Going off topic

This post (and even moreso the comment thread following) might be the worst thing I've ever seen.
Then again, I live in NYC, n was in Manhattan on 9/11/01. We who have in literal fact suffered from terrorism deserve much worse in the minds of these... "people", because we want effective counter terrorism policies instead of having the issue misused to justify policies meant to satisfy blood lust and greed. We'd rather be safe than seek misdirected and counterproductive revenge, which somehow makes it ok to wish the worst upon us.
The post is about a remake of that piece of propaganda crap Red Dawn. The blogger says

In my hands it would be set in Manhattan because an island’s easier for the terrorists to defend and chock-full of appeasers in desperate need of a wake-up call. The scene with a herd of Greenwich Village liberals being shoved into burqas writes itself.

Is war the answer now, punk? Oh, it is? Good. Then why isn’t it when the people are brown-skinned foreigners?

Ahhhhhhhh, right wing projection, how common you are.
We, who are the only ones outside the Pentagon to actually have been attacked, need a reminder.
And the comments are worse.

Manhattan is the exact wrong place to set it. Not even Snake Plissken wants to die to save Manhattan. We would just cordon it off and turn it into Gitmo North.
Red Dawn is a redneck shining moment. Folks between the Appalachians and the Sierra Nevada (on balance) do the fighting and dying for this country. I love The Wolverines, but maybe they could change the high school mascot to The Crusaders.
What are the odds that this Red Dawn will be a high school version of V for Vendetta? Remember Remember the 11th of September… as the day GW Bush took over.
Or perhaps the Mexican invasion and the war for Aztlan?

and

Of course, if Jimmy Carter had been elected to a second term in 1980 the world might have turned out much like Milius depicted in Red Dawn.

and

Y’know, I’ve always wondered why Leftists tend to flip out at the very mention of the word “theocracy”, as opposed to, say, “Islamic theocracy”, given that other theocratic states such as Great Britain and Japan are relatively benign by comparison.

Two nations we've never had major wars with. And, finally

Let me enlighten you, Templar. Leftists subscribe to a worldview known as Critical Theory, an anti-intellectual philosophy that sprung from a motley crew of communists known as the Frankfurt School.

Don’t assume that “critical” means “critical thinking skills” in this context. Quite the contrary: Critical Theory is ONLY about critisizing the Power Structure, which is assumed to be white, male, Judeo-Christian, heterosexual, and capitalist. The purpose of Critical Theory is to attack, denigrate and weaken the Power Structure in any possible way. The mission is to undermine the legitimacy of liberal, capitist society (epitomized by the west and specifically America) and the authority of the Power Structure. Anything that supports or stengthens the Power Structure is to be opposed and marginalized if not totaly destroyed - by any means necessary.

I'll close with a question, since we're all lefty academics here. Which claim is less accurate, that critical theory forms the basis of lefty politics today, or the description of CT that follows?

(Via Thers by way of LGM)