"Completely smugly and to the utter annoyance of my critics"

"A bellwether is any entity in a given arena that serves to create or influence trends or to presage future happenings. The term is derived from the Middle English bellewether and refers to the practice of placing a bell around the neck of a castrated ram (a wether) in order that this animal might lead its flock of sheep," according to Wikipedia. Egad. Castrated rams leading flocks of sheep. Could there be a more perfect metaphor for the MSM shaping the "opinions" of the clueless among us? (Pictures of Spain photo)

We "heart" Cardinal Park, who co-blogs at TigerHawk. His words speak for themselves and make our heart sing:

I have held rather tenaciously to the view that the war in Iraq was 1) well chosen; 2) noble; 3) well fought and 4) won.

That has elicited some wonderfully amusing and sometimes nasty criticism, primarily from the left. I happen to believe -- completely smugly and to the utter annoyance of my critics -- that they will eventually come around. I draw the historical parallel to the Reagan administration's diplomatic approach to the Soviet Union and its abandonment of the language of detente, which was detested by and critiqued aggressively by the left and which today is almost universally acknowledged by left and right as responsible for the collapse of the USSR . . .

Eventually, the left must come to embrace what we are doing and achieving in the Middle East. Defeating tyranny and genocide is the raison d'etre of liberalism, is it not?

Yah. That's what's kept us keeping on during these long days and weeks and months and now years of "polls" taking the "pulse" of our fellow citizens. What is the citizenry's cotton-candy "opinion" made of other than the relentless anti-American, anti-Bush, anti-war gloom-and-doom spoutings of the navel-gazing media itself? Where else do Americans get their "news"? Fortunately, some of us get our news and sometimes report our news via the internet, but it seems the majority of the mushy middle are still answering the call of the bellwethers [castrated rams] of the MSM.

Update: Welcome, Instapundit readers!

Comments

[goomp]

As they say it is never too late to learn. Sixty-five years ago I raised sheep, but it is only today that I learned the origin of the term bellwether. A great term for many leftist leaders. I believe that the liberal delusions come from a refusal to accept that humans like all animals have a nature. Part of human nature is that unless living under a system of reward for good and punishment for evil, the evil will dominate. Given dictatorial power the evil side of human nature comes to the fore and freedom to disagree is extinguished.

[sol]

the war is a disaster, there's no way around it

you will be remembered as fools for supporting it

[bo ure]

Excellent post.

[fng]

Hey there sol, how they hanging, or not?

[dailypundit]

the war is a disaster, there's no way around it

You are a boob, there's no way around it.

My statement is as likely to be true as yours, given that both offer no supportive evidence to back it up. Well, that's not quite true. I offer as evidence for my statement, yours.

[Shannon Love]

I think we can use the Lefts position on the Vietnam war as gauge of how likely they are to be correct on Iraq. While they won the political debate on Vietnam and abandoned the people there to their horrible fate, 30 years hindsight and opening of the Soviet archives have shown that not a single assertion or prediction that the Left made about the nature of the war of the "peace" they engineered has stood the test of time.

In short, they got everything wrong.

Yet the same people, using the same intellectual methodology, now claim that they understand the true pretext for the Iraq war, the actual state of Iraq and have a quick and easy solution for it. Given their track record in such matters. why should anyone trust them?

Just as educated people look back at the pro-communist victory movement of the vietnam era and ask how they could have been so misguided, 30 years from now we will be looking back at the current anti-liberation movement and asking how they could possibly got everything so wrong.

[RebeccaH]

What a great post. We can all dismiss Sol's sour snipe completely smugly, and to his utter annoyance.

[nate zuckerman]

1.stop the name calling--in comments and in post.
2. history and not the present will tell
3. It is just plain wrong to state that the Left ended the Viet Nam war...America tired of the senseless deaths there and brought about the change. To blame the Left for what America choose is scapegoating and obvious.
4. and now for all the bloggers who want Others to kill and be illed but stay here to urge them on and write about it, read this
http://www.texasobserver.org/article.php?aid=2440

[Sissy Willis]

Don't forget, Nate: Those who don't study history . . .

[Robert Crawford]

It is just plain wrong to state that the Left ended the Viet Nam war...America tired of the senseless deaths there and brought about the change. To blame the Left for what America choose is scapegoating and obvious.

It's "obvious" because it's not only true, it's openly bragged about by the Left. Their attempts to deflect blame for the aftermath, which they were warned about ahead of time, should not be accepted.

