Saturday, February 04, 2006

Daniel Flynn Why the Left hates America Chapter 1

The general mantra of the self loathing American after 9-11 was that we deserved the terrorist attack for any of a host of reason. The media widely portrayed Falwell's stupid attempts to blame 9-11 on Gays. The media ignored the Antisemitic hate rally in Union Square attended by 2,000 on the Saturday after 9-11. Long term Bad Eagle readers and readers of this blog are aware of that story.

Flynn points to numerous examples of hostility towards expressions of patriotism. Colleges and some locales insist on removing the American flag as it might offend some people. They also defend the right to burn the flag. This is a moronic argument as anyone who is in the USA has no right to dictate my freedom of expression in my own house. Burning a flag involves symbolic speech and is another matter. I find burning of anything odious personaly . However I am curious to what would happen if every time a leftie burned a flag Conservatives responded by burning pictures of Marx , Chomsky , Osama. Setting uncontolled fies is a violation of local laws. In Union Square I had an unfortunate accident with Shaken Mountain Dew and put out the fire. The policemen laughed as the lefties cry to arrest me was laughed at.

Americans on the left feel an intellectual superiority by playing up the alleged evils of America. At the same time they white wash the evils of Communism, Islam and third world nations. The apex of this idiocy is the anti semitic Commie 167 who claimed Iranian elections and criminal justice are fairer then those in the USA. The comedic value of a gay man defending a country that executes gays was priceless. Rob Bayn who some of you seldom agree with defended the USA. REgular readers of this blog should not be surprised that Justin Morris and I took him apart. Similarly Ducky and the Disturbed Chemist have felt a need to link the Muslim cartoon furor over the Guliani administrations defunding of an exhibit that portrayed a crucifix in urine. Defunding and protesting are legitimate responses to expressions one disagrees with. Threatening terrorist attacks are an illegitamate response to the offending images.

Flynn recounts many of the more odious words of professors on Campuses and the idiotic statement blaming 9-11 on the Crusades. All of these rationalizations miss the point. We were attacked by a band of religious zealots acting in the name of Islam. Osama could care less about the history of the USA with regards to slavery and treatment of Native Americans. In Fact Islamic history itself has greater links to slavery and brutalization of indigenous people. Osama does not care about Kyotto,
the Durban Racist meetings and up until a few years ago said little about the Pseudostinians.

The left thinks it is morally superior to side with the most regressive regimes on the planet. Yet it holds the USA and Israel to absurdly high standards that apply to no other countries. Such a view is the worst type of moral relitivism. Smacking airplanes into office buildings and shooting school children in the back are crimes against humanity and not cultural variants.

Mr Beamish in 08, Ducky deBEAKED and 167 adios muchacha via condios and don't let the door hit you on the rear.

I think I saw a picture of one of my favorite bloggers Jason Papas on a milk carton.


Anonymous said...

Very entertaining read, beak. Loved the Mountain Dew story.


Jason_Pappas said...

I'm not missing ... yet.

You convinced me that the "burning idea" doesn't sit well given history and local laws. Besides that's performance art. I prefer "conceptual art." I'm thinking of commissioning: "Koran With Bacon, Hold the Cheese."

beakerkin said...


We miss having you around. Nobody drives the odd trolls up a wall better then you.

If you get a chance one of my posts is on the Bad Eagle blog. I told him to contact you for some excellent posts.

I have to do a top ten authors and pundits. Daniel Flynn is an amazing talent. I wonder why I never heard of him.

Always On Watch said...

I see that you left a comment at my blog today, and I received that comment in my notification. But now your comment is missing from my site.

It's not just your comment. Blogger has been having problems since late last night.

Just letting you know.

beakerkin said...

For whatever reason it would not let me comment this morning. I am sure you are aware of the attack of the Danish embassy in Syria.

Always On Watch said...

Blogger has obviously done some repair this afternoon, but I still had a helluva time getting to your site. I had to go to Jason's, click on your name, go to your profile, then to your blog name.

Other Blogger sites are also having difficulty, so it's not just mine.

Always On Watch said...

Now, to comment on a point in your article...

