December 13, 2006
Surrender By Any Other Name....
Printer FriendlyBy: Ann Coulter
How did we go from winning the war in Iraq to losing overnight? Was this decided by the same committee that changed "Peking" to "Beijing"?
These word changes are a fortiori evidence that liberals are part of a conspiracy. On what date did "horrible" and "actress" vanish from the English language to be replaced with "horrific" and "actor"? Who decided that? (Meanwhile, I'm still writing "Puff Daddy" in my nightly dream journal when everybody else has started calling him "Diddy.")
When did "B.C." (before Christ) and "A.D." (anno Domini, "in the year of the Lord") get replaced with "BCE" (before the common era) and "CE" (common era)? "Withdrawal" is "redeployment," "liberal" is "progressive," and "traitorous" is "patriotic."
These new linguistic conventions – like going from "winning" to "losing" in Iraq – simply spread like an invisible bacterial invasion.
To be sure, last month the Democrats did win a narrow majority in Congress for the first time in more than a decade. And it cannot be denied that for the past 50 years, Democrats have orchestrated humiliating foreign policy defeats for America. So it is understandable that some might interpret their midterm gains as a mandate for another humiliating defeat.
But that's not what the Democrats told Americans when they were running for office. To the contrary, they claimed to be gun-totin' hawks. A shockingly high number of Democratic candidates this year actually fought in wars. And not just the war on poverty, either – real wars, against men with guns.
It was a specific plan of Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chair Rep. Rahm Emanuel to fake out the voters by recruiting anti-war veterans to run against Republicans. (And when did "chairman" become "chair"?)
To the credit of the voters – especially the American Legion and VFW – the Democrats didn't fool enough Americans to even match the average midterm gains for the party out of power.
But the point is: You can't run as a phony patriot and then claim your victory is a mandate for surrender. That would be like awarding yourself undeserved Purple Hearts and then pretending to throw them over the White House wall in protest. No, that's not fair – nothing could be as contemptible as throwing someone else's medals on the ground in protest.
Is it the report of the "Iraq Surrender Group" that suddenly caused everyone to say we're losing?
The ISG report was about what you'd expect if the ladies from "The View" were asked to come up with a victory plan for Iraq. We need to ask Syria to tell Hamas to stop calling for the destruction of Israel. Duh! "Dear Hamas, Do you like killing Jews, or do you LIKE killing Jews? Check yes or no."
Most of the esteemed members of the ISG were last seen on the "Dead or Alive?" website. Vernon Jordan's most recent claim to fame was getting Monica Lewinsky a job at Revlon when she was threatening Bill Clinton with the truth. He's going to figure out an honorable way to get out of Iraq?
We're still trying to figure out a six-part test from some decision Sandra Day O'Connor wrote back in 1984, but now she's going to tell us what to do in Iraq.
Have things changed on the ground in Iraq? Are our troops being routed? Hardly. The number of U.S. fatalities has gone from a high of 860 deaths in 2004 to 845 in 2005, to 695 through November of this year. If the Islamic fascists double their rate of killing Americans in the next month, there will still be fewer American fatalities in Iraq this year than in the previous two years.
Admittedly, it would be a little easier to track our progress in Iraq if the Pentagon would tell us how many of them we're killing, but apparently our Pentagon is too spooked by the insurgents posing as civilians to mention the deaths of our enemies.
Moreover, it might seem churlish to mention the number of Islamic lunatics we've killed during the holy month of Ramadan. Half the time we do anything to them, it's "the holy month of Ramadan." It's always Ramadan. When on earth is Ramadan over?
It's true that no one anticipated that al-Qaida sympathizers would stream into Iraq to fight the Great Satan after Saddam fled to a spider hole, but that's because everyone expected al-Qaida to be fighting us here.
Like "Peking," that's something else we can't say anymore: the amazing absence of another 9/11-style terrorist attack in the past five years. The heart of the insurgency in Iraq is, by definition, composed of Islamic terrorists who hate the Great Satan, own an overnight bag and are willing to travel to kill Americans. But don't worry: The Iraq Surrender Group feels sure they won't come here if we pull out of Iraq.
If absolutely nothing changed in Iraq over the next few years – if it didn't continue to get better and if the savages never lost heart (I'm assuming they subscribe to "TimesSelect") – by 2010, 6,000 brave American troops will have died to prevent another 9/11 terrorist attack on American soil for a decade.
If that's a war Americans think we're "losing," Osama bin Laden was right: We are a paper tiger.
