Meet the Oppressed

Here’s a portion of the transcript from yesterday’s Meet the Press with the back-and-forth between former Senator Fred Thompson and Mike “BJ Honeycutt” Farrell:

MR. RUSSERT: Mike Farrell, let me bring into our conversation, and out of equal time to Martin Sheen, provide you with a viewing of Senator Fred Thompson’s commercial. Let’s watch:
(Videotape, “Citizens United” Ad):
MR. THOMPSON: With all the criticism of our president’s policy on Iraq lately, Americans might ask what should we do with the inevitable prospect of nuclear weapons in the hands of a murderous and aggressive enemy? Can we afford to appease Saddam, kick the can down the road? Thank goodness we have a president with the courage to protect our country. And when people ask what has Saddam done to us, I ask what had the 9/11 hijackers done to us before 9/11?
(End videotape)
MR. RUSSERT: Mike Farrell, what’s wrong with that commercial?
MR. MIKE FARRELL: Well, other than the—Fred disavowed the name-calling and then used it. You know, this whole business of leftists and appeasers is really an insult to patriotic Americans who believe that this administration is on the wrong path and choose to say so. The idea that we’re tying Saddam Hussein to 9/11 by inference is another of the propaganda ploys, if you will, that are being used by the administration. There is no connection, there’s been no demonstrated connection. It is clear that there is no connection between Iraq and Saddam Hussein and 9/11. The 9/11 attacks were carried out by al- Qaeda. We understand that. Everybody understands that. And that is the threat that should be being pursued by this administration, which has chosen instead to propose a $97 billion expense to mount a war against Iraq and mount a $13 billion expense against the war on terrorism. It seems to me that the priorities are misplaced and one ought to actually find out why.

Straw Man: The author attacks an argument which is different from, and usually weaker than, the opposition's best argument

Mike Farrell does the full Ray Bolger with this convoluted defense. Let’s enumerate:

Straw Man #1 - Anti-war activists are unpatriotic
The peace crowd loves to repeat this canard because it feeds their martyr complex, their need to be “censored” and “oppressed.” Let’s make it clear: the anti-war protesters are not “unpatriotic” – they’re just wrong. Fred Thompson does not make the allegation that the anti-war types don’t love their country, but somehow Farrell twists the accurate term of “appease[rs]” into an attack on patriotism.

Straw Man #2 – The pro-war types are making a false link between Al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein
While I will agree that some have tried to make this tenuous link (such as Lindsey Graham earlier in the show), in the commercial Fred Thompson does not tie them together except in a metaphorical way. By invoking the 9/11 hijackers, Thompson is obviously using a comparison designed to invoke a visceral reaction – but the point here is that evil must be confronted now before we’re confronted by it later. Farrell seizes upon the mention of the 9/11 hijackers as if Thompson was trying to link them to Iraq. He did not.

Straw Man #3 – The war in Iraq will cost too much
Earlier in the show, Tom Andrews of Win without War hit on this theme relentlessly, and Farrell couldn’t wait to pile on, apropos of nothing that Fred Thompson said in his commercial. (Andrews bordered on self-parody when he practically held a pinkie up his mouth and declared the war would cost “One trillion dollars!”) Here’s a newsflash: wars cost money…lots of it. But liberals (patriotic liberals!) like Farrell can’t get past the “If the Navy had to have a bake sale” mentality so prevalent among the anti-war crowd. Look, there’s always going to be other stuff we could spend defense dollars on, but it’s hard to maintain order and defend freedom around the world with Amtrak.