My spouse got suckered into buying tickets for a speaker's series. Long story but I almost crapped myself when I saw a fistful of tix to hear Distort DeNewsa on the counter. For some masochistic reason I actually attended just to see if tar and feathers were needed. Or perhaps some wood for the fire around the stake.
I left mollified. Not because he had words of wisdom or was thought provoking; his speech was intellectually lazy and confused. But in the midst of the tangled logic, he actually screwed up and spoke a little truth.
First, he was on best behavior. Our community has very strong liberal elements (1/3 the crowd was silently hostile) and it was clear he was trying to dial back the Ann Coulter elements of his personality. In doing so, he spent his time "jumping randomly from safe spot to safe spot" as one person put it. About 1/3 of his arguments directly opposed another 1/3.
"Bringing Democracy to Iraq is a great and bold plan that puts a third way forward for Muslims". Few minutes later, "Be careful what you wish for. Promoting democracy in the Middle East will like lead to radical islamist victories a la Hamas". So a bold experiment destined to fail?
The remaining third of his speech consisted of Straw Men (I counted about 15 before I got tired), Ad Hominen attacks on the French and "Romance language department at Duke", a couple of questions begged and some lame jokes.
BUT he did pass out a few gems:
- Traditionalist Muslims (anyone not allied with Bin Laden-- the radicals) have a lot in common with fundamentalist American Xtians. The religious belief structure underpinning them is identical and they would like to achieve the same goals (society run to maximize "virtue")
- Invading Iraq was a mistake ----he did try to absolve GWB in half assed fashion-- he did the best he could with what he had blah blah blah.
- We cannot leave Iraq for many many years (compared our situation with post WWII occupation of Japan for 9 years)
- The west cannot afford to allow Iraqi and Iranian mullah led governments to control all that exportable oil. Until we have an alternative, we must continue to try to control the region.
- He all but said the main reason for GW1 was oil. We had critical interests in the region and since Kuwait is better off, we did some good while serving our interests...a D'Souza win-win.
Out-right wingnuttyness:
- We can't lose in Iraq unless we choose to. Since only a small percentage of the 20% Sunni population are resisting us, the Kurds love us better than sex and chocolate, and the Shia want elections so they can exercise majority rule, it's in the bag if we just stay the course.
- Polling is the wrong way to find out how the Iraqis feel about us. The way you learn what a people are feeling is to talk to their elected government. (the one we fund and keep in power).
- Debunked the term "war on terrorism" as terror is just a tactic. Then happily used the term about 50 times.
- Did you know that Frenchmen protested our invasion of Iraq by throwing down their handbags?? (Those faggy frogs ha ha ha I hissed but the wingers laughed louder).
- Promoting freedom for freedom's sake (the liberal position) results in societies social ills -- we create Larry Flynts. Freedom as a means to "virtue" is the correct path. He never got around to describing who gets to define virtue....
- Using foreign policy to protect American self interest is the only rational approach. Since on average we've improved the world, we shouldn't beat ourselves up too much over the South/Central American despots we've supported. --- Pretty cool -- we can average away support for murder.
- It's Jimmy Carter's fault Iran is run by mullahs.
The rest was pretty much run of the mill crap.
I will say DD gives me the same vibe as Tucker Carlson -- a frustrated hall monitor all grown up. I especially liked the off white crepe soled dress shoes under bright white pants. Must have gotten the outfit when they cleaned out at the old folks home. (hey I can do ad hominem too!)