fascist.

I think that he was lumping all totalitarian nationalist governments with expansionist tendencies with Fascism. Still inaccurate, I know - but you get the idea.

He is a Rabbi, I think and in no way represents "the media". This is an op-ed piece taken directly from his website. Are people not allowed to make arguments anymore?


wow...biased much?

my only comfort is that if the right wing base eat all the red meat that is thrown at it they´ll die for heart disease soon enough.

Maybe we will. What do you mean biased? do you mean that he has an opinion that ctrongly contrasts with his New York contemporaries? We are all biased. Any attempt at legitimate impartiality shows only a moral chasm.

[Quirinus]

I don't know... he does take a lot of opinions for granted. The liberals uniformly agree on everything and have a common agenda, communism is inherently evil, environmental problems are exaggerated, "the left never seems....", "this is why liberals have gone AWOL...", blah blah blah.....

[ICantSpellDawg]

I don't know... he does take a lot of opinions for granted. The liberals uniformly agree on everything and have a common agenda, communism is inherently evil, environmental problems are exaggerated, "the left never seems....", "this is why liberals have gone AWOL...", blah blah blah.....

The political chart is a continuum and nearly everyone on the planet has an opinion. We use generalizations group ideological leanings together. The "Left" uses them and the "Right" uses them. What is the alternative? Should he have listed instead everyone who "has gone AWOL"?

[Tribesman]

Prager being a prick as usual , is there anything he has ever written that doesn't amount to bigoted ignorant bull-excrement ?

He is a Rabbi, I think No because american Jews are secular and evil liberals who love islam ..oh sorry I was just having Prager moment .:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

[ICantSpellDawg]

Prager being a prick as usual , is there anything he has ever written that doesn't amount to bigoted ignorant bull-excrement ?
No because american Jews are secular and evil liberals who love islam ..oh sorry I was just having Prager moment .:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

I like him. The article wasn't bad. It highlights how a number of people think. Us "idiots" believe that the democrats are more interested in running around grabbing each others butts when they should be interested in protecting our country. Many of them have made serious errors in judgement.

Tribesman - I'd bet that if you were a U.S. citizen you wouldn't hate guys like Prager as much.

Unrelated - Ive just realized that I don't like Malkin. Sure she is pretty hot and Filipino, but at some point I have to look past that and recognize her as kind of an idiot. This would not stop me from romancing her pants off.

[Vladimir]

I like him. The article wasn't bad. It highlights how a number of people think. Us "idiots" believe that the democrats are more interested in running around grabbing each others butts when they should be interested in protecting our country. Many of them have made serious errors in judgement.

Tribesman - I'd bet that if you were a U.S. citizen you wouldn't hate guys like Prager as much.

Unrelated - Ive just realized that I don't like Malkin. Sure she is pretty hot and Filipino, but at some point I have to look past that and recognize her as kind of an idiot. This would not stop me from romancing her pants off.

:inquisitive: I never pictured her as the romantic type. Or even the sexually active type. Or the type who's ever had any fun type.

[Tribesman]

Tribesman - I'd bet that if you were a U.S. citizen you wouldn't hate guys like Prager as much.

You think changing citizenship changes your outlook ?:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:
Well it hasn't so far and I very much doubt it will when I get yet another one .

[ICantSpellDawg]

:inquisitive: I never pictured her as the romantic type. Or even the sexually active type. Or the type who's ever had any fun type.

oh yea? (http://www.windypundit.com/archives/2006/images/MalkinBikini_500x380.jpg)

now you have.

[Vladimir]

oh yea? (http://www.windypundit.com/archives/2006/images/MalkinBikini_500x380.jpg)

now you have.

Umm, no. That's a fake. :no:

[ICantSpellDawg]

Umm, no. That's a fake. :no:

is it?

[Vladimir]

is it?

She said it is and provided the original photo. That or she's lying. Besides, she looks a lot thinner than that.

[ICantSpellDawg]

She said it is and provided the original photo. That or she's lying. Besides, she looks a lot thinner than that.

her head looks a bit small in that photo. There is another photo that has her head clearly photoshopped on. Are you sure that the other one isn't the one that you are referring to?

Edit- i found the page that you are talking about.

I bet she's lying.

