About Me

Name: beltway girl
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Dark Days

Posted by beltway girl on Sunday, November 02, 2008 2:12:54 AM
"In the real dark night of the soul it is always three o'clock in the morning, day after day."  - F. Scott Fitzgerald
 
America now hangs on a precipice.  With the blood of our wars running into our eyes, with our economy collapsing down upon our heads, with our women on hospital beds, having their children sucked out of their wombs to be disposed of in back-alley dumpsters, with our disenfranchised shooting each other in the streets and leaving each other to die, with our homeless finding leftover fast-food remnants like donuts and hamburgers where the dismembered pieces of a human being were left to lie, in peace of some sort.
 
And this is America.  This is America.
 
It is too late to pass it by in your car if you have come down this alley.  It is too late to say it existed in some day, long gone past, and gone by now, and done away with, and reckoned with by some blind, just eye.  It is too late to say you didn't notice the thrown-away condoms out by the grade-school playground, it is too late to lose yourself and your children in some spot halfway between this ground and the sky, bought now by AIG, or the local welfare agency.  Is it too late for America?  Because this is America.
 
It is too late to pretend we didn't hear the children cursing each other in the street.  It is too late to pretend we don't know this is grown-up trick-or-treat now, and every vote counts.  It is too late to make-believe that infanticide doesn't count, that someone who tried to bomb the Pentagon is a friendly revolutionary, that abortion is a sound choice for the twenty-first century.  But this is America.  This is America.
 
It is too late for you to ignore the forces now subsuming your nation.  It is too late for sublimination, and it is too late for racism.  But that rule counts on both sides, that rule counts on your side, too.
 
This is America.  This is America.
 
It is too late to pretend the sixties aren't with us.  It is too late to ignore the slaves of the sexual revolution.  It is too late for the deaths from AIDS, the postponed Birth of a Nation, done wrong before, now done right by the birth of an integrated nation.  Real Black Empowerment, Thomas Sowell, Clarence Thomas, Condoleezza Rice, Barack Obama, and information, and confirmation, and subordination of what was an ugly mark before.
 
This is America.  This is America.
 
It is too late to say we must wake up when we have never been asleep.  It is too late to say our situation is acceptable.  It is too late when the wounds are this deep and the knife is forever pushed down further, but no obstacle is insurmountable when you are an American. 
 
This is America.  This is America.
 
And its heart keeps beating in the ghetto storefront chapel, in the tree-lined avenue, in the Catholic grottos, in the Protestant Bible Study, in the plain-brick synagogue, in the shopping mall cul-de-sac, in the back of the mini-van, in the Mason lodge, in the urban barrios, and in the seats of our souls, in the cradle of our civilization, in the bowels of our nation, and in our wombs. 
 
Please vote this Tuesday.
 
God Bless the United States of America.
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (114) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Who Is REALLY Sick Of This Election?

Posted by beltway girl on Tuesday, October 14, 2008 2:40:40 AM
THE DEMOCRATS
 
Get it over with!  First, it was Hillary.  Then, it was Edwards.  Then, a discussion of whether this other, completely independent individual should consider continuing his campaign if his wife has cancer.  Any of my business?  No.  Then, it was Barack not being black enough.  Then, it was Bill's fading blackness from his first-black-president presidency.  Then it was Hillary's ineviability.  Then there was Iowa.  Then it was CHANGE.  Then it was Jeremiah Wright.  Then it was New Hampshire.  Then it was Hillary's cleavage.  Then it was Hillary's pantsuits.  Then it was Operation Chaos.  Then it was shot-and-a-beer Hillary, the working man with cleavage in a pantsuit.  Then it was CHANGE again.  Then there was Chris Matthews' leg.  Then it was CHANGE again forever, maybe.  Then there was The One.  Then there were the superdelegates.  Then there was the day The One clinched.  Then there was the Hill/Bill Show and the Barack schism.  Then there was the price of oil.  Then there was the convention, and "This Is Spinal Tap."  Then there was the fixed roll call vote. 
 
And then, there was one.  (Not to be confused with "The One.")
 
Although, let's face it, they're (The) One in the Same.
 
THE REPUBLICANS
 
First, there was John McCain.  Then there were Mike Huckabee and Fred Thompson.  Then there was the fair tax.  Then there were the loaves and fishes.  Then there was South Carolina.  Then there was the fried squirrel in the dorm room.
 
And then there was John McCain.
 
GENERAL ELECTION
 
First, there was the Agent of Change.  Then there was the war hero.  Then there were the oil prices.  Then there was the media.  Then there was the Russian Front.  Then there was the Dem Panic.  Then there was the 3 a.m. text message.  Then there was Joe Biden.  Then there was no Hillary.  Then there was the yawning.  Then there was John Edwards again.  Then there was the Palin pick.  Then there was Bristol's Baby.  Then there was the pig in lipstick.  Then there was the Financial Meltdown down on top of Fannie and Freddie.  Then there was the Right Panic.  Then there was the bailout.  Then there was Billy the Bomber, ACORN, and the inevitable Barack Obama. 
 
NOW
 
First, no candidate is inevitable until he wins the election.
 
Second, don't underestimate Billy the Bomber.
 
