Burnt Orange ReportNews, Politics, and Fun From Deep in the Heart of Texas |
![]() |
August 25, 2004How to be Popular on CampusBy Byron LaMastersThe Reliable Source column of the Washington Post weighs in on what I blogged the other day - the intent by the College Republican National Committee to exploit the 9/11 anniversary to sign up Republicans and bring conservative speakers to campus:
Of course, the other side has rushed to defend the CR's, calling me a hypocrite for condemning the CR's, but not F 9/11. I'm sorry Chris, but that's about the silliest argument I've ever. Chris Elam managed to twist my words, because of my conclusion in my original post:
Apparently, that's hypocritical, because I haven't criticized Michael Moore for doing the same thing. Perhaps, I should have spelled it out for Chris and said:
Ok, so I should have included those two words in the original post, even though I thought that it should have been assumed, given the title (and thrust) of my post, "College Republicans to Exploit 9/11 Anniversary". Hello. If Michael Moore exploits the 9/11 anniversary to increase his book or F 9/11 sales, I think that would be inappropriate. If conservative groups use the anniversary for political purposes, I'll also feel that that is inappropriate. Both the left and the right has appropriately questioned the months and years leading up to 9/11/2001, and the actions by the Bush administration following that day. The left has attacked Bush for his failure to take our security threats seriously before 9/11, and his actions following 9/11 that have made America less safe and secure by dividing America and alienating our allies, whose help we need to fight international terrorism. The right has questioned President Clinton's approach to fighting terrorism, and the Bush campaign has run ads touting Bush's leadership following 9/11. Agree or disagree with it, but it's fair game. However, using the anniversary of 9/11 to advance a partisan political agenda is inappropriate for either side. Posted by Byron LaMasters at August 25, 2004 04:28 PM | TrackBackComments
Byron... I think your argument is silly because I think its hypocritical that the only movie in the last three years to use "9/11" in its title, is a partisan, political flick that sends libs into paroxysms of joy. I'm very curious... Why do you think my argument is silly? You seem awfully dismissive of it just to spend the rest of your post defending yourself... =P I guess I'd feel better if you spelled it out for me. =) Posted by: Chris Elam at August 25, 2004 06:42 PMChris - I'm dismissive of your argument because, uh, you don't really have one. Your post is essentially posting what I wrote, then misinterpreting my point, and then labeling me a hypocrite. Posted by: Byron L at August 25, 2004 06:58 PMYet you write a six paragraph essay in reply to nothing... Sounds reasonable. =) Posted by: Chris Elam at August 25, 2004 09:17 PMWell Chris, I find the idea that College Republicans are exploiting the 9/11 anniversary as quite damning. It says something about the character of an organization that they will exploit the anniversary of a tradgedy for political gain. I would hope that you would join me in condemning the CR's for this shameless exploitation of the 9/11 anniversary. Posted by: Byron L at August 26, 2004 01:00 AMSure... I've got no problem in joining your position that 9/11 should be a great rallying point and time for Americans to unite. That's something we can agree upon! I'm glad that we can find common ground. But... I'm sure you've noticed that I haven't said that I condemn the CR's. Regardless of what I think about the CR's, they have a 1st Amendment right to put whatever they want on their website, join whatever rallies they want, and host any speakers they want. I will not defend them (I have never yet done so on this topic) and I will not condemn them for exercising their free speech. You'll probably assume what side I take, but you'll never know for sure. =) Its analagous to the President condemning 527's but not the Swifties, after John Kerry tried to guilt him into doing so. In fact, since you're so transparently imitating John Kerry's guilt trip against the 1st Amendment, I'm imitating George Bush diplomatic non-condemnation. =) I hope that doesn't irritate you too much. =) Posted by: Chris Elam at August 26, 2004 01:18 AMBecause god knows if you have the legal right to do something like use the anniversary of the violent death of 3000 people as a membership drive booster, then by all means its appropriate and not repugnant. College kids do stupid and insensitive things. It happens. But to dance around the issue at hand useing sophistry and obfuscation, and clearly thinking you're the coolest guy ever for being able to pull of that AMAZING trick, you're just a cretin. I went to 4 funerals in less than 2 weeks in September 2001. I would just love for them to pull this crap at Rutgers. Or better yet NYU. In the end you can force people into being decent human beings and giving a massive tragedy like the reverence it deserves. Some people just weren't raised with a functioning sense of human decency. That someone like that ends up working with Delay really isn't the most shocking thing in the world. Maybe they should try pamphleting cars at local funerals. Hell if its good enough for the national scale then why not bring it local? Fucking ghouls. Posted by: Windowdog at August 26, 2004 11:18 AMNow now... name calling gets us nowhere. Here's a diplomatic solution. Would it be better if they did everything on Sept. 10 or 12? Would that help the situation? Posted by: Chris Elam at August 26, 2004 03:21 PMByron & Windowdog: Chuck, yeah, I think it's in poor taste. Damn Greens... Posted by: Byron L at September 14, 2004 04:28 PMPost a comment
|
|