Saturday, December 17, 2011
Lawrence Auster writes on his blog:
The transcendent issue in this election, on which the survival of American liberty depends, is the repeal of Obamacare. My long-time position (which could change depending on new facts and circumstances) is that I will vote for any Republican nominee who seems to be genuinely committed to repealing Obamacare.
No, he's dead wrong. The overarching issue in this election, as well as previous, and subsequent elections, is the problem of Islam. Bottom line: If there were a candidate who supported "Obamacare" and yet were also anti-Islam, I would vote for him in a heartbeat. Auster, apparently, wouldn't. That speaks volumes.
Similarly, if there were a candidate unabashedly supportive of the homosexual agenda who was also anti-Islam (*cough! Pim Fortuyn cough!*), again, I would vote for him in a New York minute. Auster, apparently, wouldn't. When Auster described the respective problems thusly:
Islam... [and] homosexual liberation—two of the major forces threatening our civilization from without and within...
-- which of the two would he choose to oppose, if the rubber met the road and he had to choose?
About people like me, readers can be confident they know where I stand. About Auster, one never knows. And how many other issues would Auster add from his hectic schedule of Commenting on All Things Emergent Under the Sun? With his penchant for labile hyperbole, "major forces threatening our civilization" probably applies to half a dozen other sociopathologies he just happened not to mention that day. And anyway, we saw up top how "Obamacare" rises above the specter of Islam like a larger Godzilla would loom over a mere garden snake. (Sorry, I got Austerianly carried away with my rhetoric there...)
Auster is yet another "conservative" for whom Islam is a problem, yeah sure; but not the "real" problem. Somewhere down the to-do list, doncha know, after we take care of all the non-Islamic Enemies Within and Under Our Bed. For its intellectual and political leadership, the Anti-Islam Movement does not need individuals for whom the problem is treated more as a hobby to be shelved aside for supposedly more urgent hobbyhorses -- than as the unique, and uniquely overarching, danger that it is.