In Fact Islamic history itself has greater links to slavery and brutalization of indigenous people.

Slavery is still practiced throughout the Muslim world. Sure, Saudi has an OFFICIAL ban on slavery, but any number of sources point out that this is a ban in name only.

The media will not explose that Islam still recognizes slavery as a viable institution.

Americans on the left feel an intellectual superiority by playing up the alleged evils of America. At the same time they white wash the evils of Communism, Islam and third world nations.

We're living future revisionist history. The matter is well beyond interpretation. Newspeak, as in Orwell's 1984, is happening! And that's why, in part, there is such a push now by the Left to silence us dissenters. It's also one reason why the offending Muslim cartoons are not being published in the newspapers here. But, aha! We still have the Internet!

Robert Bayn said...

Removing the American flag is just stupid, i mean if someone is offended by the American flag why are you here than? Burning the flag on the other hand is freedom of speech, Unpatrotic and anit-american? Sure is, but i beleive in true liberty, if someone wants to burn the flag they should be able to, burning some Osama pictures would be a nice bon fire, got some hershey bars and graham crackers? As a person on the 'left' i don't hate America, but there is nothing wrong with thinking we can do better than we are.

beakerkin said...


I do not like burning anything seriously. Burning uncontrolled fires violates local fire ordinances. Fortunately, I had some Mountain Dew and made my own statement of sorts.

Mr. Beamish the Instablepundit said...

Burning stuff is so yesterday. People should hit things they hate with hammers.

beakerkin said...

Mr Beamish

I fell off my chair at that one. Maybe we can get a statue of Chomsky and topple it.

Warren said...

Robert, I've addressed this before.

If burning an American flag is an expression of free speech, so is burning a cross. The only difference is the people doing it.

It has long been established that no freedom is unlimited. I can't brandish a firearm and excuse it as a expression of free speech.

In all three cases, they are forms of intimidation and ment to incite trouble.

In my view, ether all of these things are constitutionally protected speech or none of them are.

The Constitution is not a Chinese menu where we may pick an item from column A and two from column B.

beakerkin said...

Warren that description is better then my joke about the Constitutional cafeteria and covering parts we don't like with condiments.

I do not like symbolic speech or setting things on fire. Jason recalled my horror at a burning the Koran post. I have been entirely consistant over the years.

elijah said...

Beak you might want to change the address for my BLAAG link on your sidebar...LOL ask warren about it.

Robert Bayn said...

You make a good point Warren, just always worries me when we restrict freedoms, but i do agree there are always limitations, because if there wasn't our soceity would be pure chaos.

drummaster2001 said...


"Burning stuff is so yesterday. People should hit things they hate with hammers."

destruction is fun. i had the pleasure of smashing a broken TV with a hammer (not a craftsman) and after a couple of hits the hammer (as well as the TV) broke. the lesson: buy craftsman tools.


i am behind on fixing that link and putting up new ones.


i am in full agreement with your comment. flag burning and cross burning should be unconstitutional for the reason you mentioned before- meant to intimidate.

beakerkin said...

Drum Master

We should give Rob Bayn a link as well.

I hope Justin is well.

Warren said...

Robert, I worry about restricting freedoms also.

Although I consider myself a libertarian, (small l), I'm not an anarchist.

Warren said...

DM, I wouldn't go so far as to call those actions unconstitutional. I just wouldn't call either constitutionally protected.

There is a dichotomy between saying that burning a cross a federal crime, and saying, burning a flag is constitutionally protected.

As far as I can see, "neither" is constitutionally protected so I see nothing wrong with making law that defines both of them as civil or criminal violations.

By defining flag burning as constitutionally protected. The Supreme court has usurped the prerogative of the law making bodies and removed it from the public right of petition. (Another form of the restriction of freedom and a clear violation of the constitution).

But I don't have a degree in constitutional law! ;^)

All laws are restrictions of individual freedom and your rights end where mine begin.

That is the place and balance where freedom reigns.

Mr. Beamish the Instablepundit said...


Ducky got a mail order Chinese bride once but sent her back when he asked for 69 and she cooked him beef with broccoli.

Warren said...


You made me spew fresca out my nose!