It’s interesting how the different media organizations spin things. This particular time it is Rumsfeld that gets run through the spin cycle of the media washing machine.

Forbes mentions the lessons of history in regards to Hitler:

In remarks prepared for delivery to the American Legion’s national convention, Rumsfeld recited what he called the lessons of history, including the failed efforts to appease the Adolf Hitler regime in the 1930s.

CNN noticed that too and goes further:

Addressing several thousand veterans at the American Legion’s national convention, Rumsfeld recited what he called the lessons of history, including the failed efforts to appease the Adolf Hitler regime in the 1930s.

“I recount this history because once again we face the same kind of challenges in efforts to confront the rising threat of a new type of fascism” he said.

…

Rumsfeld recalled a string of recent terrorist attacks, from the 9/11 attacks to bombings in Bali, London and Madrid, and said it should be obvious to anyone that terrorists must be confronted, not appeased.

The Seattle Times didn’t mention the above and focuses on:

“They are actively manipulating the media in this country” by, for example, falsely blaming U.S. troops for civilian deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan, he said.

“They can lie with impunity,” he said, while U.S. troops are held to a high standard of conduct.

Rumsfeld made similar points later, in remarks prepared for delivery at a Reno, Nev., convention of the Veterans of Foreign Wars.

“The enemy lies constantly — almost totally without consequence,” he told the veterans group.

And from the UK again no mention of the parallels of the fascism of the 30’s with the fascism of today, just about the media being manipulated:

‘The enemy lies constantly — almost totally without conscience,’ Rumsfeld said. ‘They portray our cause as a war on Islam when in fact the overwhelming majority of victims of their terrorism have been thousands and thousands of innocent Muslims.’

Similar oversights occur in most of the media reports and Democrat commentators either ignore it (Harry Reid) or call it absurd (Stephen Elliott) without even giving us their reasoning. But one shouldn’t be surprised by this. Expecting them to reason, let alone articulate it, is like expecting a dog to be able to drive a car. They may think they are doing just fine but they will very shortly crash and drawing the unwanted attention of the entire world to their deficiencies.

That’s the point of this editorial. Okay. Fine. All you have to do then is amend the constitution. Just don’t pretend it doesn’t exist.

You can’t get the votes to amend the constitution? Tough. Your bright ideas must not have been all that bright then. Your options are now rather limited. You can move to another country more to your liking. Maybe you can find one with the all the socialist trimmings you whine about not having. Want a few bucks for the one-way plane ticket out of the country? I’ll be glad to contribute to you leaving. Another option is you can start a revolution and overthrow the existing government by means of violence. Your choice Mr. Kurlansky. What’s it going to be?

They are saying it needs a valve job. Apparently, mixing metaphors, they are unwilling to face the reality that it’s time to remove life support from socialized medicine and let it die. But at least it is a step in the right direction. If they open the valve maybe the monster will bleed to death as citizens utilize the private sector.

Oh, how many times we have heard the phrase, “It takes two to make a fight”.  That statement appears to assign equal guilt to the defender and the perpetrator, which is the same as saying that you do not have any right to defend yourself, or to be defended by anyone else.  By the time I reached high school in 1972, two kids caught fighting were both punished equally (’cause fighting just isn’t cool, man).  I see it as no mere coincidence that the arena wherein I’ve heard this phrase uttered the most, if not exclusively, is the public school system.

Its time to modify the phrase slightly, based on the application of intelligence guided by experience:

“It takes at least two to make a fight– one perpetrator and one defender.”

Col. Jeff Cooper was once asked whether violence merely begets more violence.  His answer went something like this (I’m going from memory, so I can only paraphrase): “It is my sincere endeavor to see to it that it does.”  In explaining his answer, he said that if someone is going to perpetrate violence against innocents, that person should get more violence in return than he can handle.

How many times have you heard some version of “Don’t judge me, man” or “You’re being too judgmental”?  Similar to the “it takes two” quote, this seems to be designed to prevent us from doing that which makes us human– it asks us to stop using our ability to reason.

If we really value “Peace And Love, Man” we should be ready to dish out both blame and praise appropriately.