July 14, 2004

EXCEPTIONAL

Via DGCI, I found this transcript from Rush Limbaugh's show about the Kerry appearance on Larry King. Larry King and Linda Heinz-Kerry had the following exchange:

KING: What do you think, Teresa, would be the effect of another terror attack on the United States politically?

HEINZ-KERRY: I don't know. I think most Americans subconsciously believe something is going to happen. It's a matter of when. And it's a matter of how.

KING: Strange way to live, though.

HEINZ-KERRY: Yeah. But you know, Europeans have lived that way and other people around the world have lived that way. Americans have been very safe, at least as a nation.

Rush Limbaugh explained a serious difference in worldview between people on the Left and people on the Right:

America is exceptional. America is the shining light, city on the hill, beacon of freedom, all this, prosperous nation, superpower. The left doesn't like that. They don't believe in American exceptionalism. They think this is an accident. It's not fair we should be more prosperous. It's not fair we should be safer. We must learn to adapt as the Europeans have. And her husband didn't step in and disagree with any of this.

I encountered some of this in the class I took over the weekend. Our professor hails from Africa but has lived in Germany for thirty years. At times during the seminar, he seemed to be belittling the American response to 9/11. He too was operating under the viewpoint that these things have been going on in other parts of the world for much more than three years, and that al Qaeda and Islamic fundamentalism terrorism is nothing to get all worked up about. He kept pointing out how Americans think that terrorism started in September 2001 when in fact it's been going on in Europe for decades.

My question is, why does it seem that we're the only ones to try to do something about it?

Granted, 9/11 is much bigger than anything the Red Army Faction or other terrorist groups ever did, but why hasn't Europe been waging a War on Terror for the past few decades? It's funny that when France said "We're all Americans now," what they seemed to really mean is "We're all victims now." And Theresa Heinz-Kerry seems to agree. It sucks to live in fear, but hey, everyone else does it. That's not the type of mentality that I want running the country. I want "smoke 'em out"; I want "either you are with us or you are with the terrorists"; I want "bring 'em on." I don't want "I'm an internationalist. I'd like to see our troops dispersed through the world only at the directive of the United Nations."

I don't want to cower like the rest of the world does. I want us to be exceptional.


(Thanks for RWN for the quotes.)

MORE TO GROK:

Annika is a lot more blunt than I am...

Posted by: Sarah at 10:43 AM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 492 words, total size 3 kb.

1 "My question is, why does it seem that we're the only ones to try to do something about it?" Well, in Israel we've been doing something about it for years, but we couldn't tell anybody. My second strongest memory from 9/11 is when Bush got on TV and said something like, "Our nation has been attacked". I can't tell you what it did to me. That one sentence tells the whole, forbidden truth. Israel has been the target of terrorism for decades, and I don't ever remember a Prime Minister saying, "Our nation has been attacked". "Now," I thought, "Now we can tell the truth too!" But we don't. We're not allowed to. Only the US is strong enough to tell the truth in spite of what the world says – and though I'm a strong supporter of Bush, I wish he would let us say it too.

Posted by: David Boxenhorn at July 14, 2004 12:04 PM (8uP3u)

2 Everyone keeps hearing about terrorism "Well it's nothing new to Europe" so why is the US making a big deal about it. The plain and simple answer "We are not Europe, We ARE the US". That means we won't appease, we won't back down and we don't turn our heads. That has been our way since we began and will be our way until time ends.

Posted by: Machelle at July 14, 2004 01:50 PM (ZAyoW)

3 Americans have been affected by terrorism for decades before 9/11. Before that date, we lived under the same mentality, it was a nuisance and nothing more. All the airplane hijackings, the kidnappings, the small scale attacks, all are similar to what the rest of the world endured for years, and we endured it with them. 9/11 was an escalation of the conflict. Never has anything like it been seen anywhere in the world. To equate that attack with what the rest of the world endures is to belittle what happened. Nowhere in the world was the scale of destruction in both lives and property matched in a single event. Israel has borne the brunt for decades, and is resoundingly condemned by the majority of the world for fighting back, just as America is now. Israel understands, America understands, I fear other countries will refuse to open their eyes until the same happens to them.

Posted by: John at July 14, 2004 02:54 PM (+Ysxp)

4 I agree with you all, including Sarah. Things have to change and you only achieve that change by doing what is right, which means it'll be difficult. All I want is that this war on Islamic fascism end in my lifetime. I don't want to have to send our grandchildren into another world war to save Europe again. I want to win this with everything we have: military, diplomacy, subversively. And if we fail, at least we can say, we died trying.

Posted by: Moor at July 14, 2004 05:06 PM (xvwyL)

5 Limbaugh is a liar. It is interesting that those who call Michael Moore a liar would cite someone like Limbaugh or Bill O'Reilly, who have been lying consistently, viciously and blatantly for years on end. Clicking on my name will get to a great link showing O'Reilly attacking a young man who lost his father on 9/11 for daring to try to speak his mind, and then O'Reilly lying about it afterward.

Posted by: ABB at July 15, 2004 04:34 AM (WJFwN)

6 Loads of Countries have been fighting the war on terror for years. Its just they didn't call it the "War on Terror". They just fought against the groups that were attacking them. Israel, France, India, the UK, China, The Soviet Union/Russia to name a few have been fighting or are fighting terrorist groups for years. Nobody says oh well we are going to live with terrorism they all decided to fight, but they don't pretend they care about all terrorist groups. Nobody cares about terrorist groups fighting against a distant country unless you are dragged into it. While Pakistan supports terrorists fighting India The US had no problem supporting Pakistan, or Afghanistan or a dozen other countries supporting terrorists. France could fight terrorists on one hand yet suppost its own terrorists when it suits them. This is done by everyone at various times. What pisses so many people off about the war on Terror is it is regarded as the War on Some Terrorist groups. Namely the ones that are of interest to the US. One thing about fighting terrorism is that it tends to go on for quite some time. This is where many people can adopt an attitude of "you just got to learn to live with it". The wars will go on until they are resolved mostly through, 1. Killing them all (terrorists + supporters). 2. Removing their supporters by compromising. 3. Leaving the area. You can't win by force as long as there are people left standing who regard the terrorist as a freedom fighter, or a fighter for a just cause. As for the comment "either you are with us or you are with the terrorists" that puts the US right into the terrorist camps in so many places. Wouldn't it leave the US in the camp of the IRA when they supported them Its a comment that concerns me from its simplistic view of terrorism and the world. If its to be taken as a soundbite then fair enough it has the good old simplistic them or us rallying call. If its a world point of view its scary in its simplicity. What if Britian used it as regards the large amounts of funds that flowed from the US into the coffers of the IRA. Or India said it about the backing of the Pakistani military that wsa busy financing and training and arming Islamic militants in Kashmir. Or Israel used it as regards the arms given to Iran while it was described as a terrorist state. These all drop the US squarely in the terrorist camp. So which is it "either you are with us or you are with the terrorists" or perhaps a slightly more complicated world view?

Posted by: j at July 15, 2004 01:11 PM (AmfhK)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
49kb generated in CPU 0.0127, elapsed 0.0845 seconds.
48 queries taking 0.0764 seconds, 175 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.