Smack of the day

First, some background:

Here's flimsy Lindsey Graham on Face the Nation being asked about the Koran-burning incident down in Florida and the resulting freak-out around the Muslim world that included 12 people being killed at the U.N. embassy in Afghanistan.

(skip ahead to the 2:05 mark)

"I wish we could find some way to hold people accountable. Free speech is a great idea but we're in a war."

Graham gives no operational definition for "accountable" because the 1st amendment pretty much makes that impossible and Graham knows it.

Graham continues:

"Free speech is a great idea but we're in a war."

Yeah, bummer about that "war", huh? Do those Afghan Muslims over there not freak-out and go on a killing rampage if we weren't at war?

And finally:

"During WWII you had limits on what you could say if it would inspire the enemy."

Wait. Does Lindsey mean to tell us that the Japanese and Germans were really going to get their hackles up if we portrayed them in a negative light? Go to this link and see if there is anything there that was printed back during World War II that could've been considered mildly offensive to Americans of Japanese descent.

Oh, but for the actual smack, we give you the incomparable Mark Steyn:

A mob of deranged ululating blood-lusting head-hackers slaughter Norwegian female aid-workers and Nepalese guards — and we’re the ones with the problem?

I agree with the Instaprof: Lindsey Graham is unfit for office. The good news is there’s no need for the excitable lads of Mazar e-Sharif to chop his head off because he’s already walking around with nothing up there. And, as for his halfwitted analogy with World War II, he’s too ignorant to realize it but he’s singing the dhimmi remake of an ancient Noel Coward satire.

Claire Berlinski has it right: The real “racists” here are not this no-name pastor and his minimal flock but Reid, Graham, and the Times — for they assume that a significant proportion of Muslims are not responsible human beings but animals no more capable of rational behavior than the tiger who mauled Siegfried’s Roy. If that is true, certain consequences follow therefrom. The abandonment of the First Amendment is not one of them.

That's a great point. The soft bigotry of low expectations somewhat excuses the bad acting of these people and lays this "accountability" crap at the feet of some wing-nut preacher in Florida.

And it's not just some nitwit Senators who are guilty of this as this soft bigotry has been institutionalized as evidence by the actions of our very own Justice Department in a municipal voting case in Kinston, North Carolina where it was determined that black voters absolutely had to know who the Democratic candidates were and another municipal voting case in Port Chester, NY, where the tried, true and democratic concept of one man - one vote was thrown out to ensure that at least some Hispanics would be elected to city council.

And you didn't think we could work in that miserable hack that runs the Justice Department into a post about murderous Muslims in such a seamless manner now did you?



We leave you tonight with a short little anecdote regarding competing customs and cultures as it relates to our friends overseas:

Gen. Sir Charles Napier in India explaining to the locals his position on suttee — the tradition of burning widows on the funeral pyres of their husbands. General Napier was impeccably multicultural:

You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows.You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours.