Dan Riehl Has Finally Gone Frickin’ Bananas
‘Crunchy Con’ Rod Dreher, frequently seen at NRO’s The Corner, has come out against the war.
Dan Riehl, frequently seen shouting obscenities at passing cars, is unimpressed:
It continues to amaze me how the Right so often bucks up admittedly fine, talented and intelligent young men as the would be sages of their age by giving their words such notoriety, when they are so lacking in deeds other than writing – read experience and genuine maturity.
You don’t say.
[…]
In my essay, I talked about how the conduct of the war was what alienated me. That includes the falsehoods and half-truths told to get us into this mess — for example, the things we were told back in 2002 by this administration and took on good faith, which we ought to have been far more skeptical of.
What things, Mr. Dreher? Do you even know anything about the real world? Do you think that because a mostly clear and definitive answer to everything you’ve ever researched or written about is available through some wiki or text, that the answers to precisely what a real-world enemy is doing, or has said or plotted behind closed doors, is readily available to you because you’re, you know, John Wayne, The Avengers, and the President of the United States all wrapped up into one?
If you believe that this President didn’t attempt to learn everything he could about pre-war circumstances and then subsequently convey and act upon them as best he could, you’re not only immature in your reasoning, you’re a fool. Either that, or simply someone who has been spending too much time poking around NPR.
It goes on for a bunch more paragraphs. Of all writing in English, Dan’s is the best at conveying an impression of anger and halitosis under a bare light bulb.
Were there difficult decisions to be made? Yes. Do some, or even several, now, with the benefit of hindsight, appear to have been wrong? Sure! So what? There are few if any truly difficult real world endeavors wherein that isn’t the case. Have you experienced enough of them, or simply written of some? Or maybe you acted them out on a pod cast for NPR?
Do you take apart the post-war standing army in Iraq to head off hostility as it was the tool used to subjugate 80% of that nation’s population? Or do you leave it in place because it could suddenly be trusted to secure the peace and not almost immediately overthrow any new government the moment America’s back was turned? Consult Lexus Nexus, or your encyclopedia, Mr. Dreher, prove to me you could have found that answer four years ago … I’ll wait.
Is this President a mortal human capable of making a misjudgment? Is Donald Rumsfeld? Sure! Again, so what? Aren’t we all likely to err, most especially when situations are so complex and dynamic as within a troubled Middle-eastern nation during time of war?
[…]
Go read or write a book, or something. You certainly don’t have what it takes to fight, or even help fight a difficult war. With benefit of hindsight, I’m forced to assume you never really did.
Shorter Dan Riehl: “Sure, it’s easy to support Bush when he seems to be in the right. But backing him when he’s wrong — well, that’s what separates the men from the boys.”
If you believe that this President didn’t attempt to learn everything he could about pre-war circumstances and then subsequently convey and act upon them as best he could, you’re not only immature in your reasoning, you’re a fool.
Uhhh……what?
Also, I agree with Dan Riehl, as long as he’s talking about Rod and himself in this part.
Go read or write a book, or something. You certainly don’t have what it takes to fight, or even help fight a difficult war. With benefit of hindsight, I’m forced to assume you never really did.
Wow. Hell really hath no fury like a neocon scorned!
Ways in Which Dan Riehl is Helping Fight a War
#1:
It’s so awesome when the rabid dog turns on everything.
Wait, not awesome. The opposite of awesome. But at least we can take comfort in one thing. When we bring Riehl to the vet, they’ll have to chop his head off to make sure.
Is he actually admitting that brown people have a right not to be bombed and thus deprive him of ambient war-porn masturbation opportunities?
Hopefully Mr. Dreher will permit someone without the professional byline, but with ten or so more years of life experience, to tell him a few things.
I didn’t realize Dan’s birthday cake had ten candles on it, did you?
It almost seems like his entire concept of conservatism is the worshiping of icons, or men destined to be enshrined on mountains.
Actually, that’s pretty much all conservatism has been for the past several years: continual sucking up to Sts. Ronald and (until last November) George the Younger (certainly not the elder, who was never conservative enough for these clowns). They have been willing to jettison nearly every conservative principle if it was in furtherance of the desires of their beloved leaders (federal deficits? Nation-building?). Conservatives pretend that they read Russell Kirk and Edmund Burke, but they really just worship a couple of icons and savagely attack anyone who dares to second guess their leaders.
oops my bad. I didn’t see “more” in there. I guess because Dan acts like a ten year old most of the time.
Lesley: To be frank, I didn’t think Riehl had ten candles on his birthday cake to begin with. Not only is your average ten-year old more mentally mature, but Riehl strikes me as the kind of person who either eats candles or can’t be trusted with fire by his parents.