Third, just pick one out.  Just pick one out.  We can look forward to stuffing our turkeys, doing our holiday shopping, and living our lives. 
 
And then, there will be one.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (236) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Why Won't Senator Obama Release His Transcript From Columbia?

Posted by beltway girl on Monday, October 06, 2008 2:38:46 PM
Considering it's being reported on the blogs that Obama lived a stone's throw away from William Ayers while at Columbia, why isn't the media making the same types of demands for release of Sen. Obama's Columbia transcript that the media would be making were Sen. Obama a Republican?
 
This is one of the only blog rumors that perhaps should not be dismissed lightly.  Ayers and Obama obviously enjoy the same company.  It's certainly not beyond possiblity that they could have met at Columbia.  Why doesn't the Obama campaign simply release the transcript, and put the whole thing to rest? 
 
And much more importantly, why is this blogger asking for that instead of our eager beavers in the mainstream media?
 
links to follow
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (104) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Tonight on "Barney and Friends"

Posted by beltway girl on Saturday, October 04, 2008 5:14:37 PM
I love you
You love me
We're as nuts as we can be
With a civil union and some home-grown pot for two
Won't you say you love...  us...  too...
 
(CNN, 7 p.m. ET, CC)  Barney tells the New York Times that Bill O'Reilly's hostile questioning of Barney on "O'Reilly Factor" is linked to O'Reilly's repressed feelings of attraction to Barney.  Meanwhile, Fox News threatens to air footage of Barney spitting into O'Reilly's coffee mug when no one was looking.  On another front, Barack, Barney, Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi and Chris Dodd stage their own guitar mass after Joe Biden is denied communion by the Catholic Church, and William Ayers presides over the service.  Several explosions occur, and Ayers reluctantly claims responsibility.  Barack solemnly notes that you can take the boy out of the terrorism, but you can't take the terrorism out of the boy.  Musical Guest:  The Weathermen Underground
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (17) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Ragin' Palin

Posted by beltway girl on Friday, October 03, 2008 2:55:26 AM
"it is an unfortunate fact that we can secure peace only by preparing for war"-- John F. Kennedy
 
The realities of a violent world were not lost on President John F. Kennedy.  Caroline Kennedy endorsed Barack Obama in a beautifully crafted and moving piece some time ago.  But after hearing Joe Biden defending Barack Obama's positions on Iran and other nations, one really has to wonder whether or not John Kennedy's words were lost on Barack Obama.
 
It is odd that Obama's views seemed to be more clearly highlighted in the vice-presidential debate than the presidential debate.  How did this happen? 
 
Barack Obama is a charismatic figure on the political landscape.  He is, truly, transcendant.  His persona actually does allow him to stand on a stage and talk about sitting down at a table to attempt negotiations with someone who wants Israel wiped off the map. 
 
But Palin came out tonight speaking what may have seemed like plain sense on foreign policy issues.  And many, listening to Biden playing cheerleader for some of Obama's espoused tactics, got to think about what Obama actually proposes to do, minus Obama's powerful  presence.  The average viewer also couldn't have helped but notice that this foreign policy "guru" on the ticket, Sen. Biden, recognizes that the man he once said wasn't ready to take office will call the shots in the event of his victory in November.
 
This is not a "mistake."  It's simply a reality.  And the average viewer should be thankful for it.  Because that viewer should be aware of the fact that this will be the situation once candidate Obama becomes President Obama.  We won't have candidate Obama succumbing to to more level-headed views held by Biden, the foreign policy expert; rather, it will be the other way around. 
 
Sarah Palin did not just clearly put forward the facts on foreign policy tonight, though.  Had this been all she did, she would herself have been dismissed as a cheerleader for her ticket, playing up the big strength of McCain. 
 
No, Sarah Palin shone through this entire performance.  She talked plainly and simply to the American voter, and she called out a hostile press in the presence of the average American.
 
She owned more than half of that stage because Sarah Palin communicated as Sarah Palin, establishing a presence for herself, much as Obama has.  She took a clear shot at Obama, noting she didn't say one thing to one set of ears and say something different to another.  And, importantly, she was not afraid to differentiate herself from John McCain.
 
Biden made no such effort, and he came off looking like the head of the Democratic Party Cheerleading Squad.
 
In doing this, he cheapened himself and highlighted the political dangerousness of some of Obama's foreign policy stands, while also underscoring the fact that Obama will wear the foreign policy pants in the family that makes this ticket.  With swing voters and states enjoying the significance that they do in this election, this may have been a blunder of epic proportions for the Democrats this year.
 
Returning to the head of the Democratic Cheerleading Squad, this may also have been a mistake, this partisan cheerleading with little else to it.  While McCain-- and now Palin-- are able to effectively divorce themselves from unattractive and generally unmarketable aspects of politics and their own party, Obama and Biden clearly are not able to take issue with their own party on, basically, anything.  In even the biggest of Dem years, such lockstepping may not be viewed favorably by many voters, even those in their own ranks.
 
Sarah Palin was Ragin' Palin tonight, Sarah the Barracuda.  She took swipes at Obama and Biden that left Biden rattled enough to cattily suggest she come with him to the Home Depot to see what the real score was.
 
