Crusader War College

Dr. Victor Davis Hanson asks why Americans are hooked on the details of the travails surrounding Anna Nicole Smith, Don Imus, and Alec Baldwin when much more serious things are happening in the world.

After a recap of those serious things, he concludes that our facination with such trivial crap (my words) is because:

... they are the modern equivalents of grotesque carnival freak shows that used to provide a perverse sense of escapism from what people dare not face. Yet as our dependency on such tabloid distraction grows, so, too, do the real dangers that we ignore.

The ghost of Anna Nicole, foul-mouthed Rosie and trash-talking Imus turn out to be the best friends Ayman al-Zawahiri, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Vladimir Putin have.

Click on the link and read the whole thing. Recommended.

[More:]

I think part of the issue is the whorish nature of our media. Liberal talking heads lecture us on how evil we are chasing dollars while their bosses put out programming in an effort to chase dollars. Their Global Warming Hero, Al Gore, champions the mandated use of offsetting carbon credits to combat global warming while having a significant interest in a corporation that sells carbon credits.

The media are quite aware of their power to call attention to things, and not only exercise it in cases that they are interested in, but suppresses it in cases where it would threaten those same interests. As an example, compare the virtual non-usage of any stock footage on a daily basis of the events that took place on 9/11 at the Twin Towers, with their semi-hourly running of footage documenting the beating of Rodney King by police officers. Do NOT tell me that they did not know the effects or consequences of their showing of the latter, and that they do not have an agenda that dictated that they do not show the former: THEY ARE NOT IGNORANT. They worked HARD for that kind of influence, and THEY ARE USING IT AND ABSTAINING FROM USING IT as their politics and beliefs dictate. Certainly, they have a constitutional right that the government not interfere with them making these decisions, but the First Amendment does not compel anyone else to watch it, believe it, forbids the viewers to act in ways that reflects that they do not believe it. Finally, the First Amendment denies them the excuse that somebody else made such programming or publishing decisions for them, putting the responsiblity SQUARELY UPON THEM. When they copyright every broadcast, book, magazine, and news paper they make, and demand financial compensation for its use, THEY ARE ADMITTING OWNERSHIP OF THE CONTENT THEY PRODUCE.

When there are real threats to the Republic, you need to figure out the answers to three questions: who to go after, when to go after them, and how to go after them.

Current Liberal hysteria posits Bush imposing a Christian Theocracy on the American people, with concentration camps for gays, minorities, feminists, abortion supporters, illegal aliens, and liberals. What idiots: Being a Christian means you know who to go after, promotes dithering abourt and delays when answering the question of when to go after them, and prevents "final solution" type responses to the question of how to go after them. In the Final Judgment, I think we "modern" Christians will be shocked to find that we would be condemned for not acting sooner and in ways that our ancestors would, and who would have earned God's approval, but not ours.