Posts
I have no respect for Harry Reid as a Senator or Majority Leader. That said, I hold no animus towards him as a person and, even if I did, my heart would still go out to he and his family following a horrible traffic accident yesterday that left his wife of 41 years, Landra Reid, with a broken back and neck. I could see no one of normal human emotions responding to this news on either side of the political aisle with anything other than expressions of heartfelt sympathy and best wishes.
Dan Riehl is a conservative blogger I have followed for some time. His post today on the situation with Harry Reid and Reid's wife, Isn't It Time To Euthanize Reid's Wife?, makes among its points that "[i]t sounds to me like [Landra Reid's] pretty well used up and has probably been living off the taxpayers for plenty of years to begin with." It is utterly vile, despicable and beyond excuse. Riehl does not have the judgement to understand that there are times when playing politics is inappropriate, let alone engaging in this type of toxic diatribe. I am deeply embarrassed that this low rent S.O.B. occupies the same end of the political spectrum as do I.
Sunday, March 14, 2010
Landra Reid's Horrible Accident - & Dan Riehl's Inexcusably Poor Judgement
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
You're a good man, GW, and I understand how a good man would cringe. The post was obviously meant to point out the hypocracy of the Obamacare debate. The outrage over Palin's Death Panel comment was as sincere as will be the outrage over this bit of sarcasm. But you are correct. A woman's life is in balance here, and she has no fault in this matter. Using her is cruel. Dan Riehl could have done better by stating at the end that he wished Mrs. Reed no harm, but this was the program her very own husband was promoting.
Everyone is entitled to his or her own opinion. Dan Riehl said it as a commentary to the whole "shove this health care up your butt and like it" and not because he really feels like we should not treat harry reid's wife. I respect him for having the balls to say it. When was the last time you heard a democrat - say, for instance when Rush Limbaugh had that little heart when he was in Hawaii - "we wish him a speedy and full recovery." No. You didn't hear that from the leftist scum. You heard, "Hurry up and die, Rush." They meant it. Dan didn't.
>>You're a good man, GW, and I understand how a good man would cringe.>>
Exactly. Ditto.
>>...but this was the program her very own husband was promoting.>>
And therein lies the problem. Again - corruption. If ObamaCare is the law, Reid's wife would get the care because her husband and therefore she, too, is more equal than others. Joe Blow's wife _wouldn't_ get that same care, but Joe Blow loves his wife every bit as much as Harry Reid does.
Three things.
One, although I would not have agreed with it, I would fully respected had Riehl approached this with the same seriousness that, say, Limbaugh approached the illness and subsequent passing of Teddy Kennedy. There was no hyperbole, though there was a very serious discussion of how this would have been different had he been subject to Obamacare.
Two, I recall what happened when Limbaugh went into the hospital. Other then some commentors on some of the large blogs, the reaction from the majority of large names on the left was wishing him a speedy recovery. Was it heartfelt - probably for about half of them, no. But they would have been rightfully savaged on Fox and in the blogs had they done otherwise. I have no intent of giving Riehl a pass on this that I would not give to those on the left.
Three, what Riehl did does not "require balls to say." That is little more than a variant of the "speaking truth to power" canard I hear from the left to justify similar outbursts that are vile and reprehensible.
Standing up for ones morals, ethics and beliefs at all times requires moral fortitude. If this type of despicable diatribe falls within Riehl's acceptable standards of conduct, and it does or he would not have engaged in it, then I have no use for the man. He does all of us who are on the right an extreme disservice and does nothing to advance the conservative cause. That's not balls, that's stupidity and lack of judgment.
Suek: That is a good point and the same one Limbaugh made with taste and decorum regarding Ted Kennedy. Perhaps Limbaugh changed minds with his rational discourse. But regardless, I can assure you, anyone sitting on the fence on Obamacare is not going to have their minds changed by Riehl's rabid and disgusting prose. If they are of normal human emotion, they will recoil in utter disgust and contempt long before the merits of Riehl's argument sinks in. Riehl did our side of the argument no favors whatsoever.
Ok...I read the entire article. I certainly understand where you're coming from. Here's the problem...
You're of the opinion that we should behave according to our own standards. As Riehl observes in the comments: "I've been watching you high-minded twirps get your lunch money stolen by the Left for years. if you don't have the ballz to get in their face, be glad someone does."
If we're not willing to "get in their face", should we simply accept defeat? Do we seem to have succeeded in convincing any Progressives by _not_ using their tactics?
Frankly - even though I state my own opinion as forthrightly as I can, I'm not really an in your face person. Is that going to be what it takes in this battle to defeat Progressivism? I don't know...I'm open to other suggestions. It certainly doesn't seem that logic or reason works... Are we bringing a knife to a gun fight?
Suek: I can't remember how long you have been reading my blog, but if it has been awhile, then you have no doubt seen one of my many points bemoaning the fact that the central mistake of the Bush Presidency was not to release the dogs of war on the left once they started with Bush lied mantra and virtually all that they said surrounding the Iraq War.
Indeed, I have criticized the Republicans with ferocity for allowing the left to get away with everything from playing the race card repeatedly to allowing the left to set the narrative as regards the current economic meltdown. I certainly believe in not merely getting in the opponents face, but emasculating them in the process.
None of that, however, crosses the line from an ideological war, which we are in, to acting in a disgraceful and debased manner. It is the difference between fighting a war with aggressiveness and ruthlessness and fighting a war with the tactics of William Calley.
Riehl is an utter ass if he thinks he advances our cause by acting in the manner he has. He confuses aggression, which I support and demand, with acting in utter contempt for basic standards of decency because some of those on the left regularly cross such lines. The manner in which to address that is to scream "hypocrisy" from the roof tops.
As to the questions in your final paragraph, I will be doing a blog post on that in the future.
>>He confuses aggression, which I support and demand, with acting in utter contempt for basic standards of decency because some of those on the left regularly cross such lines.>>
If I understand you correctly, you're saying aggression is warranted, but not directed at the individual, and particularly not at individuals who are merely "women and children" who are not a party to the fray???
I look forward to your post...I don't see what _I_ - the average citizen - can do other than stand by, watch and wring my hands. Not a particularly rewarding method of affecting much of anything...
Post a Comment