Cruelty is the new black
How will they attack this grieving mother?
The GOP has taken refuge in cruelty as politics.
I've wondered for a while why so many conservatives have made a sport of being cruel to Cindy Sheehan. As if losing her son wasn't enough cruelty.
You now have the sad Chris" Kim Philby" Hitchens, calling Sheehan a vile anti-semite based on a letter she didn't write and ABC can't find. And Hitch, having spent years on the left, knows the casual anti-semitism there. I mean WBAI used to air a Holocaust denier in the early 80's. People occasional mask their Jew-hatred by talking about the Israel lobby and the like. But at the end is the Protocols and Jewish bankers, like LaRouche and his cult and the New Alliance Party.
Now, while odious, the unscrupulous will use people to get out their views, no matter how crazy they are. And Hitchens knows this.
So why is he calling Sheehan a liar? Because he can do nothing else. The booze won't let him. His increasingly flawed logic, like defending the mayor of Baghdad who had no right to the job, now this.
But Hitchens, unshaven, with a tweedy brown coat, circles under once bright eyes, dulled by a sea of booze, prattled on, attacking a woman who's eldest son has died in service of this country. Hitchens thought he was being brilliant, but he, like all old drunks, was just sad, looking in desperate need of a stiffner. I wonder if he travels with a flask now. George Galloway nailed him as a drink-soaked former Trotskyite popinjay. Hitchens response was to mutter a reply, something which wouldn't have happened 20 years ago.
Hitchens may actually have to produce this e-mail, one Nightline doesn't have.
One word: intervention. If he doesn't get it, he will die.
The right is so desperate that they are doing extensive oppo, looking over her public financial records, getting copies of her divorce papers, searching Lexis-Nexis for any comment she made. This ain't cheap or quick.
Then you have Michelle Malkin, who for some reason, feels free to slander the Japanese Americans who served in WWII.
Now I wonder what side her Filipino relatives fought on? Were they collaborators with the Japanese? Huk rebels? Supported MacArthur? I mean, she's been awfully silent about getting benefits for Filipinos who fought with the US Army in WWII. I mean, this is a big issue within the US Filipino community. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe she has been an advocate for these people. But if not, might the reason be that her relatives were working for the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere, like Marcos did, then lied about it Or maybe they were communist rebels? Who knows?
I mean, her relatives could have easily collaborated with the Japanese, maybe rounded up comfort women for their masters. Or they could have been heroes. Who knows?
That's as well founded as her charges that internment was justified.
Japanese-Americans were so loyal, they were drafted from internment camps. Japanese-Americans were in intelligence, artillery and infantry. Serving in the Battle of Casino, the invasion of Southern France and finally, the liberation of northern Italy. They also served as translators in Asia and the Pacific. 22 Japanese-Americans won this nation's highest award, the Medal of Honor. Malkin not only questions their patriotism with her awful book, she stains their honor and bravery, which is unparalleled in the history of the US Army.
She writes her cruel, cheap words about people she's never met.
If someone asks in future years, when the Conservative movement started to die, well, this would be the moment. When politics trumped human decency.
posted by Steve @ 3:38:00 AM