[Adrian II]

She said it is and provided the original photo. That or she's lying. Besides, she looks a lot thinner than that.Many American political 'pundits' have no views or personalities, only grudges. They're turds in suits.

Among the few whom I ever really enjoyed hearing and seeing were James Carville and Mary Matalin. I adored their guts, acerbic humor and ability to think on their feet. As soon as they got near eachother in some studio sparks would fly, people's hair would stand straight up and camera's would start to shake because the crew couldn't control their laughter.

It is no coincidence that they got married.

[Xiahou]

Unrelated - Ive just realized that I don't like Malkin. Sure she is pretty hot and Filipino, but at some point I have to look past that and recognize her as kind of an idiot. This would not stop me from romancing her pants off.Just curious- why is she an idiot? I don't know her work that well, but what I have heard from her has generally been entertaining. Am I missing something?

[ICantSpellDawg]

Just curious- why is she an idiot? I don't know her work that well, but what I have heard from her has generally been entertaining. Am I missing something?

I get the feeling that there is only anger, no substance. What does she stand for? Plus she ripped on the Pope.

Idiot is the wrong word - she blows us out of the water in the intellect arena. I should have used a figurative derogatory expression.

[Vladimir]

Many American political 'pundits' have no views or personalities, only grudges. They're turds in suits.

Among the few whom I ever really enjoyed hearing and seeing were James Carville and Mary Matalin. I adored their guts, acerbic humor and ability to think on their feet. As soon as they got near eachother in some studio sparks would fly, people's hair would stand straight up and camera's would start to shake because the crew couldn't control their laughter.

It is no coincidence that they got married.

https://img134.imageshack.us/img134/6923/imageshb3.jpg

The gesture and the person.

Dang it! How did that crazy Russian get the picture so big?

[ICantSpellDawg]

Many American political 'pundits' have no views or personalities, only grudges. They're turds in suits.

Among the few whom I ever really enjoyed hearing and seeing were James Carville and Mary Matalin. I adored their guts, acerbic humor and ability to think on their feet. As soon as they got near eachother in some studio sparks would fly, people's hair would stand straight up and camera's would start to shake because the crew couldn't control their laughter.

It is no coincidence that they got married.

I like Karl Rove and Peggy Noonan alot.

[Lemur]

I don't know [Michelle Malkin's] work that well, but what I have heard from her has generally been entertaining. Am I missing something?
Dude, you are so missing something (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tt_YcQlYxyY).

[Louis VI the Fat]

I could follow the first few posts of this thread. Now I'm completely lost. I haven't got a clue what you are all going on about. ~:confused:


Irritatingly enough, everybody else here seems to know who all these people are and what this thread is all about. :cry:

:freak:

[Tribesman]

Irritatingly enough, everybody else here seems to know who all these people are and what this thread is all about.
its right wing fruitcakes who despite being convinced that the media is run by something called Liberals just happen to be in the media a lot :yes:

Possibly its a cunning plan set out in the protocols of the elders of the worldwide Liberal cabal to allow rightwing fruitcakes to publish so widely that it makes the right look like a bunch of lunatics .~;)

[Xiahou]

Dude, you are so missing something (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tt_YcQlYxyY).
Hey, just because she's a lousy cheerleader doesn't mean she's a bad person.... Actually, some might say she's a good (political) cheerleader. :beam:

painfully bad video though...

[TevashSzat]

I really like this:


Fourth, the further left you go, the more inclined you are to hysteria. From the threat of DDT to the threat of heterosexual AIDS in America to that mass killer secondhand smoke, the left believes and spreads threats that, unlike the threat of Islamic terror, really are "scare tactics."

So, DDT doesn't poison the enviornment, the animals in it, and ultimately humans? Sure, it kills mosquitoes, but guess what? What kills insects also kills humans. Thats why you don't spray pesticide in your food right before you eat it.

So heterosexuals don't get AIDS? Or that homosexuals get them more often? Just look at Africa, there are millions of heterosexuals there with AIDS

So secondhand smoke is perfectly fine for you, that all of the carcinogens within the smoke of cigarettes don't cause cancer at all

I don't really understand how comparing these widely accepted and true things to scare tactics really helps the argument here.

There is so much bias here, I don't know where to continue next.

[CrossLOPER]

https://img134.imageshack.us/img134/6923/imageshb3.jpg

The gesture and the person.

