The Audacity of Irony by By Victor Davis Hanson

[Maggie]

I hate to keep posting articles by the same author but Hanson, in my judgment, is on a roll. Comments?

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MWQyZmJkMjFiYTI1MmYyYjUwMDgwNDBkMzc0OTViYmY=

[RoyalShock]

Re: The Audacity of Irony by By Victor Davis Hanson

I hate to keep posting articles by the same author but Hanson, in my judgment, is on a roll. Comments?

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q...BkMzc0OTViYmY=

I'm by no means an Obama supporter (everyone here knows I'm a conservative), but this raised a major red-flag for me:

Only a fool would suggest that these homeland-security efforts were unnecessary, or that, in unprecedented fashion, they shredded the Constitution.

Levying ad-hominem attacks on anyone who opposed any part of the Patriot Act is the same spirit as the fear-mongering that got the act passed with mere minutes for review (which he conveniently doesn't mention). That gets a pass, but Obama giving the public a few hours to evaluate the stimulus bill doesn't. I find that highly hypocritical.

While I oppose the stimulus, you can't really compare the timeframes of going to war with a country that wasn't an immediate direct threat with trying to "save" a faltering economy. Apples and oranges in my view.

Having said that. I do agree that there is irony (and hypocrisy) in Obama criticizing tactics he's now using himself. But I think the author is wrong for not recognizing that those tactics were indeed used by the Bush Administration and not just baseless accusations by the left.

I also agree that corruption exists on both sides but seems to be more rampant and audacious among the left.

[JohnnieBallgame]

I think he nailed it!

Royal, I admire your ability to disagree without being disagreeable. Many conservatives are simply fed up with being continually smeared by a left leaning media, and are starting to fight back.

I have found myself building steam and hoping for revolution of some type because I am tired of being minimalized as a result of my religous/moral beliefs. With that being said, somethings are worth fighting for.

Often to put out a fire, it is necessary to set a back fire...I think this is what Hansen is doing.

[Maggie]

Re: The Audacity of Irony by By Victor Davis Hanson

I hate to keep posting articles by the same author but Hanson, in my judgment, is on a roll. Comments?

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q...BkMzc0OTViYmY=

I'm by no means an Obama supporter (everyone here knows I'm a conservative), but this raised a major red-flag for me:

Only a fool would suggest that these homeland-security efforts were unnecessary, or that, in unprecedented fashion, they shredded the Constitution.

Levying ad-hominem attacks on anyone who opposed any part of the Patriot Act is the same spirit as the fear-mongering that got the act passed with mere minutes for review (which he conveniently doesn't mention). That gets a pass, but Obama giving the public a few hours to evaluate the stimulus bill doesn't. I find that highly hypocritical.

While I oppose the stimulus, you can't really compare the timeframes of going to war with a country that wasn't an immediate direct threat with trying to "save" a faltering economy. Apples and oranges in my view.

Having said that. I do agree that there is irony (and hypocrisy) in Obama criticizing tactics he's now using himself. But I think the author is wrong for not recognizing that those tactics were indeed used by the Bush Administration and not just baseless accusations by the left.

I also agree that corruption exists on both sides but seems to be more rampant and audacious among the left.

Royal,

I don’t remember how much debate there was over the Patriot Act (which was only one security measure put in place by the Bush Administration) but it did have far more bipartisan support than the so called stimulus package (and we have, in fact, had a very lively public debate for the past several years regarding its constitutionality). Furthermore, its content was not hidden from the American people or the opposition party in the Legislative Branch. I think that is part of the larger point Hanson is trying to make - candidate Obama vs. President Obama.

As an aside, many of the security measures put into place after 9/11 (nearly all of which were condemned by candidate Obama) were not “unprecedented” in our nation’s history and, as President Obama has no doubt come to find, quite useful. It is easy to pass judgment on someone when you don’t have the ultimate responsibility for the actions you see fit to criticize.

With regard to Hanson comparing the build up to the invasion of Iraq to the passage of the stimulus bill – I do think the analogy is fairly solid. While the lives of American soldiers are without doubt more important than any economic considerations – the current economic situation our country now faces is indeed dire. The real reason the full content (the final draft) of this bill was not disclosed the public is very simple – I don’t think it would have garnered the necessary support.

Besides it is the antithesis of everything candidate Obama preached on the stump. It received virtually no bipartisan support, in part, because the Republican Party was not allowed to have any substantive input. It seems to me that when President Obama (and the Democratic Congress in general) talks of bipartisanship and “working with Republicans” what that really means is as follows: I will try to persuade you that I am right and you are wrong. If you can be persuaded to agree with me, fine. If not, I am going to do what I want to do anyway – without your input (which, between you and me, I was not really interested in to begin with). That is not "working with the opposition" and it is not bipartisanship.

All of this is ironic, I suppose.