Thursday, October 28, 2004

The Alamo and John Kerry

It never ceases to amaze me how Hollywood and the liberals can paint American virtue in the worst light possible. I hate to admit it, but I actually have to take my hat off to the Hollywood writers. They can take a subject that just exudes patriotism from every pore, and manage to throw anti-Americanism into it somewhere. It takes a lot of talent to figure out how to make patriotism look bad. Hollywood consistently pulls it off, though.

I watched THE ALAMO tonight, and I find myself amazed once again. This is the Disney version that came out last year, and was in the theaters for about 24 hours or so. It had Billy Bob Thornton, Dennis Quaid, and Jason Patric. It lacked John Wayne, and he was really needed. No doubt he is rolling in his grave, trying to get up and kick the snot out of the turkeys who wrote this movie.

In the annals of US history, there are not many more inspiring stories than that of the Alamo. 183 men held an army at bay for thirteen days. Their sacrifice enabled Sam Houston to assemble an army of Texans, which eventually won Texas its independence from Mexico.

The defenders of the Alamo are legendary. Davey Crockett, Jim Bowie, and William Barrett Travis are names which most Texans consider saints. They are a breed of man we rarely see anymore. Their courage and conviction seem nowadays to be portrayed as foolish and bigoted. In fact, it was men like them who made this country what it is today.

One scene particularly drew my ire. The defenders of the Alamo are sitting around a campfire, listening to Davey spin a yarn or two. One of the boys asks Crockett about all the great battles he fought. Crockett confesses he took part only in one. Crockett gets all misty eyed, and tells a story from his Indian fighting days. He mentions a bunch of Indians slaughtered a bunch of white settlers. The settlers band together, and go out to deal with the hostiles.

The settlers find the tribe of Indians, and a fierce fight ensues. The militia tracks the Indians to their village, and every member of the village fights them. Crockett admits they trapped the remaining Indians in a cabin and burned them. The settlers’ militia finds a store of potatoes under the burned cabin, which have been cooked in the rendered lard of the burned Indians. In the movie, Crockett said that he could never eat potatoes again.

Let us take this one apart, shall we?

First, the scene seems to suggest Crockett now has a dim view of killing Indians. He seems apologetic for taking part in a military action to deal with an attack on his people. How horrible is it to exercise self-defense? Hollywood seems to be saying that a people are not justified in taking action against attackers.

That one sounds a bit familiar, does it not?

Second, Crockett now admits to committing atrocities by slaughtering those Indians. He and his men slaughtered the poor Indians, “in a fashion reminiscent of Ghengis Khan.” Well, I threw that one in myself. Anyway, Crockett tells this happy little story to a band of men who are facing incredible odds, fighting for the birth and survival of their nation. He tells this story in the face of impending battle with an army led by a brutal dictator.

That DEFINITELY sounds familiar.

I cannot imagine anything more demoralizing to a group of idealistic fighters than to hear a man they look up to confess to murdering people, and no longer having the stomach for battle. They hear a man from whom they draw inspiration paint soldiers as murderers.

That says a lot about what sort of man Hollywood really looks up to.

Davey Crockett was a hero before he walked through the gates of the Alamo. His presence alone no doubt inspired men to fight harder in the face of impossible odds. In other words, he was a leader. I doubt Crockett would have told his men a demoralizing story on the eve of battle. For a leader to do such a thing is criminal, and utterly stupid. It undercuts both the men’s faith in their leader, as well as the cause for which they fight. One cannot expect to win a battle under those circumstances.

Such things only happen in the movies, though.

John Kerry commanded a swift boat, albeit for four months. Kerry came back to America, and testifies before Congress that he and his fellow soldiers committed atrocities, and were fighting a senseless, unjustified war. Worse yet, while still serving in the US military, he went to Paris to meet with the Viet Cong.

Kerry’s testimony was broadcast to the US prisoners of war in Vietnam. Their captors used Kerry to shake the prisoner’s faith in their cause and in their country. Kerry also became a poster child for a Fifth Column here in America, which did everything possible to undercut the war effort.

Kerry disparaged the fight against Communism 30+ years ago.

Let us not even mention the man’s record on the war on terror today. He has consistently called it, “the wrong war at the wrong time.” I won’t go into the rest of it.

Basically, Kerry sounds like a man who deserves to be the leader of the free world, doesn’t he?

Hollywood did its best to ruin my image of a great American hero. It did its best to cast heroism itself into a bad light.

I will have no part of it. John Wayne will always be Davey Crockett. Those 183 men will always be heroes. The Alamo will always be a source of inspiration to me.

Hollywood cannot change what the men at the Alamo did, and what their sacrifice accomplished. It cannot change the facts about what John Kerry did, either. Hollywood cannot change virtue into vice, no matter how much the liberals want it.

No comments: