Looking Away

Mark Steyn writes:

Darfur is an apt symbol of early 21st century liberalism: What matters is that you urge action rather than take any. On Iraq, meanwhile, the president declared: "Let us find our resolve, and turn events toward victory." And the Dems sat on their hands.

The American left has long deplored Bush's rhetorical reliance on such vulgar conceits as "good" and "evil." But it seems even "victory" is a problematic concept, and right now the momentum is all for defeat of one kind or another. ...Last year Arthur M. Sulzberger Jr., publisher of the New York Times, gave a commencement address of almost parodic boomer narcissism, hailing his own generation for their anti-war idealism. ...As it happens, millions died in Vietnam and Cambodia (after our departure). And the least the self-absorbed poseurs like Sulzberger could do is occasionally remember that the world is about more than their moral vanity.

Seventy years ago, Britain and Europe could not rouse themselves to focus on a looming war; today, we can't rouse ourselves even to focus on a war that's happening right now. Read 100 percent of the Democratic presidential candidates' platforms and a sizeable chunk of the Republicans': We're full of pseudo-energy for phantom crises and ersatz enemies, like "global warming.''

http://www.suntimes.com/news/steyn/231882,CST-EDT-steyn28.article

When asked what might cause Democrats to stop playing politics and start fighting the war on terror, Rush Limbaugh said, "about two or three more attacks."

But there is a simpler calculation: The Democrats will support the war on terror when the polls suggest their support would be poltically expedient.

"Deafening silence," "cruel kindness," and other oxymorons must make room for "Democrat Leadership."