It'll never happen, though

Ann Althouse would like to see one network simply run its original programming from Sept.11, 2001 on 9-11 this year.

No re-editing to clean up the narrative or eliminate repetition, no reporters looking back on how they felt at the time, no analysis in light of subsequent events — just the feed we saw that day.

You know what?  So would I.

By the way, the comments thread for that post brings up one of those memes that sets me off for its sheer irrationality--namely, that one can "support the troops" without supporting their mission.  This makes lefty heads explode in that it's the sort of structure designed for a logical contradiction, at least unless you define the word "support" in a weak and meaningless way.

The problem is that the troops, not being "kids we sent off to die," volunteered as adults to risk their lives for a cause, a cause that by and large they believe in (judging from their reenlistment rates).

If you do not support what they believe in doing, how can you then claim to support them? You reduce them to the status of poor draftees or children who have no choice in what they're doing, reducing their moral authority to that of a minor or a helpless waif who had no choice but to join .  That doesn't sound much like real support to me.  Try this:

"I think you're risking your life for something relatively worthless, and I think you're completely wrong to support this action.  And maybe Karl Rove and his Jooooo minions have gotten to you--brainwashed you somehow--but hey, I support you!"  (Now, I thought we weren't going to talk about that yet.  We were going to claim that clever, brilliant handlers--hey, even Rove himself--would have a chance to, um, reprogram their thinking in a way more in line with accepted leftist thought.)  But what do I know.

You can hope for their safe return, you can be happy they exist, you can be grateful for them in an unfocused, general sort of way, but don't try to claim that such affectations constitute real support.  You can't be glad with them when they're glad, because they're happy that the U.S.'s interests have been moved forward, but unhappy when they are worried that U.S.'s interests took a beating today...just don't try to claim that this sort of conditional support is really "support."

Let the arguments begin, but be forewarned:  if you disagree, you've reduced the idea of "support" to something hardly worth being proud of and putting one of those yellow ribbon thingies on your car.

(Thanks to Outside the Beltway.)