thedrifter
12-12-05, 09:10 AM
Musings Of 'Right' And 'Wrong' ... Or 'Left'
By Gregg Bish
December 12, 2005
Maybe there's a reason that "right and wrong" and "right and left" are parallel semantically. Right aligns with right, and wrong aligns with left. This is purely an observation of semantics and word-play, of course, just a bit of silliness. But then, it makes for good entertainment. Since this is the high Holy-day season (semantically, the word holiday is derived from Holy-day, not holly-day as some might suggest), a bit of good cheer seems in order. Conservatives should entertain themselves by pondering a few memories of how the "right" was "right" and the "left" was "wrong" in recent years.
During the mid-Twentieth Century, the ecology movement inflamed the public with stories of an approaching ice age. It was suggested that dust and pollution in the atmosphere would lower the global temperature enough to trigger the advance of the glaciers once more. Forty years later, the same left-aligned ecologists argue that the world is warming, and have abandoned the ice-age theory. There are a few who suggest that record cold temperatures in some places are a result of global warming, of course.
The ozone layer, keeps healing itself. One study several years ago pointed out that the explosion of Mount Saint Helens repaired more than a hundred years worth of damage to our ozone shield. It was also noted that it emitted more than forty years worth of greenhouse gas and particulates. The world has not fried in a blast of UV radiation.
Media analysts estimated that the first days of the Iraq War would produce tens of thousands of American casualties, with civilian casualties as high as a million. Casualties on the scale suggested never materialized. There have been casualties, each a tragedy, but the estimates were so incorrect as to be worthless.
It was estimated by the media that there would be over ten thousand dead in New Orleans. There were bodies stacked like cordwood in the Super-dome. The toxic ooze that ran in the streets would make the city permanently uninhabitable. It would be years before the city could be repaired, and oh by the way, "it was ALL BUSH's FAULT!"
However, reconstruction is already well underway. Much of the city is re-populated. There is no lasting damage to the soil from toxic waste. Once again, the "left" was "wrong".
However, the right has been "correct" on some interesting issues.
Three dollar gas seems to have accomplished what forty years of ecological hectoring could not, a tilt in automotive buying habits toward alternative fuel systems. The right was correct that market pressure would drive change.
Conservatives support the idea of free market economics and lower taxes. With the Dow hovering just below 11,000, with 3.5-4.0 per cent annual growth in GDP, record new home starts, and near-full-employment, it would seem that lower taxes and an investor-friendly tax code are a good prescription for America.
The left says it believes that Iraq is un-winnable. From Howard Dean to Congressman Murtha, the Democrats have aligned themselves with the idea that we should get our boots out of the desert in as orderly a retreat as we can contrive. Yet there is a new Iraqi congress, a new draft constitution, reconstruction is well along its way, and the majority of Iraq's citizens are glad for the change. The same is true in Afghanistan, where 88 per cent of the public supports the United States and its presence there. The left is wrong in this, just as they are wrong in asserting that 280 million Americans have more potential influence on global warming that 1.25 billion Chinese, the world's fastest growing economy and soon to be largest global consumer of petrochemical products.
The ideological left has been so wrong, so often, that it lacks credibility. We cannot leave Iraq just yet. Abandoning the fledgling democracy at this juncture would be counterproductive. Terrorism would be rampant. Hussein would be freed within days by his insurgents and restored to power. Anyone that had in any way helped the coalition would be tortured and executed. And the image of American strength would be deeply undermined.
There is no alternative in Iraq but to stay the course and prevail. The alternative is an invitation to disaster. And that is a conservative opinion. And of course, conservatives are always "right".
Happy Holy-days.
Ellie
By Gregg Bish
December 12, 2005
Maybe there's a reason that "right and wrong" and "right and left" are parallel semantically. Right aligns with right, and wrong aligns with left. This is purely an observation of semantics and word-play, of course, just a bit of silliness. But then, it makes for good entertainment. Since this is the high Holy-day season (semantically, the word holiday is derived from Holy-day, not holly-day as some might suggest), a bit of good cheer seems in order. Conservatives should entertain themselves by pondering a few memories of how the "right" was "right" and the "left" was "wrong" in recent years.
During the mid-Twentieth Century, the ecology movement inflamed the public with stories of an approaching ice age. It was suggested that dust and pollution in the atmosphere would lower the global temperature enough to trigger the advance of the glaciers once more. Forty years later, the same left-aligned ecologists argue that the world is warming, and have abandoned the ice-age theory. There are a few who suggest that record cold temperatures in some places are a result of global warming, of course.
The ozone layer, keeps healing itself. One study several years ago pointed out that the explosion of Mount Saint Helens repaired more than a hundred years worth of damage to our ozone shield. It was also noted that it emitted more than forty years worth of greenhouse gas and particulates. The world has not fried in a blast of UV radiation.
Media analysts estimated that the first days of the Iraq War would produce tens of thousands of American casualties, with civilian casualties as high as a million. Casualties on the scale suggested never materialized. There have been casualties, each a tragedy, but the estimates were so incorrect as to be worthless.
It was estimated by the media that there would be over ten thousand dead in New Orleans. There were bodies stacked like cordwood in the Super-dome. The toxic ooze that ran in the streets would make the city permanently uninhabitable. It would be years before the city could be repaired, and oh by the way, "it was ALL BUSH's FAULT!"
However, reconstruction is already well underway. Much of the city is re-populated. There is no lasting damage to the soil from toxic waste. Once again, the "left" was "wrong".
However, the right has been "correct" on some interesting issues.
Three dollar gas seems to have accomplished what forty years of ecological hectoring could not, a tilt in automotive buying habits toward alternative fuel systems. The right was correct that market pressure would drive change.
Conservatives support the idea of free market economics and lower taxes. With the Dow hovering just below 11,000, with 3.5-4.0 per cent annual growth in GDP, record new home starts, and near-full-employment, it would seem that lower taxes and an investor-friendly tax code are a good prescription for America.
The left says it believes that Iraq is un-winnable. From Howard Dean to Congressman Murtha, the Democrats have aligned themselves with the idea that we should get our boots out of the desert in as orderly a retreat as we can contrive. Yet there is a new Iraqi congress, a new draft constitution, reconstruction is well along its way, and the majority of Iraq's citizens are glad for the change. The same is true in Afghanistan, where 88 per cent of the public supports the United States and its presence there. The left is wrong in this, just as they are wrong in asserting that 280 million Americans have more potential influence on global warming that 1.25 billion Chinese, the world's fastest growing economy and soon to be largest global consumer of petrochemical products.
The ideological left has been so wrong, so often, that it lacks credibility. We cannot leave Iraq just yet. Abandoning the fledgling democracy at this juncture would be counterproductive. Terrorism would be rampant. Hussein would be freed within days by his insurgents and restored to power. Anyone that had in any way helped the coalition would be tortured and executed. And the image of American strength would be deeply undermined.
There is no alternative in Iraq but to stay the course and prevail. The alternative is an invitation to disaster. And that is a conservative opinion. And of course, conservatives are always "right".
Happy Holy-days.
Ellie