• Hey! We're on Twitter!

  • Buy The Book!



    Click to Buy The Mug

    Buy The Book

I was surprised the other day to learn that RenewAmerica owed its existence to Alan Keyes, because I’d always assumed it was founded by P.T. Barnum.  Perhaps it was the warmth and unity I sensed among its contributors — a group of outcasts and misfits, united by their common differences, much like the family formed by the eponymous characters in Todd Browning’s Freaks.  But as much as I love each and every wingnutty one of them, there is no more endearingly demented oddball than Fred Hutchinson.


Fred, with his toothy smile, clip-on tie, and pink rosebud pinned by a proud and loving mother to his short-sleeved, polyester dress shirt from Sears, is a refreshingly goofy arbiter of moral justice.  It’s as if one of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse favored pastels and resembled Napoleon Dynamite’s brother.

But even more darling is Fred’s bio, which is actually longer than his column.  It isn’t really a conventional, shorthand resumé so much as it is a heartfelt account of one man’s spiritual journey from confused, vision-questing adolescent to smug middle-aged dork:

During my teen years, I discovered a passion for truth in my heart and also discovered I was a political conservative. During my college years I joined the debate team, got active in politics and discovered that I enjoy a philosophical approach to learning. I was deeply convinced that truth exists and can be found by those who mean to have it. I devoted myself to the search for truth and stuck with that devotion for the rest of my life.

Yes, the search for Truth inevitably leads to RenewAmerica.  Well, I don’t know about you, but I’m convinced of Fred’s bona fides.  Shall we get on with the column?   Oh, I’m sorry, Fred, you weren’t done with your bio?

At some point, I realized that to find truth one must go to the fountainhead of truth, namely God. I sought God during my last two years in college culminating in a traumatic and supernatural moment when I met Christ at the cross. From that moment to this, I have never doubted my eternal salvation.

‘Nuff said!  At this point, I’m more than ready for Fred to bust some Truth in our ass, but not only are we not done with his life story, we’re still two paragraphs away from the 1970s!  So I’m going to skip ahead to the end, where we discover that — I hope you’re sitting down — Fred is an unemployed CPA.  Anyway, let’s get on to his 400 word history of America’s involvement in Southeast Asia.

Liberal myths about the Vietnam War

Columnist Bob Herbert has historical amnesia about the Vietnam war but has total recall about the liberal myths of the anti-war movement. The central theme of his essay of 6/08/09 was that it was the Vietnam war was unwinnable and therefore a pointless waste of lives. It was not unwinnable but it lasted much longer than it should have because of the Johnson — Mc Namera rules of engagement and the micro-management of the war.

Like Alcoholics Anonymous members and the manufacturers of Hebrew National hot dogs, I’m going to pause here and defer to a Higher Power — Doghouse Riley:

“The political and military leadership of the North understood the war to be primarily political. We didn’t, and we still don’t. We never understood the Vietnamese, or how to fight an insurgency; our commanders tried to refight WWII. Our largely indiscriminate bombing program in the South, and ham-fisted relocation efforts, served to magnify Vietnamese resentment of the Western colonials and their corrupt Catholic puppets. And yet some of us are still trying to argue that if we’d only fought a little more WWII we’d have won. Like the tout sheet says we were supposed to.”

The Nixon-Kissinger team went China to give China what they wanted, namely prestige and world celebrity. In return, China agreed to allow America to bomb North Vietnam aggressively, with a Chinese promise not to come into the war as they did in Korea.

That’s some awesome truth-seeking Fred.  Of course, it might be worth mentioning — and correct me if I’m wrong — that by the time Nixon went to China in 1972, the People’s Republic had already withdrawn their forces from Vietnam, which by then was primarily a Soviet client, and begun backing the Khmer Rouge, who were involved in skirmishes with the North Vietnamese even before the fall of Saigon.  Then there was that little matter of the Vietnamese-Cambodian war beginning in 1975, and the Sino-Vietnamese War in 1979.  But that’s all nitpicking.  The centuries-long history of relations between China and Vietnam probably wasn’t really all that complicated, and I’m sure Nixon and Kissinger knew exactly what they were doing.

Contrary to liberal myths, this bombing was very effective because it brought the North Vietnamese to the Paris Peace Talks (1973). The result was stalemate similar to the Korean War. In order to ensure that North Vietnam did not renege on the agreement, it was necessary to keep some American troops in Vietnam, give aid to South Vietnam and to retain the option of bombing. This was a win in terms of our goal to prevent the spread of Communism in South East Asia.

Yes, we had the North Vietnamese right where we wanted ‘em in 1973.

When Nixon was in Paris, enjoying the crowning triumph of his career, The Watergate burglars were captured. In the process of his downfall, the rage of the Democratic congress against Nixon reach a fever pitch. In this environment, the angry democrats in Congress were ready to swallow the all the myths of the antiwar movement. They cut off funds for the war, pulled out the troops and banned bombing.

Absolutely.  Except for a couple of minor points…

  1. Nixon wasn’t at the signing of the Paris Peace Accords on January 27, 1973.
  2. The Watergate burglaries took place almost a year earlier, in 1972.
  3. The Nixon Administration began withdrawing troops from Vietnam in 1971.
  4. Congress didn’t “cut off funds for the war,” since the war was over.  They refused to allocate funds for renewed combat operations, and they cut aid to South Vietnam from $1 billion to $700 million.  The South Vietnamese were forced to economize by reusing Handi-Wipes and giving up some of their premium cable channels, but there was no shortage of leftover ordnance.

Historically, a blood purge follows the violent take-over of power by Communists of the Marxist- Leninist brand. The blood purge in Cambodia in involved in the murder of an estimated 2,000,000 people. 3,500,000 or one tenth of the men, women and children of South Vietnam died from political violence after the war and one third of these, or 1,250,000 were murdered. Bob Herbert puts the number at 2 or 3 million, not mentioning that most of these deaths were murders of communist blood purge and not civilian casualties of American military operations.

Actually, Herbert is talking about wartime casualties (”More than 58,000 Americans died in Vietnam and some 2 million to 3 million Vietnamese”) which is why he didn’t mention your blood purge thing.  Now I think I see why you didn’t link to his column.

As a lefty, he wants to cover up the communist blood purge and make America look bad.

Is this like one of those viral ad campaigns on Twitter where you can win a MacBook Pro if you keep tweeting #bloodpurge?

The Paris Peace talks should have saved the lives of all those blood purge victims.

Guess so.  Well you’re working hard for it.  I hope you win.

The Democratic Congress who threw all those lives away.

(The Password is…Robert McNamara…)

They did it willfully even after they had been warned about blood purges. None of the Democratic congressmen who pulled the troops out and none of the anti-war leaders have ever apologized for engineering American defeat or for facilitating the blood purge.

Well.  I guess there’s nothing more to say then, except…Good-bye.
Oh, and…Blood Purge!

9 Responses to “The Dud From “Mystery Date” Sets Us Straight”

every time i see some daft right-wing cunt blathering on about how many people the vietnamese killed after the war it seems to double. it used to be 700,000 (figures from where exactly?) then a million, now its up to 3,500,000. i know the figures are nonsense, but where do they get them from originally? i presume there must be some sort of central database that controls it all, because everyone seems to change their figures at the same time, so each individual can’t just be pulling them out of their arse. so if we hack that site and take off a zero every couple of days, presumably they’d have to follow suit. it’d be nice to see if we could get the “death toll” down to 35 people before they noticed

In college, Fred discovered The Truth is something you can make up as you play along. It’s fun!

May I safely assume Fred’s bio inexplicably leaves out his service in Vietnam?

First, would the early days of July be a good time to remind people that the United States was formed by a band of insurgents who, though opposed by a sizable number of their own countrymen, still managed to “defeat” the greatest military power on earth, with the help of that power’s enemies, basically because that country’s leaders withdrew support when the war became too costly? If Vietnam “doesn’t count” then we’re still a British colony.

And because Scott loves praeteritio so much, we’ll ignore the time-honored idiocies about the rules of engagement being such a handicap (you can say a lot about US military and political leadership in Vietnam, but at least they understood what had happened when we acted as if the Chinese army didn’t exist in 1950); political opposition to the war being based on anti-war fantasies (we’ll put the combat records of John Paul Vann and Dan Ellsberg up against Rosebud Hutchinson’s any day); the bizarro idea that Nixon went to China to gain retroactive permission for the Johnson administration to drop 3.5x the total ordnance of WWII on the North, a move which was so vital to our Strategic Rubble Creation Program (STRATRUB), but, militarily, not so much; and the standard wingnut conflation of the Soviet Union, “Red” China, and anyone who wore a beard (the Chinese were hated by the Vietnamese, of course, and only allowed the Soviets to use their rails for a supply line once it became clear we’d caught ourselves by the balls. Prior to 1965 the primary source of Viet Minh armaments was US materiel either captured or sold to them by corrupt Southern officials, to use a redundancy).

Instead, let’s just mention that the real Commie bloodbath, the one in Cambodia, occurred precisely because of Nixon’s bombing campaign and the loosening of rules of engagement. Not that the truth matters any.

That, plus at least he didn’t call it the “Democrat Congress.”

I suppose it would be impolitic to point out to Fred, that Ho Chi Minh’s forces had been instrumental in the allied campaigns in southeast Asia against the Japanese, and, in exchange, were promised the right to negotiate independence from France. Had not the French reneged on the agreement and Truman ignored Minh’s request for support, the Vietnam War would never have occurred.

The US right never gets that they’re dealing first and foremost with nationalists, who want their countries freed from foreign domination. That one or the other of the conveniently demonized ideologies involved are merely what these nationalists see as the most effective vehicle to that end.

For the record, blaming Americans, the middle class, college students, the peace movement, and Vietnam veterans for “losing” the war, because they had no stomach for it is crap as deep as it is wide.

The Vietnam War was a disaster morally, strategically, (war of attrition,) and diplomatically. People questioned why America should be involved a civil war half way around the world for a few rubber plantations and the loss of over 58,000 American soldiers. The people were not educated to understand the importance of the KGB and the CIA using small countries with agrarian societies to wage testosterone based massacres to prove which side was the most merciless and had the biggest balls.

Indigenous people are too primitive to mind being used and killed for proxy wars between nations led by psychopathic barbarians whose only means of proving how brave they are is to exploit differences among “primitive” people, (easier to kill and defeat without air support, sophisticated communications, transportation, manufacturing base, navy, satellites, drones, missiles, starlight scopes, infra red imaging, Kevlar uniforms, shock and awe, WMDs, unbroken supply chain, unlimited munitions, or simply the most powerful military in the world.)

The previous facts make me wonder why the U.S. needed to employ its military to fight 3000 rag tag intellectuals, lunatics, and revolutionaries living in caves. It was and remains an intelligence and law enforcement problem. Everything is B.S. to try to con Americans into believing the right wing perspective is tough; instead, of what it truly is - lame.

The so-called “weakness” the leaders have been trying to hide with propaganda ever since the Vietnam War was the lack of control American leaders had over the people. Morality, common decency, and sense be damned; if a nation’s leaders order its soldiers to attack an orphanage run by unarmed pacifist nuns serving children who lost their parents in war, soldiers are not supposed to question the morality, legality, and the intelligence of such an order.

The “weakness” was the fact that thinking Americans questioned authority and came to their own conclusions about the actions they chose to be engaged in. Independence of thought and action has been America’s greatest strengths historically. Some of America’s greatest moments have been due to thinking for oneself rather than blind obedience.

The war sadists had to find someone else to blame, because tin pot dictators and ruthless tyrants think of independence as the result of weak leaders. Leaders should presumably have total control over the hearts and minds of citizens. Therefore, they blame Americans for not having the guts to be stupid.

Long before numb-nuts started finding excuses for the “weakness” in American leadership, blind obedience was generally considered a weakness, because loyalty that is not reality based falls apart among brainwashed ignorant followers. The brainwashed do not have the same determination to win that the independent and free possess.

So, our leaders try to protect their reputations as ruthless, merciless control freaks to other nation’s leaders and in so doing rob Americans of their reputation for strength that at its root lives their independence. Independence is the source of spiritual strength, character, and an idea that once made this nation’s people appear unique in the world. The idea implied courage, because Americans chose rather than followed.

Patriotic fervor is simply not real when a war is an act of aggression against a foe that does not stand a chance in hell of winning. Defense of one’s nation, one’s family, and one’s comrades in a war for survival does not require manipulation, propaganda, and deception to convince soldiers to fight.

Then there is numb-nuts making up stupid excuses that no one believes, apparently, not even him. I know this is long and not particularly funny, but some bullshit should not be allowed to stand without comment.

Thanks to Fred Hutchinson and Alan Keyes for volunteering to go to Vietnam in my place since I had been anti war since 1966.

Been reading some Robert McNamara was a complex individual comments. A few free facts:

Dresden fire bombing planned by McNamara.
Tokyo and a hundred innocent towns in Japan fire bombed under McNamara planning.
Hiroshima bombed under his personal control.
Nagasaki bombed under his personal control.
Personally chose Westmoreland (more kills means we win even if we wiped out villages of 100 and recovered one broken shotgun) to command in Vietnam.

Die Kissinger, die, the devil needs you to baste McNamara as he toasts in napalm and white phosphorus.

Number 5 war criminal in 20th century for murdering unarmed innocents. Stalin, Hitler, Chiang Kaishek, Mao, McNamara, then Pol Pot. I am sure that he was deeply troubled in his declining years for not being number one. All but Hitler died happily in bed of old age. Human race?

Cheney is a choirboy compared to this super evil overeducated semihuman thug.

[…] Well, maybe not so much. […]

Something to say?