At no time did she look like the incompetent nitwit the left-dominated press has tried to depict her as.  At no time did she look like the dizzy beauty queen with astronaut wife hair, fumbling for answers she'd memorized in a bubble bath, and now, on stage, ultimately lost.
 
No, as she stood on that stage tonight, she was a formidable figure on both a national and international stage.  John McCain may well end up winning his race against the United States economy.  If he does, it will be because tonight, Sarah Palin won her race against Barack Obama.  And Joe Biden, and the "mainstream" media.  All in one, fell swoop.
 
Returning to the quote by John Kennedy, John Kennedy also said, "The wave of the future is not the conquest of the world by a single dogmatic creed but the liberation of the diverse energies of free nations and free men."
 
Tonight, Palin stood on that stage with Joe Biden, and she, alone, invoked the concept of freedom.  It is apt.  Her ticket is far more free from the dictates of politics and party than their rivals.  If global freedom begins at the grassroots level, i.e., individuals, Sarah Palin proved in this debate that she is far more free.
 
Let's hope it spreads.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (12) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Will John McCain Lose To The United States Economy?

Posted by beltway girl on Sunday, September 21, 2008 3:16:17 AM
Before the announcement of the AIG bailout, John McCain and Barack Obama were locked in battle, entrenched in the deadest of heats. 
 
Today's national Gallup poll shows Obama up by six points.  Six points is not chump change in such a race.  Although still close, this relatively modest lead now threatens to widen, and perhaps even explode.  If it does, it will not be attirbutable to Barack Obama's economic wizardry, nor to his charms and talents; it will be because of this nation's ongoing economic collapse and popular perceptions of our country's two political parties. 
 
Democrats, since the time of the Great Depression and FDR, are viewed as the party protective of the working-man, his security, and his vote, while Republicans conjure up ugly images of economic disaster and Hoovervilles. 
 
It has been an interesting year leading into this brave September, and it has been quite a dining experience and bill served to our White House table by the waiters on Wall Street.
 
First, there was Bear Stearns.  According to Wikipedia, Bear Stearns was one of the largest global investment banks and securities trading and brokerage firms.  But they got into serious trouble in the subprime mortgage crisis.  "The Fed, using a procedure from the Depression Era of the 1930s, raced to the aid of Bear Stearns...  alongside JP Morgan Chase.  Bear Stearns had made a fortune in mortgage-backed securities but faced a possible collapse after those investments soured.  Wall Street plunged as fears spread jeopardy."  http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/03/16/business/paulson.php
 
The tab for taxpayers?  A $29 billion loan to JP Morgan Chase for its purchase of Bear Stearns. 
 
Ah, and then, there was Indymac, most to be noted for its twenty-first century news coverage of a real run on a bank.  Looking like a not-so-wonderful life for the economy, Indymac made history with images of people lining up to demand cash to put in their mattresses.  The tab for taxpayers?  Existential.  Indymac collapsed. 
 
Next, we have Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  Who are Fannie and Freddie?  "These are two government-sponsored enterprises, created with the primary mission of stabilizing the market for residential mortgages in the United States. They are under the regulatory control of the government, but issue debt and shares of stock in the financial markets. Their size is enormous, representing more than $5 trillion in financial market obligations and being associated with almost half of all U.S. residential mortgages."  http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/09/20/INA112VO9M.DTL
 
Fannie and Freddie were, evidently, dysfunctional liberal wunderkinds.  Speaking about the Fannie and Freddie, one writer notes, "Topping the list of the 250 largest publicly traded companies which disproportionally fund left-wing groups over right-wing is Freddie Mac, which scored an 'F' on the Capital Research Center’s 'Patterns of Corporate Philanthropy' study for being overtly polarized in their philanthropic giving." http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=E24728A4-41B9-4C4C-B9B3-E0ED65397BB9  The article goes on to describe the left-wing bent of the Fannie organization:  "Fannie Mae is as well culpable for funding a host of left-wing groups. Recipients of their funds include the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), and the Center for Community Change. ACORN, the self-proclaimed largest left-wing activist organization in the nation, implements an anti-capitalist agenda which has roots in the National Welfare Rights Organization – a 1960’s radical group formed for the sole purpose of inundating the welfare system with enough recipients to break America’s financial back. The Center for Community Change’s goal is to 'create better communities and policies' – it hopes to achieve this goal by enlisting such celebrity notables as Susan Sarandon and Russell Simmons to propagate the message to vote Democrat."
 