Or both.
What does Dan Riehl’s vaunted “life experience” consist of? Something hardscrabble, a bit salt-of-the-earth, I presume? Something beyond a prefab pun about the reel/real/Riehl world?
As you can see, the reports of my death were exaggerated… I merely went undercover. Secret assignment, infiltrating the right-hemiblogisphere, et cetera.
Well, FlipYrWhig, if you go to his own website and click “About” you find out some things. From all his bravado and snark about the “real world,” it would be nice to learn that he, say, served in SpecialOps or did intelligence analysis for CIA or State. Or even had been in some of the dicier spots in the world working for private business.
Sadly, no. By his own description, he has “always written.” (How is this different from typing?) He was editor of his college newspaper. He freelanced for a local weekly. He now works in marketing for a tech firm, trying to persuade people to buy things he had nothing to do with making.
Oh, yes. He blogs.
Did you expect anything better?
Riehl can be pronounced exactly the same as real. God has clearly labeled a new line of prophets for us, and one is finally getting a bit of attention. We would be wise to listen, and not to nitpick that a manchild, being generous with the word man, with no experience in anything all except sitting behind a desk playing with a pile of feces which he may or may not have produced himself might not be in position to lecture about reality. His name sounds like real, let me remind you.
“Were there difficult decisions to be made? Yes.”
“Do some, or even several, now, with the benefit of hindsight, appear to have been wrong? Sure! So what?”
Were the decisions made after that wrong? Sure!
Were the decisions made after that wrong? No doubt, but so what!
Were the decisions made after that wrong? As the sun rises each morning.
Were the decisions made after that wrong? Is a bear Catholic?
Did we continue to support manifestly failed policy decisions long after they had proven to be unmitigated disasters? Absolutely! Without hesitation!
“Is this President a mortal human capable of making a misjudgment? Is Donald Rumsfeld? Sure! Again, so what?”
Was it unmistakably clear very early on that the situation in Iraq was akin to a giant turd burrito, or perhaps like that recurring nightmare I have about the monkey with the sledgehammer? Yes! Of course! But I fail to see the relevance.
UPDATE BY ROD DREHERNPR wrote :
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6817201
Rod Dreher wrote :
http://beliefnet.com/blogs/crunchycon/2007/01/jonah-usual.html
Mr. Dreher, prove to me you could have found that answer four years ago … I’ll wait.
======================================
The answers were available about 3 months prior to the disbanding Danny Boy.
Hans Blix: Nope, no WMDs
Ritter: Nope, no WMDs and the shit they had is entirely useless.
Prince Bandar: $700,000,000 will buy the Iraqis out from under Hussein.
Wilson: What the Fuck? Nope, no Yellowcake from Niger.
Danny seems to have a memory like a Goldfish. Each new day a blank slate with endless possibilities and previous days’ “facts'” can be invented or ignored as needed.
Is a “Lexus Nexus” like an expensive car crash? How can that help Dreher understand this pres–
Oh, wait. That’s a good typo.
Please forgive my ignorance, but is the picture line-up supposed to be a game of ‘Spot the Dickhead’? Do we get a prize for guessing which one is the Riehl one?
I’m going for whichever one was dropped on his head as a baby, ‘cos that guy writes like a sheep that’s wandered into the marijuana plantation. Is he always like that? I’m new to this crazed RightWingOSphere.
“Is a “Lexus Nexusâ€? like an expensive car crash? ”
I think it’s a Toyota dealership.
It continues to amaze me how the Right so often bucks up admittedly fine, talented and intelligent young men as the would be sages of their age by giving their words such notoriety, when they are so lacking in deeds other than writing – read experience and genuine maturity.
I didn’t realize Dan Riehl was an Iraqi war veteran. Wow. The lack of reflection on one’s own position is really astounding.
Carey Roberts should have been next to Ultimate Warrior, IMO.
Somewhere, the Truth is weeping.
Riehl is like the Carleton Sheets of political discourse – filling people’s head with crazy notions about instant wealth and glory, while conveniently forgetting to mention how the program works. If you look closely, you can see “Results not typical” in tiny, tiny print at the bottom of the screen.
(The word ‘Riehl’ can be replaced with the name of almost any member of the WingNut-o-sphere or the Bush administration. Satisfaction guaranteed or your sanity will be cheerfully refunded.)
Go read or write a book, or something. You certainly don’t have what it takes to fight, or even help fight a difficult war.
I’m unfamiliar with this Riehl guy. Is he one of the “fighters” or a “fighter-helper”? You know, like is he a grunt, or a grunt’s assistant?
Can we prove that Adam Yoshida and Teh Virgin Ben are not the same person?
Maybe they were spearated at birth?
OK, I have a problem with this.
“Were there difficult decisions to be made? Yes.�
“Do some, or even several, now, with the benefit of hindsight, appear to have been wrong? Sure! So what?”
Since when is “ignoring problems until they fester, bloat, and explode” called “making a decision”?
And why isn’t Reihl smart enough to fake up his resume before he claims to “have what it takes”?
Translation:
“It continues to amaze me how the Right so often bucks up admittedly fine, talented and intelligent young men as the would be sages of their age by giving their words such notoriety, when they are so lacking in deeds other than writing -”
Translates to:
“I can be talked into anything, I will follow anyone who says I should be more powerful”
you really need to add a pic of Vox into your rogues lineup…
Rod Dreher:
Rod Dreher (and millions of Americans) believed that the Iranian hostage “crisis” proved Carter’s weakness and Reagan’s strength. Dreher was 12 years old when the hostage “crisis” started. As he was going through puberty, America was going through the nightly excercise of watching a new TV show, hosted by Ted Koppel, named “America Held Hostage” (the show was later renamed as “Nightline”) and airing nightly on ABC. Finally, in 1981, just as Dreher was about to turn 14, the hostages were released in the middle of Reagan’s inauguration speech. Does any sane American still believe the Iranians did this because Carter had a wimpy little stick and because the Iranians were suddenly scared of Reagan’s awesome big stick?
Dan Riehl says that our problem in Iraq is that George W. Bush’s wimpy little stick isn’t a big enough stick.
Damn, what we need is a real man, like Margaret Thatcher.
Look, you have to at least acknowledge that the right is absolutely correct here. If we were to kill every living thing in iraq, everything that walks or crawls, 2 legs, 4 legs or six, on the ground, in the ground, in the air, in the water, then peace would reign. It would be blessedly quiet, a parched, scorched landscape of bones and graves, from which we could tease out the oil, gas and any other resources we might find, then turn out the light, softly shut the door and stalk sheepishly back to our own shores…
mikey
Were there difficult decisions to be made? Yes. Do some, or even several, now, with the benefit of hindsight, appear to have been wrong? Sure! So what?
Definitely Rumsfeld.
“It continues to amaze me how the Right so often bucks up admittedly fine, talented and intelligent young men as the would be sages of their age by giving their words such notoriety, when they are so lacking in deeds other than writing – read experience and genuine maturity.”
Tip-top. “bucks up” has nothing to do with what he seems to mean. “admittedly” is big-time stoopid AND self-preeningly pretentious. “would be sages of their age” reads like an inept literal translation from some other language. He doesn’t mean “notoriety,” (which implies the Right wants its “sages” to be wrong, scandalous, etc.), but rather “exposure” or “prominence.” “They are so lacking in deeds” is echt wing-nut (Swank could have written it with both hands tied behind his back). And, of course, “maturity” is the insecure, booger-eating, I-don’t-have-to-be-sexy-because-I’m-smart geek’s imperious final put-down.
In sum: a fine effort. We look forward to more!
It would be blessedly quiet, a parched, scorched landscape of bones and graves, from which we could tease out the oil
Plus, added benefit! All those dead things would (wait for it) create even more oil. It’s a win-win!
Swank could have written it with both hands tied behind his back
I was going to ask how he types under those conditions… but thinking about it, I don’t really want the details after all.
Since when is “ignoring problems until they fester, bloat, and explode� called “making a decision�?
Since Reagan proved that this was the way to handle the AIDS problem! It was bold, forthright, decisive, etc.
Were there difficult decisions to be made? Yes. Do some, or even several, now, with the benefit of hindsight, appear to have been wrong? Sure! So what?
Are people in authority usually held responsible when they make a lot of mistakes on the job? Well, ye–
Do they usually get fired or replaced? We–
Did the American public, to which the Administration is responsible, respond to these several mistakes by throwing the President’s party out of Congressional power? Uh–
When a situation has been totally mismanaged, isn’t it typically described as a “failure”?
SHUT UP, DAMMIT! JUST–JUST SHUT UP! SHUT…UP!
I am gloating now. It’s not real gloating, since this thread is dead, but gloating nonetheless.
Is that Adam Yoshide or the magnets-for-immortality guy, Alex Chiu (?), in there at the end?
I’m pretty sure it’s that notorious sage of his age, a Lexus-Nexus in his own right, Adam Yoshida.
[…] This attitude also permeates the minds of Bush’s most ardent followers, from pundits on right-wing hate radio to conservative bloggers, and has lately taken on an eliminationist bent. For a more salient example, just look at what happened with Spocko. […]
Horny cam girls, free live video chat
Biggest dating portal in the world, come meet women tonight!…
…