|It's Not What It Looks Like!
As our story opens, Colonel Hogan is working on the bomb in the compound wondering which wire to cut. He asks Colonel Klink "Which wire should I cut?" Klink says "Cut the red one."
So Hogan cuts the blue wire. The bomb is disarmed. Klink is relieved, but then he wonders "Why did you ask me which wire to cut when you didn't take my advice?"
Hogan comes back with the memorable line "I didn't know which one was right, but I knew you'd pick the wrong one."
You know what fascinates me? Just how consistently the left gets it completely wrong. No, really, they're staring right at something and you can count on them to get it 180 degrees bass-ackwards.
Okay, everybody take your seats, class is in session. There are two kinds of phenomena in this world: Things that are just exactly what they look like, and then there are things that aren't as simple as they look.
You want an example? Good idea. You've got the Earth, see, and you look out over it and it looks nice and flat and level. But it's not that simple. It's actually a huge sphere. Science is full of great paradoxes like that. What if you throw a baseball out horizontally and drop another one from the same height at the same time? You'd think the one you throw would take longer to hit the ground, but they hit simultaneously. Isn't that cool? When you're educated you know these upside-down things that other people wouldn't think of.
On the other side of the coin you've got the husband in a hotel room with a hooker. When his wife bursts through the door he says (you know this line, say it with me) "It's not what it looks like!" Guess what? It's exactly what it looks like.
So lets say you've got the president of the United States having sex with young girls in the oval office. Now an awful lot of people think that's not right and they say so. They say that a married man, much less the leader of the free world, should not be having sex with young interns in the oval office and maybe this kind of man is not fit to be president. Then you have other people that are educated beyond their intelligence. They remember that sometimes things in science defy your first instinct, so they say "That's an over-simplification. The situation is much more complex than that."
No. It's not.
So what if you get a whole bunch of people that don't approve of this sort of sophomoric behavior and they start speaking out about it? Well, of course what you have here is a highly organized conspiracy, a Vast Right-wing Conspiracy, if you will.
Bzzzzzt! Wrong answer.
See, when you might suspect a conspiracy is when you have a bunch of people who just spontaneously get together in major cities all over the world one weekend and they all have the same signs protesting the war in Iraq and they all are chanting the same things. That smells more like some orchestration is going on.
Since we're in an educational setting here, I'll learn you up on how you can tell the difference. If it's people acting how you'd naturally expect them to behave, you don't suspect a conspiracy. For example, if a lot of people see a sunset and characterize it as "beautiful," I wouldn't call up Art Bell right away. But if you get people acting contrary to their nature and saying things that are 1) not correct, and 2) not something a normal person would think of saying, that's a conspiracy. So, to cite our sunset example, if you've got a bunch of people looking at a sunset in different places and chanting "It's a tangible tapestry of purpleness . . ." Yeah, I'd suspect that's not a grass roots movement.
Parenthetically let me remind you that very few people in America oppose going in and solving the problem in Iraq. There are, however, a significant number of people who are opposed to democratic elections in America. You listen to the most outspoken of the so-called anti-war people (SCAWP) and the conversation takes a very predictable route. It begins with a fairly reasonable sounding opposition that you dispose of. Then the proposed arguments get less reasonable and the volume gets higher. Finally the SCAWP in frustration yells "The supreme court stopped the recount!"
Oh. Now I understand.
Certain conscientious people may be sincerely opposed to the war for short-sighted reasons that on the surface seem to be compassionate. Those people are useful idiots for the organizers of the rallies who are mad because we held an election instead of just installing the guy they wanted.
So Bill Clinton (you remember Bill Clinton--All the pardons, vandalizing the white house, boinking interns with wanton abandon, renting out the Lincoln bedroom, selling secrets to China, bombing any place he could think of to distract attention from his scandals without the least breath of protest from Hollywood? That Bill Clinton.) comes out and says that hey, the conservatives are highly organized. They've got all these talk shows on the radio. We've got to get organized and get our own talk shows.
Okay, here's a question (since we are, as you recall, in an educational setting): How did that man get through college without taking a single economics class?
Radio talk shows are conservative because that's what people want to listen to. That’s why Fox News--the station Janeane Garofalo characterizes as "The most . . . the most . . . conservative channel since . aaaaah!!" is number one.
Chart that one under the "It's simple, just like it seems" column.
The reason we don't have leftists on the radio is because no one wants to listen to their drivel. If no one listens, the advertisers don't sell their products. Then they quit paying the station. And those darn capitalists that run the radio stations just won't keep funding a cause that's losing money.
So, Mzzzz Garofalo, you can quit running around auditioning for the job. If this liberal radio network does happen, it will only last for about a week until the organizer's funds run out. Then you will have made yourself a laughingstock for nothing.