...more recent posts
Tuesday, Oct 17, 2006
Inga Barks
While driving back from LA I tuned in KMJ Fresno and heard a perky acolyte of all things Rush, Ms. Inga Barks.
Inga was fielding a call from a conservative listener who had concerns about the war. "Max" said that the war was wrong from the beginning, and we should find a way to get out. Since Max was a conservative, he was by definition "serious", and Inga treated him as such.
Inga said that while she strongly disagreed, discussing the war and discussing withdrawal were reasonable things to do, as long as the critic was conservative. Any liberal who had a problem with the war was obviously a Bush hater, or extreme partisan, and was not worthy of engaging in serious discussion about serious matters. She advised Max that anti-war conservatives need to take back the issue from the anti-war liberals who "stole" the anti-war issue from serious thinkers, like George Will and Pat Buchanan.
But Inga had more on Max's point, and had something she really wanted to say, but would have to wait until after the break. That little tease, as they say in the radio biz, got me to hang around through the interminable break.
No, I don't want to re-fi the house. Nope, I'm not going to buy any gold. You know a steel building would be kinda cool, but I'm not in the market right now.
Okay, we're back. Now the incomparable Inga Barks is gonna 'splain in a serious way her serious critique of the serious conservative anti-war position. I'm, like, all aquiver.
Woah! Dude! Like, that totally isn't an argument. It's barely an opinion. You get paid for this?
To summarize:
- While anti-war conservatives are serious people with genuine concerns which are worthy of discussion, anti-war liberals are Bush-haters and shouldn't be given the time of day. Besides, they stole the issue from Pat Buchanan.
- Whether or not you can make a case against the war in Iraq, withdrawal is not an option. Because.
- Woof!
older posts...