…from Victor Davis Hanson who is certainly no lightweight and a person who’s opinion must be respected. Hanson says in part:
Some bloggers sent me postings the other day about Charles Johnson’s Little Green Footballs website, and suggested that the site has changed—as in flipped sides. I have not followed the controversy, but I once rode a bike down in LA for an afternoon with Johnson and found him both a serious and bright guy with all sorts of original ideas about radical Islam and the anti-Enlightenment dangers it posed.
Out of curiosity I went to the site today. All I discovered different was a change in emphasis, but not necessarily attitude. He still is strongly anti-jihad; the difference is that he now worries just as much about creationism, paleo-right tribalism, and the white supremacists’ piggy-banking onto efforts to stop radical Islam. Those are legitimate worries for any liberal (as in 19th-century liberal) minded. Almost monthly I am smeared by the far far right for defending the Anglo-American effort in World War II or support for the melting-pot traditional of racial integration and intermarriage. So I understand some of his concerns.
This is the best single defense of Charles that I have read including one’s I’ve written myself (that’s no surprise after all it IS VDH). A person with no experience with what is going on who read this article would certainly be expected to take Charles side on this dispute.
For those more experienced with the matter it reeks of delicious irony.
First: He is right about the anti-jihad stuff so far I have not seen Charles abandon Israel and the War on Terror, or the troops. For me the war on terror is THE issue and I’d rather have him on board than not. Too bad Charles doesn’t have that same opinion concerning being on board.
Second: He bases his opinion on his personal experience with the man. It may be only a singular experience but that one meeting is one more than I’ve had. That is of course the best way to judge a person, first hand experience. I’m sure that Steven Green, Dan Riehl, Michelle Malkin, Pam Geller and Cynthia Yockey would agree with that statement. Too bad Charles Wouldn’t.
Third: He talks about being slimmed by people because of his arguments so he can relate: I’m sure that Rush Limbaugh honorary lizzardoid, Steven Green, Dan Riehl, Michelle Malkin, Pam Geller can all relate to that. Not so much Charles, under his current rules of engagement he won’t link to this article defending him since PJM and my extension you are associating with an unacceptable person and would normally be banned,
Robert Stacy McCain’s first article on Pajamas media was dated May 20th of last year, Charles did three Pajamas video interviews , the earliest is Dec of 2008 and the last is March 2009. According to his own rules, he can’t link to himself.
If Victor being dishonest? Of course not, but he is making the mistake that Tip O’Neill talked about when watching congress. The Action isn’t on the bills. (Posts) the Action is in the Amendments (comment threads). Although a long time Lizard I was never really a chat room guy and didn’t dive into comments, it was only when I took the time to do so and saw what was happening there that I saw something is rotten in Denmark.
As Two Face once said to Lex Luthor in Batman 293 “There is a difference between lying and not knowing the truth.” VDH is certainly no liar, but he doesn’t know all the facts here.
Update: I should point out if I haven’t made it clear that VDH is one of the GREAT writers and if you don’t read him regularly you should. His book Carnage and Culture is a classic, my review of it on Amazon is here.