Eminent Domain Stuff
New London Update (2/24/06)
Coverage of the Rally at New London's City Hall (w/ pics)
Monday, June 07, 2004
I must admit to not being surprised by the absolute drivel and vitriol coming from a select few on the Left in what should be a time for solemn remembrance of a wonderful Man and President. Saddened perhaps, but not surprised.
There are two points I would like to make about these Reagan haters.
The first is perhaps the most obvious (and maybe even overused) aspect to freedom. Those who fight on the side of good end up protecting all freedom, not just their own. The essence of a truly free society is embodied in the well-known quote, “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” I agree entirely, however, pledging to defend one’s intellectual and political opponents’ right to free speech is one thing, sitting idly by while great men are not only insulted but mercilessly disparaged on the eve if their death is quite another.
And so we come to the recent offenders. Take, for example, this fine line written by Greg Palast in the Observer:
Ronald Reagan was a conman. Ronald Reagan was a coward. Ronald Reagan was a killer.
And he closes with:
Killer, coward, conman. Ronald Reagan, good-bye and good riddance.
I will not point out all the numerous counter examples freely available to contradict this ridiculous column. Rather, let me just say this: If not for Reagan, and great men and women like him, you (Mr. Palast) would not have the ability to so freely insult your leaders. So, enjoy your freedom that was won on the backs of strong men and women on the front lines of battles both literal and political.
The second idea I’d like to put forth is actually a question: How could someone possibly hate another human being enough to say, directly after his death?:
Anyway, I'm sure he's turning crispy brown right about now.
That was Ted Rall on his blog today (the link to which I will not include because I detest everything he stands for…although I do not wish him any physical harm, even in the afterlife). Perhaps not surprisingly, this particular opinion puts him right in line with Muammar Gaddafi's own view (humm...).
To be honest, I had a hard time believing that these sentiments were actually genuine. These people really believe what they are writing…and the mean exactly what they say. It got me to thinking, who could harbor this level of hatred for anther person. I found the answer in myself. I hate Saddam Hussein exactly that much. I would honestly not shed tear #1 if he were tortured to a slow and agonizing death at the hands of his own countrymen (or anyone, for that matter). I am ok with this feeling because I think it is justified, given that Saddam is truly and demonstrably evil.
This level of hate cannot exist between two good people who both recognize that goodness in each other, it simply isn’t possible. There are only two explanations, then, for the current hatred directed at President Reagan: either Ted Rall (and others of his ilk) are evil and, therefore hate good, or they are seriously confused and think Reagan is evil. I hope, for the sake of humanity in general, that they are just confused. In either case, they should be dumped by their respective editors, shunned for their natural lives and never allowed to return to the public square of ideas.
And let me also include Bush haters in this.
Here's a great point posted over at marcland about Reagan haters. I agree completely.