Example of Why I Don’t Read Claremont Review
Three years after the fall of Saddam Hussein, we are at a similar stage in the Battle of America. Our peril is actually greater. The Al Qaeda nuclear threat to our cities is more apocalyptic than the German blitz on London, yet less galvanizing for self-preservation. And the Democratic psychology of defeatism besetting President Bush is worse than anything Churchill faced from doves inside his war cabinet.
Radical Islamists, the fascist heirs of Hitler, want to nuke our great urban centers, kill us by the millions, paralyze our economy, drive us from democracy and civil liberties into desperate martial law, and destroy the United States as a nation. They have said so. ~John Andrews, Claremont Institute Blog
Actually, they have said that we should get out of their lands. They don’t seem to care very much what we do or do not do here, except as it relates to the Near East. Seriously, though, if I hadn’t seen this myself I might have thought that this was an Onion spoof of what a modern Republican writer sounds like. The “fascist heirs of Hitler”? I know, I know, “Islamofascist” (idiotic word) is everywhere on the militarist center-left (I made the mistake of referring to it as the ‘militarist right’ once, which I was realised later was terribly misleading), so Andrews isn’t saying anything new. I suppose it is just the forthright stupidity of this particular post that stuns and amazes me. For a very fat subscription price, you can get this sort of profound “Straussian” analysis delivered to your door on a monthly basis with The Claremont Review of Books.