Can you tell me what’s wrong with Michael Goldfarb’s reasoning faculties? While discussing John McCain’s appearance on Jon Stewart’s The Daily Show, Goldfarb made the following observation.
My only gripe with the interview: On the one hand, Stewart attacks McCain for taking the Hamas endorsement of Obama at face value. On the other hand, Stewart thinks Bush is ‘al Qaeda’s Rev. Wright,’ i.e. a tool they use to fire up their base. You can’t have it both ways–either you care what terrorists think or you don’t. McCain clearly doesn’t, but like he says, this ain’t beanbag, and the Hamas endorsement was as much a missed opportunity for Obama as it was fodder for McCain. As to whether Bush is a recruiting tool for terrorists–who cares? Al Qaeda was recruiting before Bush was in office and they will continue to do so after he’s gone. The important thing is that we keep killing those recruits. Eventually, one side will give up. And if Obama wins in November, we know which side that will be.
Either Goldfarb just wants to kill Muslims or he just wants to have a good cause to justify bloated military budgets. I don’t know which is true…possibly both. But we can’t kill off every terrorist until there is no more terrorism, and we certainly can’t do that if we are making terrorists faster than we can kill them. It’s obviously safer and more economical to avoid creating a terrorist in the first place than to hunt them down and kill them. That logic is so unassailable that to ignore it is prima facie evidence of an deceitful ulterior motive.