Posted by redguy at December 13, 2006 07:40 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.redstatesusa.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/645
Comments
These word changes are Liberal Newspeak straight out of Orwell's 1984. It is as Ann says above a Liberal conspiracy to dumb down the language. Orwell is hailed as a prophet by the MPM (Media Proganda Machine) for his clairvoyant predictions of a not too distant Fascistic future. BS, Orwell was a Socialist Liberal Fabian Communist Statist of the 1st Order, he was not writing a prophecy, 1984 was a How-To Manual, & it works all too Orwell.
Posted by: enemaofthestatusquo
at December 13, 2006 10:29 PM
Comparing the ISG to the ladies of "the View" is scathingly brilliant.
Posted by: IlGOPGal
at December 14, 2006 06:56 AM
Ann….
The canard did not start nor stop there. As ESQ so poignantly posts, the Orwellian double speak employed in “1984” and “Animal Farm” is no different that the “Code” used by today’s yellow running jackals, I meant, Democrabs et al.
“Crony”, “gang”, chicken hawk”, “thugs”, “brave American service people” all mean different things to the left.
I suppose that this is the way the Left gets their hate out to their proles.
Equally of interest is the fact that the Left seems to avoid and eschew any sense of positivism. Whatever term they chose to bastardize or redefine (remember “marriage?”) takes on an onerous and noisome connotation.
A crony is an old friend, not an unindicted co-conspirator, as the LSM would have you believe. (One would need to nominate someone like John Murtha for that sobriquet.)
A gang, while there is a perceived negative, has its roots in the sense of working together FOR a common good or goal. As we have all learned by now, the left and their candidates political, are rarely, if ever FOR something, rather taking solace and comfort it taking the easier AGAINST something tack.
A chicken hawk to me is that lovable cartoon character who was the foil to Foghorn Leghorn. Is it my imagination or does said Mr. Leghorn resemble in tenor and intellect a number of Democrabic Senators who have passed their shelf life?
And, for some odd reason, “brave American service people” to me and mine, meant, well, brave and American people who are in service to our country. I am not sure when the distinction as made by the kind folks of the Left decided that “brave American service people” really meant “vicious killers” “torturers” and the like. Sure, they kill civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan. That is because these upright followers of one Middle Eastern miscreant or another do not have the good fashion sense to wear a uniform. Thereby the ACLU, MoveOn and other RICO suspect groups make the outrageous claim that just because those who wish us harm feel the need to ignore the Geneva Conventions and we must comply to the letter the umbrae and penumbrae that we are therefore killing civilians because they are in mufti.
Please.
In any event, Ann, thanks for pointing out the obvious to us and you have my fervent prayer that the good people who hold political views antipodal to mine, (or, in other speak, "no good, freedom hating, God denying, anti-American rat bastards") come to Jesus and see the error of their ways.
God Bless and God Speed
John
Posted by: Jaksavin
at December 14, 2006 07:56 AM
Wonderfully brilliant column, Ann!
Orwell’s “newspeak” has been going on for quite some time. The PC crowd has been incrementally infiltrating our language with this nonsense for years and it’s only intensifying.
It’s a way of making “winning” sound like “losing”; “losing” sound like “winning”; “good” sound like “bad”; “bad” sound like “good”; “important” sound like “trivial”; and “trivial” sound like “important”. And, 2 + 2 is 5, for today anyway.
Just as the U.S. Constitution is now a living breathing document, apparently so are the definitions of words in the English language. Merriam-Webster had better be prepared.
We now have “detainees” at Guantanamo; not “terrorists”, not “prisoners”, not “insurgents”, not even “radical Islamic Muslim jihadists that are killing Americans”.
Yet, our guards are still referred to as “captors”, not “detainers”, “holders”, or some other flowered up name.
The word “captors” makes it sound like our troops abducted innocent Iraqi’s and Afghani’s in their sleep “while visions of sugar plums danced in their heads”; not visions of beheading Americans or visions of 72 virgins awaiting their arrival in heaven.
“Chairman” became “Chair” due to the feminist PC crowd when they got their panties in a ruffle at being women being called chairMAN. And I thought all they wanted was equality.
I’ll bet that’s why ERA was never ratified. Feminists probably wore, took off and threw someone else’s bra into the fire – not their own.
As you said, “traitorous” is “patriotic”. And “patriotic” is now “uneducated unenlightened moronic hayseed hick”.
“Pro-Abortion” is now “Pro-Choice”.
“Garbage Men” are now “Sanitation Engineers”.
“Janitors” are now “Maintenance Mechanics”.
