There Ain't No Moderate Islam: Andrew McCarthy's Must-Read Article

Andrew McCarthy at NRO is making a lot of sense in this post.  He writes:

Only the blink of an eye ago, uttering the unpleasant truth that in terms of doctrine there is no such thing as “moderate Islam” resulted in one’s banishment from what our opinion elites like to call the “mainstream,” by which they mean the narrow-minded, viciously defended circle of their own pieties and fictions. You could say it, but your skin had better have an extra coat or two of thick: You were in for a fusillade of rage, the likes of which our candor-phobic elites would never dream of unleashing at our Islamist enemies — no matter how clearly those enemies announced their intention to destroy us.

McCarthy's article makes it clear how so many of us have been trained to "self-censor."  There is this need to be "responsible" and "mainstream," to pander to the common mythology:  Islamic terrorists have hijacked the religion, yada yada yada.  In many cases, we have bloggers assuming a pseudo moral posture and repeating liberal slogans about religious intolerance to show how enlightened they are.

Indeed, some of the comments coming out of the right blogosphere right now are particularly inane, especially regarding Pastor Terry Jones and his plan to burn Qurans.  We have Brigitte Gabriel telling her followers:

We at ACT! for America denounce and condemn, in the strongest terms, the upcoming Koran burning event organized by Pastor Terry Jones and members of the Dove World Outreach Center in Gainesville, Florida. Their proposed event is ill-conceived, counter-productive and unwelcome in a world where ideas and philosophies are best debated in the context of the issues and the facts. We find this an archaic act that serves no useful purpose, and as such is a regrettable instance of an inability or unwillingness to discuss the issues facing us in a reasonable and constructive manner.

ACT! for America is, and has always been, committed to exposing the threat of the political ideology of radical Islam and its sharia law through constructive debate, illumination of the facts, and a reasoned analysis of the implications of the threat.

Pastor Jones and his congregation are stooping to the tactics of and joining the inarticulate who express their anger and opposition through destructive and spiteful acts of denigration. What is the difference between his actions and the actions of Islamists destroying synagogues in Gaza or churches and Bibles in Lebanon, Bosnia and Egypt? We are better than that as Americans.

Always devoted,

Brigitte Gabriel

  [Hat tip:  View From the Right]

Has Gabriel forgotten that there is no rational discussion with Islamists?  She acts as if the clash of civilizations is merely the equivalent of discussing new paint schemes for the condo complex, preferably over coffee and danish. Then she makes the absurd comparison of Jones burning a few Qurans to Muslims destroying churches and synagogues.

One of the major goals of political correctness is to cause individuals to self-censor, i.e. refrain from telling unpleasant truths under the threat of  being ostracized as a pariah.  So many of my fellow bloggers self-censor regularly and this event is no exception.
....

Rush: Do Away with Self-Censorship and Attack!

Rush Limbaugh continues to bring the fight to the Left.  Lately he has been attacking the judicial qualifications and racism of Sonia Sotomayor, the judicial extremist who wants to replace the Constitution with her personal notions of empathy.  

Rush has noted the extreme self-censorship that permeates conservative arguments; we can't oppose Sotomayor because of her race -- she is latina -- even though the Democrats viciously attacked Bush's hispanic appointments to the federal courts.  The Left, over time, has constructed well-entrenched rules that people in both the public and private sectors unconsciously obey.  

Those rules are that Republicans cannot criticize any Democrat who is of a minority extraction, whether they be hispanic or black; to do so shall be judged "racism" with no appeal.  However, this rule shall not be applied to Democrats.  They can demean and insult Republicans of minority descent until Hell freezes over, but that's fair game.  It is an egregious double standard that was invented specifically for the purpose of shutting up Republicans.

These well-entrenched "rules" cause Republicans to self-censor.  Quite a few have now concluded that we cannot oppose Sotomayor on the High Court simply because of her race; that to do so will bring charges of racism; and that we will lose the hispanic vote.

Rush says we should no longer play the game by the Democrats' rules, but should boldly criticize and oppose far-left candidates regardless of their membership in any ethnic group.  Yes, they will call us racists, but they always call us racists.  Let them.

No we won't lose the hispanic vote because we don't have it to lose.  Bush appointed hispanics to the courts and those hispanics were viciously denounced and opposed by the Democrats.  Both Bush and McCain looked the other way on illegal immigration.  It didn't help them with hispanics.

Even though Democrats opposed GOP hispanics, it didn't cause them to lose any hispanic votes.

Forget the hispanic votes, per se.  Concentrate on votes we can win, i.e., people (of whatever ethnicity) who dislike high taxes and government takeover of the economy and who want the security of a strong military.

A Protest Sign for Monday

There is a school of thought that says anything "African-American" is exempt from criticism, no matter what. That line of thinking has led to serious self-censorship for many Americans, for far too long.