The Evil Genius Posted April 22, 2003 Share Posted April 22, 2003 Author brings up some interesting points...worth reading at least - whether you agree or not...although it does wander off into other thoughts... Could this be a new version of PC that has emerged? THE NEW POLITICAL CORRECTNESS Thu Apr 3,10:02 PM ET Add Op/Ed - Richard Reeves to My Yahoo! By Richard Reeves WASHINGTON -- This is the way Machiavelli, the cynical Florentine philosopher of politics and power, put it in "The Prince" in 1513: "Everyone sees what you seem to be, few perceive what you are; and those few don't dare oppose the general opinion, which has the majesty of the government backing it up. ... The masses are always impressed by appearances and by the outcome of an event -- and in the world there are only masses. The few have no place there when the many crowd together." Few dare to oppose now, almost 500 years later. Even a clever descendant of Machiavelli's people, Madonna (news - web sites), herself a philosopher of daring, has decided the risk of opposition or the appearance of opposition is just too risky with American troops in the field. Last Tuesday, demonstrating that she is no Dixie Chick, the former Madonna Louise Ciccone announced that she was withdrawing an anti-war video to promote her song "American Life." "It was filmed before the war started, and I do not believe it is appropriate to air it at this time," she said. "Due to the volatile state of the world and out of sensitivity and respect for our armed forces, who I support and pray for, I do not want to risk offending anyone who might misinterpret the meaning of this video." Political correctness has turned sharply right, hasn't it? I'm sure Madonna was not at all influenced by the ongoing radio boycott of the Dixie Chicks (news - web sites), whose lead singer, Natalie Maines, had said she was ashamed to be from the same state as President Bush (news - web sites). That would be Texas. The chick quickly apologized, but it may have been too late. The new PC warriors are taking names. In The Washington Times, the feisty voice of Washington conservatives, for example, a front-page headline read, "Foundation Cash Funds Anti-war Movement." Beginning with a phrase about "tax-exempt status" and 990 tax forms -- a reminder that the government gives and the government can take away -- the article lists the Ford Foundation, the MacArthur Foundation, the Turner Foundation and the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation. All of them and several others, says the Times, have given unrestricted grants to organizations and committees that have questioned the majesty of government policy in Iraq (news - web sites). Not only singers and foundation executives better watch what they say and do. The most powerful "liberal" newspapers in the country are obviously watching what they say, too. The accidental killing of seven Iraqi women and children by American soldiers at a roadblock near their homes did not make the front page of The New York Times. The headline, in the "B" section of the paper, not only did not mention Americans or killing, it blamed the victims: "Failing to Heed Warning, 7 Iraqi Women and Children Die." The Washington Post did play the story on its front page, but it also avoided any mention of Americans or killing, with headlines that, except for the small print, could have been about a traffic accident in New Jersey: "A Gruesome Scene on Highway 9. 10 Dead After Vehicle Shelled at Checkpoint." As for "outcome," the military outcome of this war has never been in doubt -- and, hopefully, the worst of it is over. We are going to win the fight for territory and postwar control, at least in the beginning. Whatever mistakes were made in Washington and in the field -- particularly the White House's dismissive denials that wars against evil might involve any sacrifice of lives or money -- will soon be forgotten by the masses watching victory parades. The longer-term political outcome could be disastrous for us, but by then we will be on to other things. That is the way politics has worked for at least the five centuries from Machiavelli to Madonna. The trick now for the figure at the center of all this, the bold President Bush, is to focus attention on the military outcome and then to hold off the political accounting until after his re-election in 17 months. That will not be as easy as persuading Americans that Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) was the bad guy behind the killings of Sept. 11, 2001. With the probability that the U.S. economy may not be in the best of shape during 2004, the president may have to try to keep war fever up and political opposition down for the next year and a half. The voices of the few will have to be stifled by the crowd -- and that may mean more war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted April 22, 2003 Share Posted April 22, 2003 No one in this country has to "watch what they say". That's just an image brought up by the left to make people think we are degenerating into some kind police state. Celebrities and anyone else can say what they want, it's just that actions have consequences. They can be branded anti-American, which I believe a lot of their actions are. They can find that a majority of Americans disagree with their views, and decide to show them how much they disagree by hitting them where it hurts, by not going to their movies,listening to their music of voting for them. Talk away, but you are a MINORITY, and are treated as such. Last I checked, Sheen, Saradon and those other idiots are still roaming the streets, free to say what they want. If we were really going to a police state, they would already be in jail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted April 22, 2003 Share Posted April 22, 2003 ever notice how the left is always in a position of hoping for the worst iot achieve the power they need to implement their agenda?.....hmmmmmmmmm........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJWatson3 Posted April 22, 2003 Share Posted April 22, 2003 if madonna really believes that wouldn't she just wait until the war was over and release the video... the war is over now isn't it... she made the video the way she wanted and got scared, pure and simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackC Posted April 22, 2003 Share Posted April 22, 2003 The author has a real good point. Calling people who don't agree with want you want to do either anti-American or unAmerican is really the new "PC"! If you fail to see it you aren't being very honest with yourself. I hope it wasn't Unamerican of me to say that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted April 23, 2003 Share Posted April 23, 2003 Actually, Jack, I am one of one of the government representatives from the Office of Thought, created in the fine print of the first Patriot Act. And that was a very un-American thought. Stay where you are. Me or one of my friends will be at your house momentarily :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackC Posted April 23, 2003 Share Posted April 23, 2003 Air Sarge LOL!, Good thing you sent the same folks that have been searching for OBL! They still haven't found my house and I'm listed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted April 23, 2003 Share Posted April 23, 2003 Hey jack...catch Dick Morriss on TV last night? He basically laid all the foreign policy disasters this country has experienced in the last 10 years at the foot of your hero Clinton.......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackC Posted April 23, 2003 Share Posted April 23, 2003 Originally posted by fansince62 Hey jack...catch Dick Morriss on TV last night? He basically laid all the foreign policy disasters this country has experienced in the last 10 years at the foot of your hero Clinton.......... Yeah I saw him. Don't ask my why but I like him. He makes me laugh. I actually agreed with what he said about the Russians. As for the Clinton stuff, he's been saying this for some time now. He probably arranged a few BJ for Clinton and himself. If he was a witness in a trial he would be declared hostile and unreliable. The man has some credibility issues for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.