Dana Loesch is a Dolt (but she has plenty of company)

Dana Loesch is a conservative talk show host, Tea Partier, CNN talking head, and the Editor-in-Chief of Andrew Breitbart’s Big Journalism website. That should speak for itself, but she’s also turned into one of the more prominent (and increasingly shrill) defenders of the US Marines who shot a video of themselves pissing on some dead Taliban (or dead Afghans of some sort), which then found its way onto the Net.

Even some of the louder voices on the Right have been condemned the Marines in question for their violation of International and Military Law. Take Rush Limbaugh (of all people):

Well, there’s a video, nobody knows how old it is, of some U.S. Marines urinating on the bodies of Taliban combatants in Afghanistan. Peed on them. And of course it’s Marines. It violated the rules. There’s no defense of this. The overreaction of this is nuts, but still it happened.

Full of weasel words, of course, but even Rush has to say “There’s no defense of this.”

Unless, of course, you’re Dana Loesch.

So, Dana, let’s talk about this. On your radio show yesterday, you started out giving the Marines in questions virtual high-fives:

On her show, she gave the marines in question “one million cool points” and said that she would “drop trou” and “do it too.” She ended by saying: “Do I have a problem with that as a citizen of the United States? No, I don’t.”

Really?

Today, as a variety of people started objecting to your support of an illegal action, an action liable to put other servicefolk in danger, you doubled down on your doltitude:

Yesterday on my radio show I discussed the topic of the Marines videotaping themselves urinating on dead Taliban fighters. The usual mob of progressive haters started campaigning on Twitter and complaining to CNN.

Yes, imagine, “progressive haters” expressing themselves over someone cheering on this particular despicable act.  An act that was immediately condemned by a wide variety of military commanders — including the Commandant of the Marine Corps and military leaders in the theater:

Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Amos said in a statement the behavior is “wholly inconsistent with the high standards of conduct and warrior ethos that we have demonstrated throughout our history.”

Lt. Gen. Adrian Bradshaw, deputy commander of ISAF, called the actions on the video “disgusting.” “Any acts which treat the dead, enemy or friendly, with disrespect are utterly unacceptable and do not represent the standards we expect of coalition forces,” Bradshaw said in a video statement. He said he was speaking on behalf of Allen, who is out of the country.

“It is difficult to say what long-term impacts this might have, and I would hesitate to get into speculation, but obviously any sort of footage, any sort of activity of this kind that is grossly against all the moral values that the coalition forces are standing for are very much working against our cause and against everything that we are standing for and that we are here for,” said Brig. Gen. Carsten Jacobson, a NATO ISAF spokesman. “We will find the ones who are responsible and hold them accountable.”

… “We are aware of the video. The hate in it does not represent the U.S. Marine Corps,” said Col. Ricco Player, a spokesman for the Marines in Afghanistan’s volatile Helmand province

Clearly they’re all a bunch of “progressive haters.”

You continue:

Politico this morning attempted to elevate the trumped-up controversy over my remarks to a serious journalistic story, and didn’t bother reaching out to me for comment prior to publishing. It’s the kind of hit job Politico does best–and likely payback for all the times their journalistic malpractice has been pointed out here.

Yes, let’s judge the criticism based on who said it and what previous journalistic feuds you’ve had. It’s all Us vs. Them for you, isn’t it?

There is a difference in advocating for the Marines to break the law, which I didn’t do, …

Except for, you know, giving them “one million cool points” or saying you’d “do it too” or declaring that you didn’t have a problem with what they did “as a citizen of the United States,” or insisting that it wasn’t “a scandal.”

True, you didn’t literally say that all other Marines should behave likewise.  But by saying that it was all okay, even “cool” (albeit you didn’t “get” why they would make a video of it), you certainly seems to be approving of it.

… and defending them from overly-dramatic hysteria.

I.e., criticism.

I was using absurdity to highlight absurdity.

You seem to use absurdity for everything. I assume. The alternative, that you actually believe what you’re saying, is almost too … um, absurd to consider.

It’s absurd to desecrate corpses …

But, apparently, “cool” and something you would emulate.

… but it’s not wrong to hate terrorists who are trying to kill our troops–and us.

Jesus would differ, if that makes a difference.  Regardless, we like to think that, unlike others, we don’t act on our hate.  We are not barbarians. We actually stand for something.

And I’m not in uniform–so I am free to express …

Absolutely.  If the government were to try and shut you down for your statements, I’d be right there defending you.

On the other hand, being free to express something doesn’t mean you’re protected from the social consequences.  That’s the thing about the free marketplace of ideas — you can say what you want, and others can say what they feel about it.

… what a lot of Americans feel about the controversy …

Really?

… even if it makes some pony-tailed academics feel uncomfortable.

Haven’t noticed Gen. Amos wearing a pony tail lately.  Heck, I haven’t worn one in a decade and half.

Plus … what’s it with the Right and “academics”?  You have something against smart people? Or people who have actually studied on a topic?  Are we going to maintain our industry and science without academics?

The progressive left chose to include CNN in their attack because they don’t like that the network–any network–features conservative voices and have been throwing everything at the wall to get me removed since the very beginning.

Well, let’s see … CNN presumably hired you because you are popular and they thought you would bring them ratings, no?  If some of that audience declares that your opinions are such that they will not watch CNN — well, that’s both their right of “free expression” and a very appropriate thing for your employer to consider.

My entire point of the past two days was to highlight the absurd reaction from militant troop-bashers to these Marines.

