The Voyeur of Violence

David Horowitz either has lost his mind or (along with Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin and the like) has been instructed to ratchet up the rhetoric against the left. Frankly, I don’t know which.

Before I go into his latest blog posting, let me remind you that one of Horowitz’s books is called The Art of Political War and Other Radical Pursuits. This is a man who loves the idea that what he does is “war” (as long as it puts him in no danger), and has felt that way all his life. Like many on the right, he’s a voyeur of violence. So, when an administration mired in low poll numbers, panicked about the upcoming election needs to turn to its attack dogs, he’s one pawing at the door of the kennel, anxious to get at ‘em—as long as they can’t “really” hit back.

Which brings me to “David’s Blog”.

This man who advocates “war” as an “art” of politics is now attacking the left for being at “war” with America! It’s part of this nutty campaign against The New York Times, a war that has moved from the front page to the travel section, with the wingnuts saying that The Times is deliberately pointing Cheney’s house and Rumsfeld’s house so that terrorists can attack them. Here’s what DaHo says about that:

In an apparent retaliation for criticism of its disclosure of classified intelligence to America’s enemies, the New York Times June 30th edition has printed huge color photos of the vacation residences of Vice President Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, identifying the small Maryland town where they live, showing the front driveway and in Rumsfeld’s case actually pointing out the hidden security camera in case any hostile intruders should get careless.

The blog gets curiouser and curiouser, however, after that, when Horowitz begins to conflate his metaphorical “war” with real “war”—and quite deliberately:

Make no mistake about it, there is a war going on in this country. The aggressors in this war are Democrats, liberals and leftists who began a scorched earth campaign against President Bush before the initiation of hostilities in Iraq. The initiators of this war were Al Gore and Jimmy Carter who attacked the president’s attempt to rally the world against Saddam’s defiance of international law….

Of course, if Horowitz were anywhere near right, all Gore and Carter would have been doing was following Horowitz’s own prescription for politics. But that, I guess, is completely irrelevant. DaHo goes on:

The campaign began in earnest with Nancy Pelosi’s attack on the liberation of Iraq as “too costly” on April 13, 2003, the day American troops pulled down Saddam’s statue and was raised to the level of political sabotage of our troops in Iraq and America’s war on terror when a Democratic chorus began hammering the commander-in-chief as a “liar” over the 16 words about Saddam’s effort to purchase fissionable uranium in Niger.

What was it Orwell wrote about black-is-white? People trying to stop a war are being accused of going to war by doing so?

This has gotten out of hand. Horowitz and others are listing the addresses of Times people on the Internet (or are advocating doing that). What they are doing is what they are (quite unfairly) accusing the Times of doing, and it shows a lust for lynching that I thought even the wingnuts had grown beyond.

Our Democratic “leaders” should be the sheriffs standing at the door making sure the lynchings don’t happen. But they don’t seem willing to do anything. They don’t even seem willing simply to stand up to these people and call them on their un-American nonsense.

So it’s time we find new leaders who can.

In the meantime, we’ll just have to keep doing it ourselves

Advertisements