“Black people” are now “African-American”, even if they have no roots in Africa, i.e. Barack Hussein Obama. Note: There is one exception. Walter E. Williams refuses to change his ethnicity again and has said so publicly. He’s still black and proud of it.
“Is” doesn’t mean “is” anymore although I don’t remember if a new meaning had ever officially been assigned.
“Alone” doesn’t really mean “alone” anymore although again, I don’t remember if a new meaning had ever officially been assigned.
“Having sex” doesn’t mean “having sex” anymore, although I’m completely at a loss on that one.
“I have a great memory” means “I can’t remember sh--”.
“I have no idea” means “I know exactly what happened”.
“The Iraq Surrender Group feels sure they won't come here if we pull out of Iraq.” Just like there have been no terrorist attacks in Spain after their surrender – I mean “pullout” – in Iraq.
The Pentagon will never tell us the number of terrorists we’ve been “sending to the virgins” because these aren’t terrorists waging jihad on America and Americans. They are protectors and defenders of the homeland. We are the invaders.
By the way, if the terrorists really are “protectors and defenders of the homeland” and we are the invaders, doesn’t that mean “no virgins for you, oh defender of the homeland”?
The problem is that Americans are being relentlessly duped by liberal Democrats and the liberal media into believing that America is losing in Iraq. Americans aren’t paper tigers when they know the truth. The problem is that “truth” has now become “a matter of perspective”.
Osama bin Laden has it wrong. Americans aren’t paper tigers. American politicians, especially liberal Democrats, are. Turn our troops loose and let’s see who the paper tiger is.
Posted by: LynnJG
at December 14, 2006 09:03 AM
LynnJG makes way too much sense for the average person in general or a libercrab in particular to digest. (BTW, after the second line I recognized his/her writing style.)
Just like in Orwellian double speak, the words have not only morphed to mean what the birkenstockistas want them to mean, a la the Queen of Hearts, but they also control the means of dissemination for their code.
Even with the instant availability of information on the internet, sadly most Americans are force-fed their information, and more sadly the data needed to make an informed and correct opinion, by the LSM.
In my humble opinion, and by humble I mean “correct and accurate” the first step that needs be addressed is a reeducation of the proles. Once they are exposed to columns such as this and other websites that are more intellectually honest than the information divulged by the LSM perhaps then and only then the lies, falsehoods, prevarications, mendacious statements, slanders and libels of the left will be exposed.
Unfortunately I am not the person who can make this happen. But, together, all of us, by emailing our friends, co-workers, family members, social acquaintances and more can make it happen. If you let the Left make their outrageous claims and allow them to go unchallenged, then we all deserve what we get, which is more of the same.
One need not have an evangelist’s zeal in dissemination of said truths. When there is a hot topic such as the ISG perhaps an email containing a rebuttal to said findings with the simple comment like “gee, I never thought of this before, do you thing the media are lying to us?” might do the trick. Subtle, but effective.
A quick word about the brilliant findings of that august body of previously employed public servants and hacks. I wrote out a series of left wing espousing methodologies that said panel might suggest. Each page had a single “brilliant revelation” (newspeak for “equine scatology”) that could be on the table. I have a wonderful pet “Rocket the Wonderdog”, a fine example of a North Carolina Slaw Hound, and he loves papers. I gave him the sheath of papers and he played with them and rolled around in them then he amassed them in a heap. No surprise, they were in roughly the same order as the compilation of those with the limited EEG.
Bitter? A tad, but seriously we have no one to blame but ourselves if we allow the lies to circulate and gain currency.
God Bless, God Speed, God Help Us All
John
Posted by: Jaksavin
at December 14, 2006 09:46 AM
John,
Her.
Lynn
Posted by: LynnJG
at December 14, 2006 09:49 AM
Lynn:
LOL
Did not mean to offend, as I know a few fellows with the same first name. But not sensitive enough to make overt apologies in advance for a putative error. Love your comments! Keep them coming regardless of your gender-choice.
(The "JG" also threw me, as it may stand for "Junior Grade" a military rank.)
God Bless
John
Posted by: Jaksavin
at December 14, 2006 10:28 AM
John,
LOL!!!
It takes a bit more than that to offend me!!!
Yes, I know my name can be either male or female, i.e. the great Lynn Swann was not a woman football player. Trust me - I could not be mistaken for a man.
JG - J is for my middle name; G is for my last name.
Lynn
Posted by: LynnJG
at December 14, 2006 11:07 AM
When did "B.C." (before Christ) and "A.D." (anno Domini, "in the year of the Lord") get replaced with "BCE" (before the common era) and "CE" (common era)?
