RIGHT TO THE CHIN

Thoughts of An Anti-War Protestor Protestor

from Enigma

I’ve had the opportunity to attend a few anti-war protests in Chattanooga this year, and I have to say that I remain unmoved by the anti-war movement. All I’ve seen in my few visits is a predictable gaggle of lethargic, unfocused, hygiene-optional folks, who have trouble getting their P.A. to work. It is really quite sad. They have also failed to change my opinion that Saddam Hussein is a terrorist-funding mass murderer, and that his removal by force is the only realistic option. I also still enjoy oil.

One protest I attended was before Christmas, and this “anti-war” protest was also a protest to legalize pot, protect abortion rights, protect the environment, and stop hate crimes. See what I mean about a lack of focus? I mean, for crying out loud, pick a cause and stick with it!

There was also entertainment, as a group of young ladies, who I believe called themselves the “Anarchist Cheerleaders,” really got the party started with an unforgettable cheer about “being heard” and “resisting.” I forget how it went. It’s not important, though. For what they lacked in choreography, choral skills, and common sense, they more than made up for in armpit hair.

At another anti-war protest, I was joined by some of my compadres from our TV show, “On The Other Hand.” As a goof, we wore signs protesting against “lactose intolerance.” My observations at the earlier protest led me to want to try this sort of open-air protest parody. While most people we met were friendly, we did meet some resistance along the way. One woman took us to task for our charade, declaring that the war was a very serious issue. And since I agree that the war is a very serious issue, I thought to myself that it might have been better if she hadn’t shown up to the protest stoned.

The views and actions of our local “elites for peace” are represented tenfold by the symPATHETHIC media and an endless list of celebrities. The major media outlets take pride in overreporting about anti-American civil unrest, and those in Hollywood are often the chief instigators. Paid to pretend to be other people, actors are desperate to seem real and relevant. They use tired clichés (“Give Peace A Chance”) and quote tired Marxist, Socialist, and Communist idealogues to create entire movements with the sole purpose of demeaning and discrediting our republic, and everything it stands for. Upon our victory in Iraq, celebrities like Susan Sarandon, Martin Sheen, and Sheryl Crow will have dug themselves into a hole the size of Michael Moore. And speaking of obese, Socialist, future heart-attack victims, Michael Moore’s acceptance speech at the Academy Awards was as full of holes as his work.

Talk radio airwaves, too, are filled with opinions about the war, and the always-interesting “FRED The Show” page of WGOW’s website even features a link to a website listing some musicians who oppose the war. Musicians like Massive Attack (unfortunate band name for such a list), Jackson Browne (who’s against violence unless he’s beating up Darryl Hannah), and Natalie Imbruglia. Imbruglia’s inclusion on the list is interesting. As she’s now become a proud part of the anti-war movement, I can’t help but remember how I protested the bowel movements that came out of her mouth mislabeled as “songs” when she last had a hit. Five years ago. Or was it six?

What all these people and groups have in common is a desire for “peace.” There is a lot of whining going on about people like myself speaking out against the so-called “peace” movement. “We have a right to say what we want,” they shout. Yes, they do have a right to say what they want. But rights are not the issue here. Decency and respect are the issue here. When, through “civil unrest,” you block the streets and block people from getting to and from their jobs, and disrupt their livelihoods, you are being disrespectful. You are placing your rights above theirs simply because they disagree. And there is nothing peaceful about that.

In the end, what the heck is “peace” and where does it come from? Through hopeful complacency to preserve the way things are (or seem to be) now, or through risky action now to try to ensure the future? It’s a tough question. I tend to want to say the latter. But maybe Tom Cruise could help me out with it.