Now Instapundit is arguing that Gloria Steinem has been inconsistent -- hated Taliban THEN, loves them NOW, via Bennett.

Actually, there is nothing inconsistent about signing a statement of support for the women of Afghanistan which calls for this:


Congress, the US Mission to the UN and other US policy-making entities must support:

1. The integration of this Declaration as a part of the process for a just, honorable and durable peace for the legitimate country of Afghanistan for eventual inclusion in the Constitution,
2. Pressure on Pakistan to end its military, political, and financial support which renders the Taliban militias possible,
3. The denial of recognition of the Taliban militias.



and this statement.

The worst Bennett could find is this:


We believe that peoples and nations have the right to determine their own destiny, free from military coercion by great powers.


Maybe you can argue Steinem is naive, but since she never called for military coercion before how is it inconsistent for her to be against it now?


UPDATE: Digby explains why I'm wrong:


Steinem's influence is so huge that her every utterance must be parsed in great detail so that we can predict how the political debate will be played on the world stage. As she is the premiere spokeswoman for the Mighty LeftistFeministPlayboybunny Fifth Column, it is incumbent upon us to expose the inconsistencies not only in her words but in overarching terms of her lack of moral clarity. How else will the nations of the world know how to interpret the Grand Leftist strategy and prepare to fight it to the last man, as they clearly must begin to do if we are to survive this left wing/Islamist conspiracy?

Some might be content to believe that signing a document calling for non-military action against the Taliban is not inconsistent with a later condemnation of military action generally. But that is old fashioned linear thinking.

One must read between the lines to understand that when Steinem was calling for protection and human rights for the women of Afghanistan under the Taliban, she was actually endorsing a full out invasion of the country. For Feminazi anti-family values she was clearly prepared to launch World War III. Nothing could be more obvious.

When it came to 3,000 dead Americans, however, it seems she's just brimming with love for her Islamic fundamentalist brothers in Afghanistan. To please the massive numbers of Leftist Americans who support the goals of al Qaeda, i.e. the destruction of the United States, she has done a complete 180 and is now a "pacifist" who claims she doesn't believe in any military intervention anywhere. My God. It's diabolical.

That's how these Leftist hypocrites do it. They tailor their arguments to whatever political consituency they need to favor on a given day, trusting that nobody will ever notice. It's our job to stay on top of this and expose them for the hypocritical megalomaniacs they really are.

I say thank you, thank you to all of those bloggers out there who are holding these dangerous power mad Leftists' feet to the fire on a daily, sometimes hourly, basis. It may be our only hope.