Printer Friendly
Read Comments
Post a Comment
E. Pluribus Diversity?
· Thursday, November 12, 2009
Government and military officials have issued statements since last week's shooting rampage at Fort Hood, Texas that have nothing to do with the reality of what occurred, what is occurring and what our enemies would still like to have occur all over the United States. Listening to them leads to the conclusion that these people were handed talking points because they are all saying pretty much the same thing; that we shouldn't jump to conclusions, stereotype or give in to paranoia.
As the quote says, "Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you."
Army Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey is a good man and a faithful soldier. That's why it is difficult to believe he wasn't forced to say on the Sunday news programs, "As great a tragedy as this was, it would be a shame if our diversity became a casualty as well." Gen. Casey also spoke of his "concern" that a "backlash" might take place against Muslim soldiers, though there has been little that could reasonably be called a backlash since 9/11.
The alleged shooter, Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, was unimpressed by our diversity. In fact, it may have been diversity that set him off. Hasan and other Muslim extremists don't practice diversity. They mostly practice Sharia law, which backlashes against anyone who won't submit to their fundamentalist view of the world.
The U.S. State Department's Web portal, www.america.gov, provides a perfect example of the problem. The site bills itself as a place to "meet the people" and "explore the values and ideas that define the character of the United States." But when it comes to American Muslim organizations, that often means providing a U.S. government stamp of approval to organizations allegedly linked to the Muslim Brotherhood, such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC).
Why do so many American leaders seem ashamed and apologetic about America? Holding to the view that America is unexceptional and that no idea, policy, belief, or practice is to be preferred over any other is not diversity. Rather, it is thin gruel; unappealing and unappetizing, and it robs us of our strength.
Did diversity build and sustain America through world wars and economic challenges? No, it was a firm set of principles held by patriots of many races who were willing to pay the price in money and blood. These days, we seem to be increasingly confronted with people who are the political equivalent of shoplifters: they want the benefits without paying the price.
If you are unwilling to part with the money you earned while building a business, or a life, to fund a life for others who refused to do so, are you selfish? As a way of punishment, should your hard-earned money be given over to those who didn't earn it?
If you have a particular faith (Christian) you are to be discriminated against and silenced. Your sacred symbols -- from crosses on a desert mountain, to Nativity displays in public places -- are banned. You increasingly are forbidden to pray publicly "in Jesus' name," but Muslims can speak of Allah and Mohammed anywhere they like and who is foolish enough to try to silence them?
Apparently, "diversity" is not for everyone and even if it were, what does it mean? To those who wish to impose it, it seems to mean that no one can any longer speak of truth, or even seek it out, because according to the rules of diversity, there is no objective truth. Thinking so makes you a fundamentalist, unless you are a fundamentalist Muslim, in which case you are to be accommodated, pacified and given special rights -- like ritual footbaths, prayer rooms and prayer times at public schools and universities that would probably be denied and challenged as violations of church-state separation if a Jew or a Christian were to make requests unique to their faiths.
I grow weary of having to tolerate everything when none of those making such demands seem willing to tolerate much of what I believe. Shouldn't diversity be a two-way street instead of a roadblock?
(c) 2009 TRIBUNE MEDIA SERVICES, INC.
Opinion
- William Murchison: Education 'Reform,' From the Top Down
- Mona Charen: Not Just One Terrible Idea, But Two!
- David Limbaugh: Without Firing a Shot?
- Cal Thomas: Private in New Jersey
- Dennis Prager: The Bigger the Government, the Less You Are Needed
- Ken Blackwell: Biden and Art of Doublespeak
- Thomas Sowell: Talking Points vs. Realty
- Debra Saunders: Obama Evokes Fear, Calls for Courage
- Jeff Jacoby: 100 Million 'Missing' Girls
- Michael Barone: Tea Party Brings Energy, Change and Tumult to GOP
- Burt Prelutsky: Straight Talk About Ron Paul and Glenn Beck
- Paul Greenberg: Things I Don't Believe
- George Will: Sis Boom Bah Humbug
- Lawrence Kudlow: Yellen Is Spellin' Future Inflation
- Ken Blackwell: Hail to the Chief Justice
Columnists
- Michael Barone
- Austin Bay
- Ken Blackwell
- Tony Blankley
- L. Brent Bozell
- Mona Charen
- Linda Chavez
- Ann Coulter
- Larry Elder
- Roy Exum
- Edwin J. Feulner
- Suzanne Fields
- Michael Gerson
- Jonah Goldberg
- Paul Greenberg
- Rebecca Hagelin
- Victor Davis Hanson
- Jeff Jacoby
- Terence Jeffrey
- Charles Krauthammer
- Lawrence Kudlow
- David Limbaugh
- Michelle Malkin
- William Murchison
- Peggy Noonan
- Oliver North
- Dennis Prager
- Burt Prelutsky
- Michael Reagan
- Debra Saunders
- Ben Shapiro
- Thomas Sowell
- John Stossel
- Jacob Sullum
- Cal Thomas
- Matt Towery
- R. Emmett Tyrrell
- George Will
- Walter E. Williams
The Patriot is not sustained by any political, special interest or parent organization, and we accept no advertising. Our mission and operations are funded entirely by the voluntary financial support of Patriots like you!
MichaelSSEC
Exactly right. "Diversity" is just a lot of rubbish, a con job, a slick way of bullying special rights for some while snuffing the rights of others.
Liberals set themselves up as the ultimate arbiters of fairness. They decide what's fair. They decide what's unfair. They decide who has been discriminated against, who has been oppressed, who has been censored, who has been victimized. They've decided that Muslims are the victims and the slain soldiers are...what? Liberals make noises that sound like empathy for those murdered, but we can see in their leader -- President Obama -- the total disconnect, the complete lack of outrage that MUST obtain in any decent human being in the wake of the Ft Hood attack.
Oh, Obama has outrage, all right. But it's on behalf of the Muslim victims of this imaginary backlash, not for the real victims. While the Liberals make excuses for Hasan, the rest of us are indeed lashing back: the backlash is REAL. It's the backlash against the insanity of Political Correctness. If there can be any good to come out of the Ft Hood attack, let it be that the horror of that day may serve as the cure for the mental illness of PC movement.
Posted November 12, 2009 at 7:35:59 PM
DC Resident
Obama vs Bush
If George W. Bush had been the first President to need a teleprompter installed to be able to get through a press conference, would you have laughed and said this is more proof of how inept he is on his own and is really controlled by smarter men behind the scenes?
If George W. Bush had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to take Laura Bush to a play in NYC, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had reduced your retirement plan's holdings of GM stock by 90% and given the unions a majority stake in GM, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had made a joke at the expense of the Special Olympics, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had given Gordon Brown a set of inexpensive and incorrectly formatted DVDs, when Gordon Brown had given him a thoughtful and historically significant gift, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had given the Queen of England an iPod containing videos of his speeches, would you have thought this embarrassingly narcissistic and tacky?
If George W. Bush had bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had visited Austria and made reference to the non-existent "Austrian language," would you have brushed it off as a minor slip?
If George W. Bush had filled his cabinet and circle of advisers with people who cannot seem to keep current in their income taxes, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had been so Spanish illiterate as to refer to "Cinco de Cuatro" in front of the Mexican ambassador when it was the 5th of May (Cinco de Mayo), and continued to flub it when he tried again, would you have winced in embarrassment?
If George W. Bush had mis-spelled the word "advice" would you have hammered him for it for years like Dan Quayle and potatoe as proof of what a dunce he is?
If George W. Bush had burned 9,000 gallons of jet fuel to go plant a single tree on Earth Day, would you have concluded he's a hypocrite?
If George W. Bush's administration had okayed Air Force One flying low over millions of people followed by a jet fighter in downtown Manhattan causing widespread panic, would you have wondered whether they actually get what happened on 9-11?
If George W. Bush had failed to send relief aid to flood victims throughout the Midwest with more people killed or made homeless than in New Orleans , would you want it made into a major ongoing political issue with claims of racism and incompetence?
If George W. Bush had created the position of 32 Czars who report directly to him, bypassing the House and Senate on much of what is happening in America , would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had ordered the firing of the CEO of a major corporation, even though he had no constitutional authority to do so, would you have approved?
If George W Bush had proposed to double the national debt, which had taken more than two centuries to accumulate, in one year, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had then proposed to double the debt again within 10 years, would you have approved?
So, tell me again, what is it about Obama that makes him so brilliant and impressive? Can't think of anything? Don't worry. He's done all this in 5 months -- so you'll have three years and seven months to come up with an answer.
Posted November 17, 2009 at 1:10:48 PM