{"id":5721,"date":"2006-01-07T18:07:25","date_gmt":"2006-01-08T01:07:25","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/proteinwisdom.com\/?p=5721"},"modified":"2006-01-07T18:07:25","modified_gmt":"2006-01-08T01:07:25","slug":"we-love-the-troops-but-its-a-tough-love-144-updated","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/proteinwisdom.com\/?p=5721","title":{"rendered":"We love the troops; but it’s a tough love (#144) – UPDATED"},"content":{"rendered":"

[extended reply to the Left Coasters here<\/a> – ed]\n<\/p>\n

\nFrom Jim Geraghty at TKS<\/a> (via Allah):<\/p>\n

\n

Reaction at the liberal blog, The Left Coaster<\/a>, to the latest message from al-Qaeda’s number two, Ayman al-Zawahiri:\n<\/p>\n

\nI have to admit it is fun to see Al Qaeda play Bush like a violin<\/a>.<\/tt><\/p>\n

Revealing.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\nLeft Coaster also discusses the NYT<\/a> body armor story, addressed here <\/a>by Conferederate Yankee, as well as the relative dearth in new jobs created in December (an interesting spin for an unemployment rate that fell below 5%<\/a>).  But be that as it may.\n<\/p>\n

\nWhat I find most telling about posts such as Left Coaster’s (in addition to the affected tone of smug resignation directed at “obvious” errors made by those who it is fair to assume understand foreign policy and the mechanics of waging war quite a bit better than anti-war pundits) is that they are almost invariably circular in nature and pinned to “realities” that they have been at great odds to help “create” and propagate. \n<\/p>\n

\nPerception, to those like Left Coaster, is<\/i> reality—but perception itself is driven largely by a rhetorical campaign carried out by many in the legacy media, by virtually every major player in the modern Democratic caucus, and by apparatchiks like Left Coaster himself.  Time and again we see those like Left Coaster or Kos or others pushing polls<\/a> as objective proof of their own assertions, even as they unabashedly cheerlead for their fellow travelers to actively participate in (and, in some notorious <\/a>cases<\/a>, overparticipate) those very same online polls.  The result being that they then tout those polls as proof that “the public” overwhelmingly supports their position.\n<\/p>\n

\nMore scientific polls present a different and more complex set of problems (including Democrats often<\/a> being overdetermined among the respondents<\/a>), but thus far have shown nothing too suprising—they tend to break down along partisan lines, with Democrats and left-liberals polling virtually in lockstep against the President, while some conservatives upset about the border issue, or with over-spending, will break from the GOP for purposes of being polled (the paleocons who disapprove of Bush, and the Lieberman Dems who approve of the President, cancel each other out).  Hence, you see in a nation roughly divided, the President moving between 42-47% approval—though several percentage points that militate against the President’s approval rating are unavailable to Democrats in any election (the best they can hope for being a strong, right-leaning third party candidate to pull those votes from Republicans, or that certain social cons or right-leaning libertarians decide to stay home on election day to protest some “compassionate conservative” program or other).\n<\/p>\n

\nThese polls are further skewed on important issues by the general tenor and message of the high-circulation meda when it comes to their framing of stories<\/a>; Iraq, for instance, has been portrayed almost universally as a minor mess and, at its worst, a complete and unrecoverable quagmire”—with negative stories and coalition deaths overrepresented by an enormous ratio when compared to coverage of the less sexy and slow moving positive news coming out of the region (positive news that has been covered extensively by Michael Yon<\/a>, or Austin Bay<\/a>, or Bill Roggio<\/a>, or Arthur Chrenkoff<\/a>, and Mudville Gazette<\/a>, among other non-traditional outlets).\n<\/p>\n

\nOnly recently, in fact, the problem with polling as indicative of nothing more than rhetorically-driven and partisan-finessed “truth”—of a manufactured perception trumping empirical reality—was clearly illustrated in the competing polls over the NSA “domestic spying” non-story:  The Rasmussen poll<\/a> (discussed at some length here<\/a>) vs. the Zogby poll<\/a>, which added an interesting twist (one that Zogby, to his credit, acknowledged):<\/p>\n

\n

The inclusion of the president in the question appears key, says John Zogby, the pollster. When Bush becomes part of the equation in polling, political polarization comes to the fore. \u00c3\u00a2\u00e2\u201a\u00ac\u00c5\u201cSince the president is at the core of the issue, we felt it legitimated the question by putting his name in there,\u00c3\u00a2\u00e2\u201a\u00ac\u00c2\u009d Mr. Zogby says.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\nIn the Zogby poll—where the President was specifically named<\/i>, the electorate was split; in the Rasmussen poll, which more properly dealt with powers granted the office of the Presidency<\/i>—which is what the question really should<\/i> be, the poll numbers shifted dramatically in favor of the Executive branch—as clear an indication as possible that partisan politics is playing a dramatic role even in questions of our national security.\n<\/p>\n

