Discretion

"Pete, it's a fool that looks for logic in the chambers of the human heart." ~ Ulysses Everet McGill (From "O Brother, Where art thou?")

I wrote this enormously long comment over at Eric's place and then decided instead to go ahead and post my comment as an entry here, but after I copied what I wrote over there, and deleted it, I then copied another statement, thereby losing the entire content of my comment, which I failed to paste here first.

Does that make sense to anyone?

So, I am going to attempt to rewrite it. The original was brilliant, and this one will no doubt be far inferior to that one.

I begin with the original comment to which I was attempting to respond, (Parentheses are mine)to wit:

Erudite Redneck said...
Re, "Freedom of speech is not license to speak harmful hyperoble. (sic)" (This statement was copied and pasted from Art's comment, made previously)

Yes, it is.

It is perfectly acceptable -- in fact, it is my patriotic duty! -- to scream FIRE in a theater if the theater is ON FIRE!

This country is on fire! And warmongering imperialists like George W. Bush and his lackeys -- using the concept of liberty as a makeshift human shield, as if she were a slut they can buy and sell, to hide their intent -- set the fire! Liberty?

They wants (sic?) no liberty. They want an empire because they think THAT lowly of this country. They want it to be equal to the Ottoman, or the Soviet, or the Roman empire, the lowest forms of government -- beneath the worst of their subjects.

But we are CITIZENS, not SUBJECTS. And my First Amendment rights are more important that this stupid Iraq war, this president, or EITHER party. And if ewither (sic) of you think othersise (sic), you are, in fact, traitors to the ideals of this nation. You've sold your birthright for a mess of porridge labeled "Bush," who is no conservative, no leader, no statesman, and no commander -- and you know it.

Yes. Well. I see we're back to an impasse.

God bless the Congress of these united states (No capitalization? Could this be Freudian?): May it find its balls and take OUT this brainless, godless, soulless, senseless president before he destroys this country.

G'night.

Now, I try to be fair and acknowledge a commenter when said commenter makes (in my opinion) a valid point, and this time is no exception. ER makes a valid point.

"Obi Wan" Pelosi and Harry "The body" Reid, are indeed guaranteed a first amendment right to make statements in dissension against American policy. They can announce the war is lost, or the surge is not working, or any General with whom they happen to disagree with is incompetent, even when they have no experience in military command themselves. They have every right to say anything they want.

They also have the right to be wrong. And stupid. And disagreeable.

But I think they have to also make use of some discretion when making statements that could undermine the efforts of our military, and at the same time, embolden our enemies.

Yes, we have a patriotic duty to shout "Fire" in a crowded theatre when it is indeed on fire, however, wouldn't the chances of an ensuing panic be lessened somewhat by quietly going to each patron and calm urging them to leave the theatre quietly and orderly, yet quickly? Shouting fire would cause even more havoc, would it not? Wouldn't less people be injured by remaining calm than would be injured by a mad rush to the exits?

The press is complicit in this, too. Some of us are old enough to remember when the press used discretion. They knew more than they reported, yet they refused to divulge details that could compromise the country and politicians. They do that today, also, but not to protect The United States or it's leaders. Instead, they do it now to protect the guilty, tear down our leaders, and to undermine our country.

FDR, Eisenhower, and Jack Kennedy all cheated on their spouses but the average American didn't hear about it because the press didn't report the affairs. Babe Ruth and other famous sport stars lived scandalous private lives, but their accomplishments in their respective arenas were what the press reported. Reporting their bad behavior would have accomplished nothing positive.

Nothing.

Conversely, Today's media reports every negative accomplishment they can find, while playing down or even completely ignoring positive accomplishments of our leaders and our troops.

What word is the opposite of discretion? if there is such a word, it certainly applies to the modern media.

We all have the right to say whatever we want. But we also have the right...nay...the responsibility to use discretion, especially when refraining from doing so can result in catastrophe. Do Reid, Murtha, Pelosi, Durbin, and the others who continually harangue America and her troops use discretion? Does the press? Do any of them really care if American troops are killed as a result of their making use of their right to free speech?

I suspect the answer to that question can only be found in their hearts.

So, making liberal use of their first amendment right of free speech is not treasonous. But it certainly isn't helping our leaders and our troops, is it? What is the definition of "giving aid and comfort to the enemy?"

Taking advantage of our right to free speech to undermine our troops and our country's leaders isn't giving aid and comfort to the enemy. It's just not giving aid and comfort to our side.

Apparently, there's a fine line between patriotism and treason.

Hey! I think this post is even better than my comment over there!