You would think that Republicans would be shamed by the fact so many of them seem to agree, at least to some extent, with the beliefs of terrorists and other Muslim extremists. For example:
It's unlikely the Saudis who keep women from taking part in the electoral process would disagree. Me, I'd be ashamed if these beliefs were held by people on my side of the political aisle, but not Republicans.
- Dinesh D'Souza thinks that "decadent and depraved American culture...angers and repulses other societies—especially traditional and religious ones." You know, like the religious conservatives of al Qaeda.
- Congressman Virgil Goode (R-VA) believes, in the manner of the Taliban, that countries should be run by a single religion. They only disagree on which religion should rule.
- Bill O'Reilly and Ann Coulter think certain Americans are simply asking to be attacked by terrorists.
- Bush supporter author Orson Scott Card thinks that, when terrorists call us decadent and evil, Hollywood movies "prove their point."
- Mary Grabar, writing on one of the most-visited conservative sites, writes she agrees with pre-Enlightenment views of women, specifically that"Women, without male guidance, are illogical, frivolous, and incapable of making any decisions beyond what to make for dinner."
Of course these people are not at all ashamed. In fact, they completely lack any sense of irony. After decades of accusing liberals of celebrating American defeats at the hands of our enemies, these super-patriots now find themselves sympathizing with terrorists who wish to kill Americans. These absurd arguments permit an inference of the belief that America "deserves" to be attacked by terrorists because of our decadent and self-indulgent ways. Who now then is on the side of our enemies? And this from the people whose overriding concern is supposedly some fear of a world-wide Islamic Caliphate ruling over us? It seems to me that these wise pundits think such a result would be an improvement on the current state of affairs.