Her, Barbara Streisand, Sean Penn, Alex Baldwin, etc. just need to shut the hell up with their liberal nonsense. I think Penn is an outstanding actor, but his political antics piss me off to no ends. I think they are all stooges. Not to forget, Ann Coulter and other goons in that camp garner about the same amount of respect from me. Having those sides, I am really drawn to independent voting. Both parties have good points of view, but I cannot completely fall into one camp. There are certain core values of each “side” that I can never agree with.
Aside from the Hollywood and talk radio angle of liberal influence, there is something pointed out in Coulter’s article that really stood out from the rest of the stuff because it’s something at the Smithsonian museum(s) in Washington, D.C.—a place to which I hope that a less opinionated and more factual and objective approach was taken in their exhibits.
THOU SHALT NOT COMMIT RELIGION
http://www.anncoulter.com/cgi-local/welcome.cgi
Ok the “NEA-funded performance” items are completely ridiculous. I don’t really know how it’s considered art, but I don’t like my tax money paying for that garbage. I’d rather see $ go into fixing the highway infrastructure or something. But what really stands out is stuff from “Smithsonian exhibit” references. That kind of stuff really stands out to me. I do not like seeing history getting rewritten and presented through the politically correct filter. For example, look at this one…
"For most Americans ... (war with Japan) was a war of vengeance. For most Japanese, it was a war to defend their unique culture against Western imperialism. ... Some have argued that the United States would never have dropped the bomb on the Germans, because Americans were more reluctant to bomb 'white people' than Asians." — Smithsonian exhibit to commemorate the 50th anniversary of VJ Day, later modified due to protests
That is the most narrow minded statement, and completely false. I am glad that protests changed this. Yes the war was in part a war of vengeance. Perl Harbor got attacked and the nation of Japan was the clear aggressor here. “Defending their unique culture” is the biggest load of PC horse shit that I have ever heard. The Japanese culture had been trying to westernize itself since the beginning of the 20th century. They whooped the Russians in a naval battle, and put many resources into becoming an economic power in Asia.
In doing so, they needed oil. Because of their invasion in parts of China to seize its natural resources, the Japanese committed atrocities and killed many Chinese in the process. Search the net for ‘flying tigers’ for more info on that. Anyway, in protest, the United States placed an oil embargo on Imperial Japan. As a result of the strain on resources to feed their war machine, Japan figured an attack on the US pacific fleet in one fell swoop would end the threat of the American navy, hence Perl Harbor. So a war of vengeance is justified, but be sure to include why we were vengeful to begin with…even prior to Dec 7, 1941. Stop making American’s sound like ravenous blood seekers. Stupid liberals.
Now the atom bomb…of course the liberal mindset is going to include race. With the little amount of space available on the plaque, or whatever is part of the exhibit, it has to be race. Definitely include that information in the internment camp exhibit, I saw it, it was really good. But when you consider the atomic bomb, here are a few facts:
1. VE day was way before VJ day, and the Russians were kicking ass in Berlin, there was no real need to use the bomb if we had it fully developed by then. VE day was in May of ’45. The first successful test of the atom bomb was July of ’45. Considering those dates, how the hell can that race statement seriously be taken? Stupid liberals.
2. The potential cost of US lives in an invasion of the Japanese homeland was 1 million casualties. In turn, the Japanese felt the need to go out fighting tooth and nail in event of Americans landing on their islands. They might have been defeated over time, but the Japanese military planned on making every inch of US progress as costly as possible. See the suicide weapons that Japan was developing. Kamikaze mini-subs and rocket planes. Of course we are going to use whatever weapon minimized American casualties. The Japanese mindset behind this was to have a conditional surrender, where we wanted an unconditional one.
3. “For most Japanese, it was a war to defend their unique culture against Western imperialism” – total horse shit. Their emperor, who dictated its will to the people, for the most part (to be fair with the statement quoted) were acquiring as much westernized technology and knowledge as possible so that they could become a world power well before 1941. Much of their culture is oriented around serving the emperor at that time. The Japanese culture is amazing to me, but this was the way it was at that time. The emperor was treated as sort of a living deity, so his will was the will of the people. There was no real defending against Western culture. Defending against western military influence in terms of strategic influence and secure resources for Japan, yes. Western culture, no. Stupid liberal.
4. Another aspect of the bomb was to show the Russians what we could do. Factor in that, with the Japanese determination to kill as many American’s as possible, was included in dropping the bomb. There were MANY factors, but the liberals only factored in race. In addition, more lives were lost…”over 100,000 people were killed in the ensuing firestorm--more casualties than in the atomic bombs dropped on either Hiroshima or Nagasaki” during the napalm bombing of Tokyo (http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0310-34.htm). If that did not lead to surrender because of the total devastation, other and all means to save US lives were used. The Russians were invading Manchuria. In using the bomb, we showed Stalin what we could do and ended the war quickly. Occupation after VE day by the Russians was causing concern for the rest of the allies. That was also included in consideration to drop the bomb. Of course the liberals won’t include that, just the context of race is used.
That’s what pisses me off about liberals. Obstruction of fact and all points of view. The only one they care about. I can definitely appreciate the racial aspects of historical events being used within their context, like in the civil rights exhibits. That is definitely needed to educate people on what black Americans had do suffer through and deal with. I’d say that is something we should never forget or gloss over with a PC brush or filter. Sean Penn and co. are definitely a bunch of nitwits. But they are harmless compared to a Smithsonian historian (or group of) that decides in this little amount of space that they have called an exhibit, they put the most blatant politically correct liberal garbage that they can possibly think of. It’s rewriting little bits here and there of history, expand that to laws, that liberals do that pisses me off. I consider that train of thought to be a virus, a disease, or a mental disorder.
I am not any accredited historian. The facts I looked up were the dates mentioned and the tally of the
