Posted On: Friday - August 27th 2021 10:40AM MST
In Topics:   Pundits  The Neocons  World Political Stupidity
It happens. You can agree with 98% of the writing or speech of some pundit, politician, even friend, but occasionally stuff that you just plain can't agree with comes out. How can they be like that, you wonder. Ann Coulter has been Peak Stupidity's #1 literary pundit for a long time. It's not just her opinions but her writing style and humor that put her at numero uno.
I would say I agree with 98% of what she writes. I have disagreed on her about the pot (a minor issue, IMO) and about her support for Affirmative Action. The latter stance is not libertarian. It's not conservative. In this day and age, after 1/2 a century of proscribed discrimination against the White Man, not to mention that the shit hasn't helped matters, that stance is plain stupid. Like I wrote though, there's that 98%.
Therefore, while reading what started off and ended as another good common-sense column that any real Conservative, Libertarian, Constitutionalist, and alt-righters, even, would agree with, I came across a Neocon flashback from Miss Coulter. In her latest column, Teaching Psycho Flintstones About Women’s Equality Didn't Work. (Duh!), there's this one small paragraph in the middle:
I was, and remain, more pro-Afghanistan war and Iraq war than Donald Rumsfeld, but not so we could hang out for 20 years and teach them to respect transgenders.Please note that I kept the link there that either Miss Coulter or VDare had included, pointing to her column on the TownHall site from September 14th, 2001. Yes, it's important to first read her writing from 3 days after the NYC attack. I have a memory of Miss Coulter being a Neocon but forgave her for that emotional writing during that time.
I ask the reader to click that link, because it's not all Neocon vitriol. There's a lot of great libertarian writing about the airport security stupidity. I didn't mean to write a long post here, but.. anyway, here:
"All of our lives" don't need to change, as they keep prattling on TV. Every single time there is a terrorist attack -- or a plane crashes because of pilot error -- Americans allow their rights to be contracted for no purpose whatsoever.Great stuff! Now, I read further, and I got to part I specifically remember, 20 years later! You may too:
The airport kabuki theater of magnetometers, asinine questions about whether passengers "packed their own bags," and the hostile, lumpen mesomorphs ripping open our luggage somehow allowed over a dozen armed hijackers to board four American planes almost simultaneously on Bloody Tuesday. (Did those fabulous security procedures stop a single hijacker anyplace in America that day?)
Airports scrupulously apply the same laughably ineffective airport harassment to Suzy Chapstick as to Muslim hijackers. It is preposterous to assume every passenger is a potential crazed homicidal maniac. We know who the homicidal maniacs are. They are the ones cheering and dancing right now.
We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's war. And this is war.That was pure emotion, that's all. People read it though. Perhaps the Neocons took great advantage of that.
The 2nd clause in that one sentence paragraph in her recent column has Miss Coulter's point that the wars were OK, but only to punish people and get out. Well, I'll write more with my view of the purpose of the Afghanistan war in another post. Regarding Iraq though, does Miss Coulter just not want to admit she was wrong? Lots of people have. I'd forgive her. Does she still see some purpose for America having waged war on a country that had nothing whatsoever to do with the attack, even as alleged?*
Steve Sailer had a recent post in which he excerpted his writing from a blog post written at the time of the build-up to Iraq War II and the Afghan war.. I give him a lot of credit for his anti-war position back then. As I wrote on that thread, I also saw no rhyme or reason for the Iraq war. However, I remember now that 20 years ago I still had a small amount of respect for these high-up policy makers. My thoughts leaned toward "maybe they know something we don't and can't divulge it... for reasons." I now know that they have plenty of reasons not to tell us their intentions, but it's not because they know better than us.
* Peak Stupidity will publish a post on why we don't argue about 9/11 on 9/11, this year.