[mshyde]

The sheeple who were led in the viet nam
era protests, were slickly developed, and
led by communists who in turn were puppet
controlled from the now extinct USSR.
That is history. And it all falls into the
laps of the Left.
Be as it may, the same venue is now being attempted again by the same hoary ex hippy
communists still puppet controlled by the
up and coming new ussr.
The consequences are when places of
economic freedom are finally destroyed
the parasitic totalitarian countries will
implode because their hosts are gone.

[Tara]

Excellent post, Sissy.

Time and time again, the Left chooses dishonor over liberty.

[Shannon Love]

nate zuckerman,

It is just plain wrong to state that the Left ended the Vietnam war.

The Left's ability to pull 1984-esqe rewrites of history never ceases to amaze me.

The American people may have decided to abandon Indochina to the communists but they did so based on the recommendations of American Leftists. Leftists gained unprecedented power in early 70's due to their monopoly control of media and academia. From this privileged position they evangelized their faulty model of the conflict. Given only one side of the story, Americans chose the solution that Leftists advanced.

Even if the Left had not won the debate and had their policy recommendations implemented, they would have been just as wrong. That is what happened to them in the early 80's.

No matter how much you squirm, when you argue for a certain political policy and then the people implement that policy, you are responsible for the outcome. More to the point of this thread, people in the future have the right to look back and evaluate your models and predictions against the actual outcomes.

Leftists got everything wrong about Vietnam. They misunderstood the players, the goals and the consequences. There is no reason to suspect that their understanding of Iraq is any better.

[Billll]

" Part of human nature is that unless living under a system of reward for good and punishment for evil, the evil will dominate."

A progressive taxation system penalizes good and rewards evil. Enough to keep evil on its feet as a political movement.

[Phil-Z]

Hey Nate, Sol, and whatever other sock-puppet ID you wish to assume - I'm too old to be a fireman, so by your "reasoning" I shouldn't call the fire department if my house catches fire, I should just let it burn? Should I not speak out against evil unless I can take an axe to it myself? Do you not believe in civilian control of the military?

[Sissy Willis]

By the way, Tara . . . Thanks for your ongoing series of wonderful comments. I look forward to them ALMOST as much as I do Goomp's. :-)

[nofixedabode]

We forget that the left got us into Vietnam in the first place. From Kennedy's "advisors" to Johnson's full blow war, Vietnam was a "liberal" war in fullest sense of the word: It was evident early on that Johnson had no intention of fighting to win, he micromanaged the war from the oval office, and refused to allow the troops to do their jobs. If we weren't there to win, what the hell we were we there for? That, ultimately, was the question that turned middle-America against the war.
But the lib's only became anti-war when the draft became an issue on the College campuses. And even then, only for the students (at first). The draft wasn't a problem when it was only the working class boys getting drafted.
Anti-war became the official liberal stance when Nixon became President. Although he ran on a platform of ending the war, Nixon became the left's symbol of war and everything evil. Nixon was ultimate politician, but never conservative. He is credited with the concept of "move right for the nomination, move left for the general election". Yes, he was a rabid anti-Communist (as was Kennedy), but he was a true big-government wonk. No true conservative would have used price controls, devalued the currency, or unleashed Kissenger. After he disgraced himself, the liberals declared victory. The mantra became "the hippies were right", and numerous myths began to grow about the power of the left and the anti-war movement. Mostly BS.
The true end of Vietnam came when Congressional Democrats under the Ford Presidency reneged on our obligations to the South Vietnamese Government, causing it's collapse. One of the most shameful episodes of our history. An disgrace which Liberals are proud of to this day.

[ergo]

Don't scapegoat the bellwether.

[M. Simon]

For our liberal friends. The Genocide question.

In 1975 I was an anti-war liberal. I have the deaths of 2 1/2 million on my conscience.

Which is why I'm a Republican these days.

Had the left acknowledged the disaster and said "never again" I'd still be a lefty.

[Hogarth]

the war is a disaster, there's no way around it

you will be remembered as fools for supporting it

You know, I could live with that. What I couldn't have lived with was being remembered as a cowardly tool that stood by while a two-bit dictator thumbed his prominent nose at us in front of a global audience, nor would I want to be remembered as a selfish, self-centric 'protestor' that betrayed those that volunteered to defend our way of life at great personal cost while standing safely on the sidelines rooting for their defeat.