Now, let's look at Freddie's investments.  "Among Freddie Mac's recent grantees are: the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People; Alliance for Justice; the Children's Defense Fund; DC Action for Children; the National Council of Negro Women; the Virginia Poverty Law Center; the Center for Policy Alternatives; the Lawyer's Committee for Civil Rights; the National Urban League; the Child Welfare League of America; the Legal Aid Society; the Legal Aid Justice Center; the National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty; the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation; the Carter Center; the American Bar Association; Ayuda, Inc.; Cesar Chavez Public Policy Charter High School; Alliance for Children's Rights; DC Action for Children; Women Empowered Against Violence; My Sisters Place; the Washington Peace Center; Neighbors Consejo; the Sexual Minority Youth Assistance League; the National Council of La Raza; the See Forever Foundation; the Multicultural Career Intern Program; Asian American LEAD: Leadership, Empowerment and Development for Youth and Family; the Center for Multicultural Human Services; Planned Parenthood; the Latin American Youth Center; the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy; the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities; the Calvary Bilingual Multicultural Learning Center; the Women's Center; and National Public Radio."  http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/funderprofile.asp?fndid=5196&category=78
 
An interesting aside to all of this would be that Obama was in the US Senate for about 150 days before he announced his candidacy for the President of the United States.  But even in his rather short stint as senator, he managed to get to #2 on the Fannie-Freddie contribution list, 1998-2008.  He's one notch below Chris Dodd (D-CT), with about $127,000.
 
Fannie and Freddie doled out a lot of cash through PACs over the past four years so as to "fend-off regulation that would have required it to maintain deeper financial reserves to act as a cushion to the kind of risky loans that led to their undoing."  http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/08/cbsnews_investigates/main4428037.shtml?source=RSSattr=HOME_4428037
 
The tab for taxpayers?  According to the Huffington Post, it could be anywhere from nothing to $25 billion.  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/22/fannie-freddie-bailout-co_n_114331.html
 
And now, we have AIG, a major insurance corporation.  Like others before, and unlike Lehman Brothers, which also came along this year but was rejected for a bailout, AIG was deemed too big to fail.  Cost?  Immediate cost will be $85 billion, but in a buy like this one, the government has often made money. 
 
All of it in concert has voices rumbling on both the right and left-- but mostly the left-- about another Great Depression.  Those of us who go through life without a crystal ball or other gypsy tricks simply don't know, but many don't discount the possiblity.  Some wonder if this isn't an unprecedented collapse in our economy.
 
It's really not.  As NPR reports, "The mechanics are different, but the shock was the same in 1980, when the federal government swooped in to save the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation. Economist Bert Ely details 15 public policies that set the stage for the S&L implosion -- to the tune of $175 billion in taxpayer money. 'The extraordinary cost of the S&L crisis is astounding to every taxpayer, depositor, and policymaker,' Ely writes. Bailing out Fannie and Freddie could be much, much cheaper, at least relative to the current overall economy."  http://www.npr.org/blogs/globalpoolofmoney/2008/09/the_fannie_and_freddie_bailout_1.html
 
It's really not unprecedented, although the so-called mainstream media is reporting it to be.  As we can see, this has happened before, and it was on an even grander scale.  The difference?
 
We were not in an election year.  With the liberal, lightweight darling of the media, Barack Obama, running against a moderate Republican with a surprisingly good chance at victory.  The media is out for McCain's blood after the choice of Palin, a pro-life, conservative woman, trumping their Hillary nod, which ultimately met rejection for the veep post on Senator Obama's ticket. 
 
Senator Obama hit high on the Fannie and Freddie list, and we can see where that has brought us.  His ideology blinded him to the well-being of the nation's economy.  It has blinded him before, as the Weekly Standard noted:  
"A watershed moment in Illinois's fiscal decline came in 2002, when crashing receipts and Democratic reluctance to enact spending cuts forced Republican governor George Ryan to call a special legislative session. While Ryan railed at legislators for refusing to rein in an out-of-control budget, the Chicago Tribune spoke ominously of an 'all-consuming state budget crisis.' Unwilling to cut back on social welfare spending, Obama's chief partner and political mentor, senate Democratic leader Emil Jones, came up with the idea of borrowing against the proceeds of a windfall tobacco lawsuit settlement due to the state...  What was Obama doing while all this was going on? He was promoting the tobacco securitization plan in his Hyde Park Herald column, railing against the governor in the Defender for balancing the budget 'on the back of the poor,' and voting to override cuts in treasured programs like bilingual education. Actually, far from 'balancing the budget on the backs of the poor,' the governor had trimmed evenly across all the state's most expensive programs. In the end, Ryan did force a number of cuts, yet the resistance of Obama and his allies took a toll. When, just a year later, Democrats added control of the governorship and state senate to their existing control of the house, they revealed that the state deficit had reached $5 billion-far larger than most had feared. Since then it's been a swift downhill tumble toward fiscal implosion for Illinois. Now ruling, the Democrats have continued their profligate ways, pushing the state's budget woes to new heights."  http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/015/386abhgm.asp?pg=2
 
Not wanting to balance a budget on the backs of the poor is an admirable sentiment; but as Hillary Clinton repeatedly pointed out in her primary battles against Obama, sentiments are not enough. 
 
In this race, John McCain has the credentials and experience to do what Obama thought was unthinkable in Illinois; McCain can potentially put the economy on the right track on no one's back via true bipartisan efforts.  In the midst of financial fears and financial crisis that is "unprecedented," according to our mainstream media, but which is really not "unprecedented" at all, John McCain alone has the experience to take the reins of the economy, for both rich and poor, and make the economy work, thereby restoring its health.  Barack Obama could not do that in Illinois, nor will he do it for the United States.  Barack Obama was able to lead his own state to financial ruin in the name of fairness.  Perhaps, on the federal level, it would be best to elect a candidate who can lead us to financial success.
 