Dang it! How did that crazy Russian get the picture so big?
https://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o273/CrossL/japanese_dance.gif
foto bukkkeet :beam:

[Banquo's Ghost]

I guess it's no reflection on the quality of the original article that this thread stayed on topic for oh, three, maybe four posts.

:beam:

[Adrian II]

So, DDT doesn't poison the enviornment, the animals in it, and ultimately humans? Sure, it kills mosquitoes, but guess what? What kills insects also kills humans.It couldn't hurt you educate yourself a bit first.

DDT has its maximum effect in minimal doses that don't kill insects but keep them away from people, resulting in a 90% decrease in transmission of malaria. That's why the WHO recommends (http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2006/pr50/en/)it.

It's stupid, one-dimensional, spoilt western know-it-all views such as yours that caused needless deaths from malaria in the Third World for decades.

[Tribesman]

It's stupid, one-dimensional, spoilt western know-it-all views such as yours that caused needless deaths from malaria in the Third World for decades.

Come on be fair Adrian , the use of DDT as recommended by the WHO has never stopped , the problem was with the widespread spraying and agricultural use and it was that which was banned . It was the stupid know it all cure all application of the chemical that not only did the damage but also led to a resilience in mosquitos against the chemical .
So when Prager prattles on about
From the threat of DDT it was actually a real threat , and the threat was from the over use and mis use of the chemical .

[Adrian II]

Come on be fair Adrian , the use of DDT as recommended by the WHO has never stopped , the problem was with the widespread spraying and agricultural use and it was that which was banned . It was the stupid know it all cure all application of the chemical that not only did the damage but also led to a resilience in mosquitos against the chemical .
So when Prager prattles on about it was actually a real threat , and the threat was from the over use and mis use of the chemical .Gah!


The Economist (http://www.malaria.org/DDTEconomist14_XII_00.html): The widespread use of DDT in the 1950s and 1960s all but eliminated malaria in several developing countries and saved an estimated 500m lives by 1970. Since then, the use of the stuff has shrunk. Of the roughly 100 countries where malaria is endemic, only 23 now employ DDT to fight the disease. And that is frequently the fault of aid donors who help to finance the battle against malaria.

Environmentalists argue that DDT-spraying causes harm to humans, but no replicated, peer-reviewed study has ever demonstrated this. Nor is it likely that the tiny quantities used in house-spraying have any serious effect on the environment. Amir Attaran, another Harvard academic, estimates that the volume of DDT used to protect the entire high-risk population of Guyana for a year is equivalent to what a farmer might spray on to a single field of cotton.

[Tribesman]

Gah!

Ahem .......Amir Attaran, another Harvard academic, estimates that the volume of DDT used to protect the entire high-risk population of Guyana for a year is equivalent to what a farmer might spray on to a single field of cotton......Come on be fair Adrian , the use of DDT as recommended by the WHO has never stopped , the problem was with the widespread spraying and agricultural use and it was that which was banned


Environmentalists argue that DDT-spraying causes harm to humans
Do they , I thought the arguement that widespread spraying led to a build up in the water system and soil and was transfered from animal to animal in the foodchain so that it could theoreticly get to the stage where the concentrations would be harmful to humans .

[Xiahou]

It couldn't hurt you educate yourself a bit first.

DDT has its maximum effect in minimal doses that don't kill insects but keep them away from people, resulting in a 90% decrease in transmission of malaria. That's why the WHO recommends (http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2006/pr50/en/)it.

It's stupid, one-dimensional, spoilt western know-it-all views such as yours that caused needless deaths from malaria in the Third World for decades.
Absolutely. :yes:
While there isn't an outright global ban on DDT, western countries began tying aid to the stoppage of its use- causing many, many needless malaria deaths.

[CrossLOPER]

Absolutely. :yes:
While there isn't an outright global ban on DDT, western countries began tying aid to the stoppage of its use- causing many, many needless malaria deaths.
Survive malaria but get cancer and retarded children?

[Marshal Murat]

Survive malaria but get cancer and retarded children?
The chance of getting cell-phone cancer is probably the same as DDT.

[Xiahou]

Survive malaria but get cancer and retarded children?
Yeah, it'll thin your children's eggshells too. ~:handball: