Liberal “Newspeak”
& Teddy Roosevelt
Ralph Wilbur
Liberal “Newspeak”
& Teddy
Roosevelt
Ralph Wilbur
>>Valley Patriot>> |
Left wing liberals have raised George Orwell’s Newspeak to a new level of sophistication. The liberal conscience must be suffering under great stress from the gathering weight of their outspoken depredations being continually heaped upon our nation’s wartime leadership. To assuage their pangs of guilt for giving aid and encouragement to our enemies, they have recently seized upon a quotation by a former Republican president, which on its face, seems to support their railings against George Bush. Teddy Roosevelt once made a comment justifying his criticism of Woodrow Wilson, our president leading into WW I. He said, “To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but it is morally treasonable to the American public.” This out-of-context quote appears on leftwing internet sites as an example of a famous and popular Republican claiming it is OK to criticize a president in time of war. In a letter to the editor of a local newspaper, one liberal recently wrote, “If it’s good enough for Teddy Roosevelt, it’s good enough for me.” To use this quote in such a manner, however, is disingenuous. Liberals would have you believe that Roosevelt was criticizing Wilson for leading the country to war, when just the opposite was true. Roosevelt actually condemns Wilson because of his procrastination (U.N. style) in responding to ongoing German threats to this country. Woodrow Wilson ran on a platform of keeping this nation out of WW I. When the Germans declared open season on American ships, Wilson’s only response was to break off diplomatic relations with Germany. Roosevelt found this lack of resolve incredible. “He [Wilson] is yellow all through in the present danger, either physically or morally,” he said. Three days after the German announcement of unrestricted submarine warfare, Roosevelt wrote the War Secretary, requesting permission to raise a division of volunteers for deployment against Germany. Roosevelt later declared, “I was literally the only national leader who dared stand straight on Americanism, preparedness and the performance of international duty.” When Wilson still hadn’t declared war, Roosevelt said, “I am so utterly sick of the gush about ‘supporting the president’ that I shall write a brief and courteous, but unequivocal, statement of our present condition…”, he told Lodge. “Taft, Hughes, and even Root take part in the general idiot cry which aligns us behind the president, right or wrong – and he is 99 percent wrong [about not declaring war].” Roosevelt was correct to criticize Wilson’s foot dragging. Had we joined the conflict earlier, Russia might have stayed in the war, and our boys and their Allies would not have had to face the tens of thousands of additional German troops then transferred from the Russian front to the trenches of France. Today we face similar challenges, only this time, while our President steers a bold, steady course to strike terrorism at its source, liberals undermine his efforts at every opportunity, sending the message abroad that the United States is not united in this effort. Their conduct is treasonous. Liberal “Newspeak” & Teddy Roosevelt The definition of treason includes “giving aid and comfort to enemies”. Those who believe that the mouthings of Ted Kennedy, and Michael Moore and his Hollywood celebrity crowd don’t give aid and comfort to our enemies, and therefore are treasonous, are out of touch with reality. In this day and age of instant world communication, such prattlings of disaffection toward wartime leadership give great encouragement to al Qaida and other Islamic militants throughout the Middle East, motivating more dastardly deeds of murder and mayhem. The current liberal dialogue provides our enemies the inspiration and incentive to persist in their fanatical efforts to gain power. Criticism of our government’s efforts to defeat the enemy cannot but increase the loss of American, Iraqi and Afghan lives. Such conduct is what defines “treason”. No manner of quoting Roosevelt will change this! While Roosevelt’s comments were critical of a President in time of war, they did not give aid or comfort to our enemy, then Germany, and therein lies the difference between patriotism and treason – a difference most liberals choose to overlook. Using the Roosevelt quote like this is a desperate and dishonest effort to take the liberal conscience “off the hook” for criticizing George Bush in time of war. Even though Roosevelt did not get his division, his four sons were soon involved in the military around the world. He used his influence to place them right where they wished to be – amid the fiercest fighting. Quentin, the youngest, was killed in France, and another son was severely wounded. Roosevelt voiced many criticisms of this president. He assailed reports that Wilson was considering a peace settlement short of complete victory. He stated, “Germany has made itself the outlaw among nations, and with her we should negotiate only through the mouths of our cannon.” Roosevelt biographer H. W. Brands wrote in 1997, “Roosevelt also set the standard for what would become another signature of twentieth century America: an assumption of responsibility for international order,” and, “…he never would have questioned the assertion that enlightened countries like the United States have a special duty to enforce civilized behavior on countries not civilly inclined of their own.” Brands quotes Roosevelt further asserting, “If we forget that in the last resort we can only secure peace by being ready and willing to fight for it, we may some day have bitter cause to realize that a rich nation which is slothful, timid, or unwieldy is an easy prey for any people which still retains those most valuable of all qualities, the soldierly virtues.” And finally, “Better a thousand times err on the side of overreadiness to fight, than to err on the side of tame submission to injury, or cold-blooded indifference to the misery of the oppressed.” These statements alone lay bare the absurdity that liberals attempt to foist upon us by portraying Roosevelt as some sort of anti-war apologist. Under today’s circumstances, Roosevelt would be a staunch Bush supporter, not a Bush-basher. Liberals would have us believe falsehoods salted with grains of truth – the ultimate in rhetorical obfuscation. It is so important for young people to study history in our schools, so they can recognize when they are being hoodwinked by political “Newspeak”. Any high school student of American history should know enough about Teddy Roosevelt to realize that the liberals' characterization of Roosevelt is totally out of character. “Speak softly, but carry a big stick”, would never be the motto of a Wilson, or a Kennedy, or a Kerry. Knowledge of history is a splendid antidote against being manipulated by deceptive rhetoric. Send your questions
comments to ValleyPatriot@aol.com |
newspeak\ ‘n(y)ü-‚spek
\ n, often cap [Newspeak, a language “designed to
diminish the range of thought”, in the novel
Nineteen Eighty-Four (1949) by George Orwell]
deliberately ambiguous and contradictory language used to
mislead and manipulate the public.