In a recenbt post I remarked on the silence of the antiwar crowd now that one of their fellow progressives is the war monger. I think I even said something like, "Where's Code Pink?" So I would be remiss if I did not note that Code Pink is indeed staying on message in the great war debate. But there is a certain strangeness to their opposition, which even Lurch is smart enough to see:
From Kerry's perspective, Code Pink was losing sight of some of its founders' goals of helping people, not just protesting war.
"Code Pink was started by a woman and women who were opposed to war but who also thought that the government's job was to take care of people, and to give them health care and education and good jobs," Kerry said. "If that's what you believe in, and I believe it is, then you ought to care about fighting ISIL."
Kerry pointed to the Islamic State's record of committing rape, mutilation and other barbarities against women, and said the terrorist group possesses an ideology "that frankly comes out of the stone age, making a mockery of a peaceful religion."
"Frankly, Code Pink and a lot of other people need to stop and think about how you stop them and deal with that," Kerry said, as police led a protester out of hearing as she chanted: "Your invasion will not protect the homeland!"
Lot of pandering in there, too, but it's a valid point. In any war there are good guys and bad guys, and we ought to at least act like our side is the good guy even if we don't think now is the right time to take on the bad guy. That's a lesson Lurch himself apparently never learned. Kinda funny, though: He first testified before Congress to deplore the evilness of the American soldier in waging war. Now he's before Congress trying to justify a war he won't call by that name.