I simply cannot bother to waste more than a few moments of my life writing something about the pathetic musings of Conor Friedersdorf, Andrew Sullivan or the usual cast of self-determined “intellectuals” determined to continually attack and criticize those on the conservative front lines – folks like Rush, Mark Levin, Sean Hannity and others on the radio, as well as smart conservatives like Andy McCarthy, who has written a great new book: Grand Jihad: How Islam and the Left Sabotage America.
Yesterday, Mr. Friedersdorf wrote a crass and generally dismissive hit piece on Andy’s book (no, I am not going to link to it). McCarthy’s sin, you ask? Apparently that his general critique of the quite obviously (to anyone whose head isn’t up the rear-ends of those who travel the New York and Washington cocktail circuit) weak rhetoric of President Obama and his administration regarding the current war on terror is unfounded and “intellectually negligent.” Uh-huh. As an example, this nimrod bases his critique (again, of a few isolated passages, mind you) on the fact that President Obama, contrary to Andy’s assertions, indeed does use the term “war” even though his administration put out a directive to refer to it otherwise.
Now, for all you ignorant dolts who read RedState and listen to conservative talk radio, do you think Andy actually meant that the president and his minions immediately ceased to use the word “war?” I am pretty sure my Cocker Spaniel is clear how idiotic this assertion is. But even more, the passages Friedersdorf cite demonstrate that Obama tends to use the term “war” not in a call for action or to make clear what is at stake against the forces of evil, generally, but rather typically to lament our involvement or talk about it in a negative context (I inherited this from Bush, the wars cost a lot, etc…)… something I think – but who knows, I could be wrong, all I did was read the WHOLE book – is, uh, what do you call it?… “the point.”
I could go through the remainder of his foolish and ill-conceived post – a post he must have “collaborated” on with Andrew Sullivan, given that Sullivan seems to approvingly link to it on his fun little website (Friedersdorf seems to think Rush and Andy “collaborated” on his book because Rush provided a quote endorsing the book) – but I really just don’t feel like it.
Friedersdorf is not saying Andy wrote a good book, but that he wished maybe Andy had done x or y differently – rather, he wrote a hit piece based on a few short passages – and a rather poor one at that. In other words, he WANTED to attack Andy and conservative talk radio. I have neither the patience nor the desire to spend time worrying too much about back-bencher fools who add no real value to the world – the kind of pansy that Patton (properly) slapped across the head because when there are actual wars to fight against evil, you don’t sit around. You fight.
Count me on Team McCarthy.
Oh… and “epistemic.” There, I said it again. Don’t I feel smart!