Gosh, think you could have done that without saying that the Marines in question were “cool” and that you didn’t object to what they did?

In my Twitter timeline yesterday progressives called our military “killers, kids, barbaric trash, murderers …” The only time soldiers are celebrated by the left is when they engage in protests like OWS. The rest of the time they’re demonized. They get the red carpet rolled out for them, too.

And let’s not forget how lefty bloggers like Markos Moulitsas feels about dead American military contractors. His excuse for his “screw them” comment? He was angry about soldiers getting killed. You know what? So am I. But I blame the people who are trying to kill them–not the people they are trying to protect.

Okay, so call me a progressive (I’d accept that label). I don’t consider our troops “killers, kids, barbaric trash, murderers …” as a group. Neither do I sanctify all their actions as somehow holy just because of the uniforms they wear.

I appreciate the sacrifices they make, and the stresses they operate under, and whether it is a good war or a bad war in motivation, I know that many, even most, serve to defend their nation, and endure dangers and hardships I cannot imagine.

But  that doesn’t justify any way they act. That’s why we have a Military Code of Justice.  That’s why we hold ourselves to standards of conduct in war. That’s why we don’t wage total war, using all the weapons in our arsenal, forgiving any atrocity.

Is this the worst thing these soldiers could have done?  Of course not. But it wasn’t a trivial thing, either, for reasons both philosophical and pragmatic.  And it was against regulations, and international law, and the individuals involved should be punished appropriately.  Not strung up or tarred and feathered — but dealt with in such a way as to make it clear to them and other soldiers that this is not acceptable behavior for American soldiers.

And I won’t condemn American soldiers on the battlefield.

No matter what they do? Piss on the dead, cap surrendered soldiers, rape captives, put heads on pikes — is there nothing you won’t condemn?

Then you’re no better than the supporters of the Taliban.  You’re a tribalist, Dana — someone who takes the position that the side you’re on is more important than what your side does, that the flag you wave over your head excuses any crime, any sin.

This is nothing but an exercise in situational, exploitative outrage, and it completely proved the point I was making.

That pissing on dead opponents is “cool”?

The phrases “defile” and “desecration” popped up in my replies on Twitter every minute or so. If “desecration” is a concern for progressives, where was their outrage when the remains of over 200 Air Force members were dumped in a landfill?

There was plenty of outrage about that (Bush Administration) action from all directions (though it was a tempest in a teapot, so far as I could tell).

I’ve seen more outrage towards our troops over this incident than I have ever seen towards the Taliban themselves who’ve beheaded soldiers (American and Afghan), raped and tortured women, sent out suicide bombers, and carried out horrific attacks.

Really?  If so, it’s because, honestly, we expect that sort of barbarism from those asshats. That doesn’t mean there’s forgiveness, ant there’s plenty of outrage over their actions, but it’s not a surprise. Progressive, liberals … they (among most other humans) hate and despise the actions of the Taliban.  Hell, that’s why the invasion of Afghanistan was so universally popular amongst the American citizenry.  It was seen as a “good” war.  Because the Taliban are brutal, sadistic, oppressive, torturous, abusive theocrats and (by our standards) savages.

But we expect better from US Marines.  Shouldn’t we?

The disproportionate anger on the part of progressives is fueled by their dislike of our military.

I don’t dislike our military.  Are there some on the Left who do?  Probably. Hell, there are some on the fringe Right who hate and fear the military (as tools of the government). But I don’t think most “progressives” do.

But even if progressives hated the military the the fire of a thousand burning suns, would that justify the illegal and dangerous acts of these particular Marines? Is the righteousness of an accusation judged primarily by the accuser?

That what this proves. The left is attacking me so they can give the Obama administration a pass–unlike what they did with Bush and Abu Ghraib.

(A) They’re attacking you because you’re defending an evil act that (among other things) endangers other troops.

(B) Every indication is that the Obama Administration is acting swiftly and definitively to deal with the perpetrators here, rather than suppressing news about it, hiding the photos, minimizing or dismissing the importance of it.

Beyond which, as your own guest (?) in the radio clip indicated, this is a very different occurance, not the same at all.

The Abu Ghraib abuses took place over a prolonged period.  The abuses were part and parcel of, and an extension of, official policy at the location to degrade and dehumanize and break the prisoners.  And the abuses there were against the living, not the dead.

Like it or not, I’ll stand up for our troops no matter which president is in charge.

Our Tribe Over All.  Yeah, that’s a great moral lesson to our kids … and our troops.

Sorry, Dana. We are better than this. We are bigger than this.  And, if we are not, we shouldn’t gleefully wallow in that darkness, but continue to aspire to a higher ideal. Because, if we don’t … then what the hell are we fighting for? What makes us different from them, except we’re Us, not Them.

*     *     *

And, just to note, the comments to your post, Dana,  are even more horrific. For all that you and yours claim that the “pony-tailed academics” are fellow-travelers with the anti-Americans in the world, the Manichaean tribalists of your cheering section — it’s Us vs. Them, and They are all the people who feel differently from us, and They’re traitors and evil and eat babies when they aren’t polluting our precious bodily fluids, but far worse are Them folks who hop on and claim to be military but who think this action was a disgusting and endangering act and therefore They are obviously prissy punks who aren’t really former military but even if They are They’ve obviously sold Their souls to Satan and should be pissed on, too — those folks are far closer to the Taliban than anyone else I can imagine.  And that they are, ostensibly, Americans, is frankly terrifying to me.