About 2,000 years ago, among the Jewish community, and probably as long among other non-Christians.
Posted by: AmericanIcon
at December 14, 2006 12:43 PM
Icon
I am not certain that information is accurate. While I am not Jewish, from my understanding they have their own calendar. I believe this year is 5767. I do not see why they would use BC, BCE, AD, CE, LS/MFT or any other term to describe the year. You are correct that other non-Christian religions use their own calendars, Muslim, Hindu et al.
As far as its usage dating back that far, that would be incorrect. It seems that its earliest use is no more that 300 years.
You do touch a nerve tho, as Ann intimates. Why redefine AD and BC when they have been extant for over a millennium and a half?
If AD and BC are abhorrent to those lacking religious tolerance, why not change “Los Angeles” (do you know the complete name of that city? It is even more religious!) to “City of Guiding Celestial Beings”, or “San Diego” to “City of a Higher Supreme Power, or not, Your Choice” and do you really want to know what San Francisco ought be called?
Why can’t people just leave enough alone!
God Bless and God Speed
John
Posted by: Jaksavin
at December 14, 2006 03:38 PM
How much evidence is needed to persuade people that enemies of the U.S., within and without are using the Democrat Party to destroy us? Take out the culprits and I don't mean to dinner. The damage that they have inflicted on children, families and me is as real as bullets and howitzer rounds.
Take out television and half our war is won.
Hail Victory.
Raise the voting age to twenty-one and you've regained some precious ground.
Long live Ann Coulter. Hail Victory.
Posted by: taxigringo
at December 14, 2006 03:40 PM
Ann, another great column.
LynnJG, it is as if you read my mind before posting. And you say it so much better :-)
Keep the comments flowing, guys and gals! I agree, I agree, I agree!!!!
Posted by: JASCC
at December 14, 2006 04:30 PM
Thanks for the compliment JASCC!
Posted by: LynnJG
at December 14, 2006 07:39 PM
Ann continues to speak the truth...and the truth continues to be spoken only to those who already understand it. We are only "losing the war in Iraq" because that is what the pussy-liberals want people to believe, and they are great at getting their lies out to the masses. Our soldiers are doing great work at great risk, but the liberals and liberal media won't recognize it because it does not serve their purpose. They were successful in getting us to pull out of Vietnam, where hundreds of thousands died in the wake of our last chopper...and the same thing will happen if we pull out too soon in Iraq...and I don't know why any reasonable, sane person would WANT that...which gives me another reason to believe that pussy-liberals have serious mental problems and should be either institutionalized or sent to France (which is redundant, I think...). We need leaders now. Ann? We need you...and others like you...because our so-called conservative leadership has failed us miserably, at the potential cost of our country.
Posted by: Ziggy Spaz
at December 14, 2006 09:42 PM
Taxigringo,
I do not know if your "hail victory" is a self identification as a Nazi or not. "Hail victory is English for "sieg heil."
The Islamofascists will join the Nazis in the dung heap of history of those who tried to exterminate the Jews only to find that the G-d of the Jews (Blessed be He) destroyed them instead.
Posted by: Loser
at December 14, 2006 11:10 PM
Ziggy, I love your comments. It just would not be an Ann column without you referring to “pussy-liberals” at least once! You are spot on.
Regarding Loser’s always erudite comments, he raises a very interesting point regarding our Jewish and Israeli friends. Far be it from me to cast any aspersions or make an assumption unwarranted, but it seems to me that a larger percentage of those of the Jewish faith, practicing or not, more readily embrace liberalism that do other religions. I know I am treading on this ice here, please bear with me. But, is it not perplexing that the liberals, those who would have us sit down with Imamentalpatient of Iran or others of his ilk and sing Kumbaya, are urging us to deal with the same people who wish to wipe Israel off the face of the map.
I do not think that they will succeed (the Islamofascists or the Liberals, small difference) as I do not think it is God’s Will. (I read the end of the book, I think the ending does not support the idea of Islamofascists winning.)
Please, do not misunderestimate me, the Islamofascists will not be happy when Israel is gone or even America. They will not be happy when they convert the entire world. They will only be happy when their particular sect is the only (or, as we say down south “onlyest”) one remaining. Perhaps we might be better off letting them kill off each other.
Interessant, Ihre Bemerkung auf “Sieg Heil. Gut gemacht! Aber die Benerkung, die sich nicht das Ende der Welt ist! LOL!
God Bless and God Speed
John
Posted by: Jaksavin
at December 15, 2006 08:36 AM
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)