Wall Street has, indeed, crashed before our eyes.  It would be in the best interests of the nation for this maverick not to crash with it, as his administration offers far more of a promise of unbridled success for our economy.  Wall Street to Main Street is a catchy line, but the Main Street of Illinois is still struggling to recover from the fiscal barking of that dog that could bite, Barack Obama.  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (73) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Charlie Gibson's War

Posted by beltway girl on Monday, September 15, 2008 1:21:29 AM
Charlie Gibson's views on the war in Iraq are not widely known, nor should they be.  Charlie Gibson is supposed to be an objective journalist.  Charlie Gibson is supposed to be fair.  And yet, as we sat there watching Charlie Gibson indulging in his "Gotcha!" moment Versus Sarah Palin, we could not have helped but notice he did not look fair.  Nor did he look objective.  No, he looked like a man on a mission.  And he probably was, and still is.
 
This country is in a crisis, thanks to our corrupt news media.  Our Fourth Estate is supposed to report the news.  That is first and foremost.  There is also analysis, which involves opinion and spin.  Unfortunately, we don't see too much straight reporting any more; rather, the news appears to be top-heavy with spin and analysis, and there is a pronounced and widespread liberal bias. 
 
Bernie Goldberg worked for 28 years at CBS news, and he was a news correspondent there.  Now, he is, among other things, an author.  And he wrote a book about the pervasive liberal tilt in the news industry. 
 
An article discussing his book notes an episode where a staff editor refers to a presidential candidate as "[t]he little nut from the Christian group."  http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/12/3/215106.shtml  The writer of the article goes on to state Goldberg's point. "It is okay to slur fundamentalist Christians.  But anyone making a similar disparaging comment about any of the 'politically correct' minority groups would have been dismissed.'"
 
And it goes on.  And on.
 
"Another former CBS News employee said to this writer that 'anyone who is not a leftist knows how it must have felt to be a black kid in a white school in Tuscaloosa, Alabama, back in 1938."
 
Another article, which analyzes results of a UCLA study of this topic, notes that "[o]f the 20 major media outlets studied, 18 scored left of center, with CBS' 'Evening News,' The New York Times, and the Los Angeles Times ranking second, third, and fourth most liberal behind the news pages of The Wall Street Journal."  http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/Media-Bias-Is-Real-Finds-UCLA-6664.aspx?RelNum=6664
 
The article continues, "[o]nly Fox News' 'Special Report with Brit Hume' and The Washington Times scored right of the average U.S. voter."
 
Does that sound very fair and objective to you?
 
So is it any wonder that Charlie sat there, revelling in his "Gotcha!" moment?  Of course not.  Charlie's a very important guy, working in a very important industry, which just happens to be very corrupt.  Charlie's real mission, like that of the industry he works for, is not supposed to be to play games of  "Gotcha!" with politicians whose ideas they do not happen to like.  Rather, they are supposed to engage in non-partisan and unbiased reporting.  If they want to express their opinions and play "Gotcha!" they should be in analysis, where they can spin stories as they so choose.
 
And speaking of choice, that is where a lot of this is knotted up and ruminating.  And this bias is not a problem unique to the news industry.
 
The Hollywood Left has the same problem.  A thriving and bullying left and a bullied and wilted right.  The list of Hollywood Democrats is endless; the list of conservatives, and even Republicans, has fewer names than John McCain's veep short list.
 
Charlie Gibson's war is Matt Damon's war, the pornography industry's war, and the contraception and abortion advocates' war.  It's N.O.W.'s war.  And its handbook is the Democratic Party platform.
 
This is the Culture War.  And in this war, perhaps different for the Democrats from any other, all really is fair.  Especially when they are the ones doing it.
 
This war reaches a crescendo with this election, and the left is already paving the way for future celebrations.  A recent article in the Boston Globe is already sounding the alarm, naming Palin specifically, in so far as the precious liberal baby, Roe v. Wade, is concerned. http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2008/09/14/the_fate_of_roe_v_wade_and_choice/
 
The article's writer is very concerned, but generally, liberals always assume that justice will prevail, and that since they are justice, they will prevail.
 
But America is ripe now to turn back some of its pages written by sixties liberals.  The primary reason is probably the way their legislative and judicial victories have played out in reality and real human tragedy.  And their indifference and ineptitude when it comes to modifying them or adapting them.  The liberal response to the real human tragedies appears to be that you chose it.
 
The left-wing culture warriors have made their choices, too.  In their quest for an anything-goes America, liberals in the upper echelons have the power and resources to escape most of it unscathed.  Ah, wouldn't it be nice for everyone if they had that?  Unfortunately, they do not.
 
And John McCain is now on the brink of handing the left a death-blow in the Culture War.  And it may well be a victory every bit as important as any we experience overseas. 
 
By choosing Sarah Palin, he has put it all on the table.  Some conservatives do not appreciate his bipartisanship, and they are themselves to be appreciated, and perhaps even applauded, for doing so.  They have, in many cases, been key figures in the Culture War itself, and they do not want conservatism to be lost in what could prove to be a very bipartisan administration.
 
