if we wish to learn what was going on in Europe in 1938, just look around.
Haven't you always wondered what folks were thinking while Hitler was on the rise? VDH explains it all. He even finds the 1930s counterpart of Michael Moore and DailyKos --Fr. Coughlin!
Many people are beginning to wonder whom they should fear most — the Roosevelt-Churchill combination or the Hitler-Mussolini combination.
Please RTWT. And in a similar vein, Michael Ledeen's The 30s All Over Again?.
See also this Powerline post collecting links questioning what happened at al-Qana. I don't think we know anything except that the MSM is doing its usual yeoman's job . From Cliff May's piece on Hezbollah's goals, linked there:
They show reporters bombed buildings and dead bodies. They say: “These were innocent civilians. No fighters or weapons here.” The news crews report what they are told and shown without verification — out of ignorance or fear or both. Hezbollah exaggerates its battlefield successes and understates its losses and, with too few exceptions, the media take it in and spew it back out.
Note to MSM:
I had 6 honest serving men who taught me all I knew.Their names were when and where and what and how and why and who.
Oh for a reporter who will greet Hezbollah statements with an ounce of the skepticism with which they greet President Bush's statements. But I digress. Read the Caroline Glick piece linked at Powerline, too --especially the last half.
Aw, heck. As long as I'm in this prolonged curtsy to Powerline, might as well point you to this, too, from Michael Barone a few days ago. He collects some of the more gloomy things people are saying about the war in Lebanon, and then concludes by comparing Bush to William Pitt:
Pitt's farsightedness reminds me of George W. Bush's attempts, even in adversity, to forge long-term solutions rather than short-term patchwork.snip
I come back to what I think they had and have in common: a steely character and an ability to persevere on a long-term course despite harrowing setbacks. Both came to power in part because of their fathers and because their lineage gave people--GeorgeIII and members of Parliament in Pitt's case, American voters in Bush's--confidence in their character. And, in my view, that confidence has proved to be deserved in both cases.A little more about long-term solutions in a future post.
