By Charles M. Spear Venice
In the general claptrap of the guest commentary by Charlotte Hays, one inanity stands out above the rest. Ms. Hays, discussing the inapplicability of the
In reading the column, I was reminded of something I heard Dennis Prager say the other day on his syndicated radio show. He said, in essence, that the Liberal agenda is to get you to fear global warming while the Conservative agenda is to get you to fear terrorism. Prager was preaching to his converted conservative audience, and undoubtedly that audience found the classic Prager “clarity” in the choice. But I heard it another way. “Yes,” I thought to myself, the Administration has an agenda, and it is to conjure fear of terrorism – ceasing to exist as a society. So, how rational is this fear that terrorism is an existential threat?
On many occasions I have heard our President say that if we do not fight the terrorists in Iraq we will have to fight them here. But does this stand rational testing, this idea that ordinary citizens will be manning the barricades in Des Moines and Mobile, Chicago, Detroit, Los Angeles, everywhere, going hand to hand with the onrushing terrorists? Ridiculous, but probably not to Ms. Hays, who believes that the alternative to “robust questioning” might be the very end of our existence.
“Let’s remember how many died for this country and honor them,” Ms. Hays concludes her commentary. If, as rational thought suggests, the discontented multitudes do not together comprise “terror” upon which war must be waged, then what honor do we bestow on those who have died by sending more to their deaths?
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on July 9, 2007. Read the original PDF.