But in defense of bipartisanship, it could be a real advantage to the nation right now, particularly in the area of health care.  More than any other crisis issue facing our nation today, health care could truly be saved by a bipartisan effort.  Taking the entire system apart is not a real solution, nor is leaving it entirely intact.  Again, more than any other issue, this one finds its best solution somewhere in between.  It is arguably to the credit of the Republicans that with a crisis of these proportions, they have offered McCain and bipartisanship, while the left has offered the most liberal senator in existence.
 
So here we stand, one election away from perhaps winning the Culture War.  And finding a real solution for health care in this nation.
 
The ultimate outcome is now in the hands of the voters.  Let's hope we find ourselves on the right and victorious side of history.
 
Charlie Gibson arguably emerged the victor in his little battle against Sarah Palin.  But he might just find himself losing the war.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (58) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Manchurian Candidate And The Dream Is Always The Same

Posted by beltway girl on Thursday, September 11, 2008 2:12:05 AM
DOCTOR:  Okay, so, Barack, please tell me more about the dream.
 
OBAMA:  Well, there are all these cattle cars, and they're going to uh, uh, Pennsylvania.  And, uh, uh, I know this, even though, well, there's uh, uh, well, even though there's really no way for me to uh, uh--
 
DOCTOR:  Right.  So what then?
 
OBAMA:  Well, there are all these cattle, and they're all chanting, Yes, We, Can!  And I'm just, uh, thinking, you know, that's cool, but then, uh, uh, well, it isn't an easy thing to say, but, well--
 
DOCTOR:  Then what?
 
OBAMA:  Well, uh, they, uh, they all stand on their hind legs, and they're holding a gun in one hoof, and uh, uh...
 
DOCTOR:  A Bible in the other one.
 
OBAMA:  Right!  Uh, uh, that's right.  And they uh, uh, well, they charge me.
 
DOCTOR:  Really.
 
OBAMA:  Yeah.  Uh, uh, and I, you know, I run.  And I'm running, and running, and uh, uh, you're not going to believe who I run into--
 
DOCTOR:  Hillary Clinton..
 
OBAMA:  Right!  That's right!  And she's uh, uh, ahll bent outta shape cuz I'm not gonna, uh, uh, get into office, and there's not going to be socialized uh, uh, medicine again this year--
 
DOCTOR:  Interesting.  So what did you say?
 
OBAMA:  Well, uh, I just say that, uh, uh, of course I'm going to get into--
 
DOCTOR:  Exactly.  And then what?
 
OBAMA:  She, uh, uh, well, you know, I've never seen it before, but I know that doesn't mean it can't uh, uh, happen, but she, uh, she's throwing up, and her head is spinning, and she's, uh, uh, you know, saying, "The Lipstick Is On The Wall" in Latin, and uh, I don't understand how I could uh, well, know what she's saying uh, well, because--
 
DOCTOR:  You're obviously still afflicted by a crippling level of guilt that has rendered you virtually dysfunctional.  And this guilt is rooted in your indirectly referring to Sarah Palin as a pig.
 
OBAMA:  I, uh, I never "called" her a pig.  I just did what you told me, uh, uh--
 
DOCTOR:  Please!  Stop projecting your subliminated hatred of Sarah Palin on me.
 
OBAMA:  But you wrote, uh, uh, uh, uh, exactly what, what, what I was supposed to say on my last prescription.
 
DOCTOR:  You're hallucinating again.  I did no such thing.
 
OBAMA:  Bu, bu, but you did.  I have it right here in my pocket.  Would, uh, uh, you like to--
 
DOCTOR:  That would be either acute somnambulism, meaning you're writing these things in your sleep, or perhaps even a rare, undiagnosed case of multiple personality disorder.
 
OBAMA:  Bu, bu, but it's on your stationery, a, a, and it's in your handwriting. 
 
DOCTOR:  Well, now I remember.  But we were never supposed to speak of that again.
 
OBAMA:  Bu, bu, but you said that it would help get me elected--
 
DOCTOR:  Again, we said we weren't going to discuss this--
 
OBAMA:  Bu, bu, buht, uh, now, it's the headliner for Associated Press.
 
DOCTOR:  This type of trust issue is typical following either rejection by, or of, an overpowering surrogate father figure such as Jeremiah Wright.  We've discussed all of this before.  You know I'm a campaign supporter.
 
OBAMA:  Yes, well, uh, but--
 
DOCTOR:  I give money to your campaign.
 
OBAMA:  Ye, ye, yes, and that ten dollars a month really helps--
 
DOCTOR:  Right.  So trust.  We've discussed this before.  Hope, Change, and Trust.
 
OBAMA:  Uh, uh, uh, okay.
 
DOCTOR:  Here is your next prescription.
 
OBAMA:  Do you want me to read it, uh, uh, uhgain, like the last time?
 
DOCTOR:  Yes.
 
OBAMA:  "Tomorrow, Barack Obama calls a press conference for 11 a.m., the subject is the economy.  But Obama opens the conference by saying pigs wearing lipstick will never fly into the White House, and that the president of Iran will serve in the Obama cabinet."
 
DOCTOR:  Right, as Secretary of Defense.  So you'll be back again next week?
 