\nThen today, we find that Left Coaster actually enjoys <\/i>that the US Commander in Chief in a time of war is supposedly being “played like a violin” by al Qaeda—that those who have vowed to kill us and who slaughter civilians on a whim have supposedly outmaneuvered the President and the military in Iraq, the proof being that Zawahiri appears to be following the Democratic-narrative that any withdraw of troops should be seen as a defeat for the US, an acknowledgment that we are losing the war, and are so succumbing to pressure both from the insurgents and the Democratic party leadership (who, on this particular issue, seem to be on the very same page).\n<\/p>\n

\nOf course, this is a rhetorical ploy—another instance of an attempt to have perception trump reality—as the Democrat leadership (led by their military hero poster child, Jack Murtha<\/a>) rushed around in advance<\/a> of the latest elections (and in anticipation of the likely strong voter turnout) demanding a draw down of US troops on the patently false assertion that the war in Iraq was being lost, even while they knew such a draw down was inevitable (strength<\/i>”>and was tied to a position of strength<\/i><\/a>, and to conditions on the ground, rather than some arbitrary time table).\n<\/p>\n

\nAnd now that al Qaeda’s number two has adopted their talking points, hyperpartisan anti-war advocates like Left Coaster pretend to prescience <\/i>rather than soft complicity<\/i> (of the kind long assigned to useful idiots); that is, they use Zawahiri’s public parroting of their very own cynical propagandistic talking points as proof that they were right all along.  The perception they and their media enablers helped to create has become “reality” simply by way of corroboration and adoption.\n<\/p>\n

\nThis is postmodern moment—where reality is granted to those who control the dominant narrative<\/a> and assert its truthfulness.  That such can be done purposely and cynically—and with full knowledge that the narrative is manufactured to persuade rather than to inform—is simply part of the game.\n<\/p>\n

\nWhich is why it is imperative that those of us who are concerned that epistemology not simply become a playground for those with the biggest bullhorn and a philosophy that unabashedly adopts a strategy<\/a> whereby the ends justify the means, must consistently and painstakingly point out the rhetorical gambits and animating power structures that drives what orchestrated oppo research<\/a> hopes will become ossified narratives—“contingent truths”—which increase in power over time and with pedagogical canonization, airbrushing of inconvenient counterclaims, and repetition.\n<\/p>\n

\n****
\n
\nupdate<\/i><\/b>:  Jane Hamsher fires back<\/a> with a post titled, “Jeff Goldstein Better Make Damn Sure He Wants To Get Into a Right\/Left Wackjob Posting Contest”, which post consists of a graphic of the Flight 93 Memorial design done up as a Red Crescent—the suggestion being…well, who knows<\/i>, exactly?  Is Hamsher implying that those who thought the controversial Flight 93 Memorial design bore too close a resemblance to an Islamic crescent (a conclusion at least some of them based on the design’s original title and the designer’s public proclamations and political leanings) are somehow of a piece with those who take admitted joy in the possibility that al Qaeda’s number two may be getting over on Chimpy McHitlerburton by closely parrotting the talking points of Murtha, Dean, Reid, Kennedy, and Pelosi—or by following the foreign policy advice of Kos or Cindy Sheehan?  Or is she saying Steve Soto is some fringe <\/a>”Left Wackjob”?\n<\/p>\n

\nEither way, I’m not saying Zawahiri’s meta-ironic transnational wink isn’t an absolute scream<\/i> to those with the proper mindset.  Just that, well—I’m not sure I see the connection to the Memorial<\/i>, is all. \n<\/p>\n

\nHowever, I will <\/i>remind readers of my own take on the Flight 93 Memorial, which can be found here <\/a>and here <\/a>(discussions continue on throughout the comments).\n<\/p>\n

\nOf course, as one commenter over at Hamsher’s site noted when I pointed out my earlier posts: “too much grad school.” Seems “nuance” and “intellectualism” are only permitted when they are introduced into the discussion by our blue state betters; otherwise, it’s mere bourgeois posturing—a strained affectation to be dismissed without so much as a second thought, much like “progressive” humanists dismiss the white trash blue collar laborors they pretend to champion at the precise moment that white trash blue collar laboror has the temerity to walk out of book on sociology or economic theory and into one of their salons in his mudcaked Timberlands and a pair of dirty Carhart overalls.\n<\/p>\n

\nAfter all, ideology is one thing.  But please<\/i>.  That smell!<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

[extended reply to the Left Coasters here – ed] From Jim Geraghty at TKS (via Allah): Reaction at the liberal blog, The Left Coaster, to the latest message from al-Qaeda’s number two, Ayman al-Zawahiri: I have to admit it is fun to see Al Qaeda play Bush like a violin. Revealing. Left Coaster also discusses the NYT body armor story, addressed here by Conferederate Yankee, as well as the relative<\/p>\n

Read More<\/a><\/div>\n","protected":false},"author":9196393,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5721","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/proteinwisdom.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5721","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/proteinwisdom.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/proteinwisdom.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/proteinwisdom.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/9196393"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/proteinwisdom.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=5721"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/proteinwisdom.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5721\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/proteinwisdom.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=5721"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/proteinwisdom.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=5721"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/proteinwisdom.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=5721"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}