The "Anti-War" Left Is Just A Bunch of Sanctimonious Phonies

A e-mail to Instapundit:

Notice how there was no “antiwar” movement during the ‘90’s, even though we were at war the entire time in Iraq, Haiti, Kosovo, a dab here and there in Afghanistan and Sudan. Then, after 9/11, it was the “Next Vietnam” with a passionate “antiwar” movement with the NYT’s full treasonous participation, just like the good old days. And now, even though the daily death count has matched the highest daily rate we ever saw in Iraq, there is no “antiwar” movement or daily casualty count in all the newspapers. It’s like the “antiwar” movement can be turned off and on like a switch, depending on which party is in the White House.

Comments

[Bruce Oksol]

So true.

[TooMuchTime]

Near where I live at the Bohemian Grove, world leaders get together and schmooze. And every year the protesters come out. Except when Bill Clinton was in office. On the first meeting after Bush took office, the local paper had a huge, front page above the fold, story about how the protesters were glad to be back after a 9 year absense.

Isn't it interesting that when the liberals are in the white house, all of the worlds problems are no longer worthy of protest?

And the idiots in the print media wonder why subscriptions are down.

[TGGP]

You should read sites like Who is IOZ?, Stop Me Before I Vote Again and A Tiny Revolution.