OBAMA:  Uh, uh, uh, uhf course.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (64) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

And You Can't Put Lipstick On This, Either

Posted by beltway girl on Wednesday, September 10, 2008 2:22:49 AM
Barack Obama has officially been on the campaign trail for nearly two years now.  And he has been a phenomenon, of sorts.  His meteoric rise to political stardom can be likened to a comet, with a long, bright tail of laudatory praise peppered into stories that were supposed to have been written by objective journalists.
 
It's been quite a ride.
 
It ends today.
 
"But you know...  you can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig.  You know, you can...  wrap an old fish in a piece of paper called change, it's still going to stink."
 
Now, Geraldine Ferrarro, when she was on a recent edition of a cable news program, advised Joe Biden, in preparation for his debate with her, to "watch her [Palin's] tape."  Whatever tape she was referring to, a prior debate, the speech from the convention-- well, it's unclear.
 
But we can be reasonably sure that whatever she is referring to, politicians watch each other.
 
Obama watched Sarah Palin's convention speech.  He knows about that pit bull with the lipstick.  His campaign didn't turn off the television that night to go bowling. 
 
This "gaffe" may not have been a total, or even partial, accident.  Had Obama done this on purpose, exactly who would be able to prove it?
 
No one.  No, those who "read too much" into these words would surely see themselves branded as lunatics, paranoid personalities, hate-mongerers, and race-baiters by news organizations yet to be named, and they will be, because just as surely as they rode to the rescue of Barack Obama on the heels of the vitriolic Jeremiah Wright, they will certainly come riding again now. 
 
It might not work this time.  Obama's campaign "got it."  And Ben Smith's Blog has the goods.  The Obama campaign's members had been talking just that day about Sarah Palin and her lipstick.
 
"Though on a day when Obama's surrogates were just joking that Palin's record can't be concealed with lipstick, it was hard for those following the campaign not to hear the echo." http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0908/Obama_Lipstick_on_a_pig.html
 
Today online, there were tee shirts for sale.  They had a little lipstick kiss next to the words, "Pit Bull."
 
So make no excuses, Obama's campaign had gotten the message.
 
Some now are musing whether "the old fish in a piece of paper" isn't also a repulsive form of ageism directed at John McCain.
 
Did Barack Obama do this on purpose?
 
Obama's campaign is in trouble.  Sarah Palin has turned this into a whole new ball game.  Pundits wonder in their columns if he didn't throw away his best, and perhaps only, chance at the White House by passing over Hillary Clinton for the vice presidential spot.  And, most importantly, the polls have finally broken for McCain.
 
All of these factors, when taken together, are very bad news for Senator Barack Obama.  And he came out tonight, and his face, of late flashing with previously unfamiliar anger, may have flashed again.  But what we know is the words came out of his mouth.
 
Barack Obama already had to travel to San Francisco to tell us what he really thinks of Pennsylvanians.
 
Has he now had to travel to Lebanon, Virginia, a state much imbued with our nation's rich history, to tell us what he really thinks about women?
 
Or maybe just conservative women?
 
"Sweetie" Barack Obama?
 
Passed-over-Hillary Barack Obama?
 
"My own white grandmother" Barack Obama?
 
On a day when Joe Biden told us Sarah Palin doesn't really, you know, care for her own son, born with Down syndrome, enough because she dares to disagree with his "view" on stem cell research.
 
And Senator Biden, has it occurred to you that if Palin adopted your "worldview," the face you show your nation, the one that says abortion is a choice, that child might not exist at all?
 
All on the same day.
 
It may have been more than a gaffe by Senator Obama today.
 
Eight thousand troops will come home from Iraq one day soon.
 
Joe Biden and Barack Obama might also go home in November as a result of the remarks they made today.  Let's hope they do.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (17) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Mac the Knife

Posted by beltway girl on Friday, September 05, 2008 3:04:50 PM
Last night, in a speech accepting his party's nomination, John McCain may have secured a win in November. 
 
At the beginning of these conventions, the candidates were running even in the polls.  Their vice presidential selections and their acceptance speeches attained significance of mammoth proportions.
 
And Obama did everything wrong.  First, he not only chose Joe Biden, but he chose him after fanfare worthy only of a Hillary Clinton. 
 
So not only did Obama take a pass on a tested, vetted co-runner who guaranteed instant bounce at the polls with real votes, but he did it in an insulting manner.  As Jennifer Anniston once said of Brad, there was a senstivity chip missing there.
 
To make matters worse, his much-anticipated text message came at 3 a.m..  This makes him look like the smart-alecky kid in high school who ultimately goes on to burn down a garage or break into a gas station, and you read about him in the neighborhood paper.
 
Next, Obama goes on to give his acceptance speech that is simultaneously magnificent and ridiculous.  A long shot of the scene is reminiscent of a coliseum.
 
And the speech itself?  Other than the line about change coming to Washington rather than from it, it was the usual laundry list of demands we hear from the Dems every year, although delivered in a superior manner.
 
But it was not just that Obama did everything wrong; it's that McCain did everything right.
 
