Rope A Dope? Hardly

via Vanderleun at American Digest:

Masterful.

I'll be looking for the wave of apologies to President Bolling.(sic) Starting with mine for thinking ill of his motives.

Gerard, my friend, while it'll sound all Limbaugh-ish to say it, motives matter to Liberals, conservatives deal with reality and more importantly results. I never questioned Bollinger's motives. Most liberals have great motives, that doesn't mean they aren't misguided. And you can't perform a Rope-a-Dope when you don't even fight in the same weight class as your opponent.

Not only is there now a video framing him with all the things he is and stands for, there is also a video clip of his claim that there are no homosexuals in Iran. This one little clip alone will undo any "extra" legitimacy he got today.

Yes, the homosexual remark makes him look foolish, as if that is going to change a single mind on the Left. But just who is in this video allegedly exposing Ahmadinejad? Bollinger! Let me re-phrase, Bollinger, who? Because the sum total of Bollinger's admittedly scathing critique will be measured in some dusty institutional archive while Iran and the media will be trumpeting Ahmadinejad's speech at Columbia throughout the Muslim world. Maybe you caught the bits where he was playing such the strong champion of Palestine precisely for that reason?

Bollinger did a fine job in denouncing Ahmadinejad. Now the rest of the world can go back to caring about what Bollinger thinks about as much as they cared yesterday ... not so much. As for the Iranian president, that's a different matter. He has another stage tomorrow and Bollinger will be old and all too liberal news.

Comments

[dumbblonde]

I doubt that hearing what Ahmadinejad had to say changed anyone's mind. He said nothing new. He lied. He dodged questions. Those of us with a grip on reality were already able to see him for what he is. The rest of "us" are so deranged by their Bush-is-Hitler-and-America-is-the-root-of-all-that-is-evil-in-the-world mentality that they are blind to the reality of what evil really is. And blind to the reality of the threats that face us.

Would they feel differently if they themselves were living in a theocracy like Iran? Would being lashed for something as minor as drinking beer change their minds? Or being arrested for not wearing a properly-wrapped headscarf? Or being beaten for not showing up for prayers? Or even watching a friend being hanged for being gay? Do they think they could safely criticize the regime the way they criticize our own government?

[vanderleun]

Well, yes, of course "tomorrow is another day." But for this news cycle, the two main themes to come out of this will be the masterful Bollinger denunciation and the No Gays in Iran clip.

And the clip will persist.

We're not looking to win from the left. I agree that nothing changes their mindset. We never win from the left. We win by turning the middle.

As for me, I'm no Jane Hamsher ranting about never, ever giving ammunition from the opposite side.

The world will always move on in its metalled ways. That's the nature of the world. But on this day, I score it 2 for Columbia and the Free world. 0 for the death dwarf.

But I still love the Riehl world like a brother.

[Lala]

Various people who were interviewed on the street prior to his arrival were saying really stupid things like "it's good he's here, he'll be forced to answer some tough questions".

Forced?

[Dan Riehl]

"But I still love the Riehl world like a brother."

Thanks, Bro. Back at ya. And so you know for the record, I wasn't stridently against his speaking. But see this:

http://www2.irna.ir/en/news/view/line-24/0709252616013529.htm

And here's where I didn't go after Bollinger. I thought it was a bad decision, but his to make.

http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2007/09/ahmadinejad-in-.html

"Here's the deal. I usually don't get all worked up about not letting this one visit, or that one speak, or address the National Press Club, etc. That shouldn't be interpreted as my not being displeased with the choices being made. But I don't like restricting tradtional and extremely important American freedoms as a response to fascism.

[Bob]

This beady little eyed fuck reminds me more and more of Borat.
"HomoSexualz? Vhat - you are kiddink, right?"

Should anyone take this man serious, the fact he denied that there are homosexuals in Iran is proof that he lies.

Not that there isn't enough evidence of in-humane treatment of gay people over there. Even the most afflicted libs will agree with that.

Actually, in our court system, and with his record on the matter, this statement could very well be a hate crime.

[Terry Gain]

Ahmadinejad's visit is being portrayed in Iran as a great triumph.

Liberals are too hubristic and delusional to have contemplated that they were giving this cretin a platform. Bollinger and Columbia were played. The students who needed to hear this 12th Imam madman to know what he stands for are ineducable. They are a stupid as their brain dead liberal professors. Idiots.

As usual the right has to work twice as hard to protect their country because of the idiocy of their brain dead sinister countrymen.

[templar knight]

"...brain dead sinister countrymen."

Yep, that about sums it up for those on the Left, Terry.

[seekeronos]

They (the DNC) are lockstep (or in goose-step) with their ideological cousins in Ayatollahville... for them, the truest, most Luciferian motive is "power".

Where A'jad sez "there ain't no homo's in Iran", Hitlary or the Silky Pony will glibly say the same about anyone not on their respective wagons, if God forbid they win in 2008.

In their sugarplum dreams, they see walled off former US military bases and GITMO used to house "radical Xtianists" (anyone who thinks Jesus had some good ideas) and "fundies" and incorrigible "class enemies" (read: anyone who has been a registered Republican or has owned a firearm) whilst phoning up Cyclone Insecticide Corp. for an encore.