Generally speaking, any metaphor involving Nazi’s is a…just don’t do it. It never works out. Marco Rubio on the other hand is so good, he was able to use one to describe the war on terror and take a hard shot at Hillary Clinton.
Hillary and the other guys answered Rubio’s criticism of their refusal to say “Radical Islam“…by refusing to say Radical Islam. No really, I can’t make this stuff up. Video evidence below.
“That would be like saying we weren’t at war with Nazis ’cause we were afraid to offend some Germans who may have been members of the Nazi party, but weren’t violent themselves. Of course all Muslims are not all members of violent jihadist groups, but there is a global jihadist movement in the world motivated by their interpretation of Islam… and it needs to be confronted for what it is.”
Put another way, this quote during a powerful scene on “The West Wing.” For some reason, the clip isn’t available anywhere in the Internets, but they were having a similar argument…
“I don’t remember having to explain to Italians that our problem wasn’t with them, but with Mussolini! Why does the U.S. have to take every Arab country out for an ice cream cone?”
Boom goes the suitcase bomb that looks like a clock. The difference between 9/11 and the Paris attacks is that at least with 9/11, we all agreed on what terrorism actually was. Now, one politically correct generation removed, here we are.
I know, I know we’re all supposed to praise “the millennials” and their progressive sensitivities. But here’s a history lesson for you: since the beginning of ever, when somebody attacked your innocent civilians, you retaliated. Brutally. Regardless of feelings.
War can’t be politically correct. It must be pitiless. It requires generalizations. Some that are offensive. Many which save lives. This week has been fascinating. We’ve gone from coddling overly-sensitive, politically correct college students demanding “sensitive language”… to coddling overly-sensitive terrorist-sympathizers demanding more “sensitive language.”