First, he picked Sarah Palin as a running mate.  Sarah Palin, who wields her tongue like a blade in a verbal knife fight, placed in Head Attack Dog position.  Sarah Palin, who has touched off mass hysteria amongst the angry, entrenched, and up-to-now comfortable Frothed Estate.  Sarah Palin, referred to by one writer as a hand grenade in the culture war. 
 
Sarah Palin, who drew a nod for women this year from the Republicans while 18-million-vote Hillary claimed her nay.
 
Sarah Palin, whose choice emphasizes Obama's passing over of Hillary so sharply that pundits muse over whether McCain did it for that very reason.
 
Ah, the left.  They imagine everyone swims in the same goldfish bowl of thought that they do, and the idea that one maverick simply gravitated to another never occurs to them.
 
And then, McCain delivered his speech.  It, too was something of a laundry list, prompting the left to wag their index fingers in the air and exclaim, "Aha!"...
 
Except McCain's lauandry list was a list of the ways he has suffered for this country in its service and how he has loved it.  How he still loves it, how he has fought for it in his senatorial career and how he will fight for it again.  How he will deliver as a president for peace, attempting to heal the breach between the left and right in this nation, and attempting to find peace abroad, saving lives and the lifeblood of our men and women in the armed forces.
 
He notably spoke of the day a car pulled up outside his house to call his father to war, and how his father went away for a very long time.  He spoke of his grandfather, also called away.  And how when his grandfather finally came home, he died the next day.
 
His most powerful statement of the night was that he has the scars to show from his battles for this country, and Senator Obama does not.  We should add that these scars would not just come from a bayonet.  They would be from his prominent role in the culture war, the war of ideas in this country.
 
Back-to-back conventions, along with the choice of Palin and McCain's speech last night, have made the difference between the two presidential candidates so pronounced that the most mindless voter in America couldn't help but see it.  It's the experience, stupid.  And experience at the forefront is a scenario vastly favorable to McCain.
 
McCain's political brilliance in making all of this unfold as it has cannot be underestimated.  Last night, as he accepted his party's nomination, he was not only a great soldier; he was a giant on the sociopolitical landscape.  He cut through the jungle of political machination as if he were hacking through with a machete. 
 
John McCain, as he stood on that stage last night, was Mac the Knife.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (40) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Our Town

Posted by beltway girl on Thursday, September 04, 2008 1:53:14 AM
 
 
So—people a thousand years from now—this is the way we were in the provinces north of New York at the beginning of the twentieth century.—This is the way we were: in our growing up and in our marrying and in our living and in our dying.  --Stage Manager, Our Town, Thornton Wilder
 

 
Do barracudas go for the jugular?
 
This one did.
 
And tonight, she was so effective, she looked far more worthy of the nickname "Jaws." 
 
The curtain went up on Sarah Palin and she came out swinging.  She talked about life in a small town, noting that these are the people who make this nation, who work for this nation, who fight for this nation, and who die for this nation.  She noted that she knew small town people well, and she quoted a writer on this topic.  But her own words were far more eloquent.  "They are the ones who do some of the hardest work in America... who grow our food, run our factories, and fight our wars."
 
She stated that these are the people who are always proud of their country, a stinging rebuke of the celebrated Michelle Obama comment. 
 
Then, Jaws entered Barack Obama's receding ocean.  She said that, you know, being the mayor of a small town was a lot like being a community organizer.
 
Except with responsibility.
 
Ouch.
 
She bashed Obama on his bitter comments.  She talked about cleaning up Juneau and auctioning off its luxury jet on eBay.
 
And she sang her own praises a tad, giving us an idea of the scope of her work as governor of Alaska.
 
Oil is a huge issue in our nation today, and Palin's speech, something of a tour of duty unto itself, stopped there next.  Palin's state is vital to America's quest for oil independence.
 
She blasted the dependence on oil supplied by nations who hate our own.  She mapped out the Mc-Palin road for our energy future, albeit vaguely.  This is appropriate for a speech of this kind, and actually necessary by virtue of its breadth.
 
This woman made clear she is a champion for the cause of life, not so much by talking about it, but by showing it to us.  A picture of her special needs baby in the cradling arms of Cindy McCain.
 
But the one thing throughout this speech, like a constant drumbeat, was her steady support for John McCain.  Sarah Palin clearly admires this man.  And it's genuine.
 
It was a big night for the party, and for the country.  We had wonderful speeches from Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, and (notably) Rudy Giuliani.
 
But at no time was this night bigger than when Sarah Palin forced it to become small.  When Sarah Palin reminded America of little places that dot the map until they swallow it.  Until she reminded us of the growing, the working, the drive, the sacrifice, the living, the wars, and the dying.
 
Conjuring up images of Thornton Wilder's "Our Town," Sarah Palin was a strange reminder of Emily.  A woman who, on the surface, appears no deeper.  But, like Wilder's great work itself, she is far more complex than any simple mind would like to make her.
 
Tonight, Sarah Palin's town became our town, the United States of America.  She made it so herself, tonight, with her words and her sincerity.  And it cannot do this nation anything but good that she succeeded in doing it.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (8) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Change

Posted by beltway girl on Wednesday, September 03, 2008 3:40:04 PM
During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.   --George Orwell
 
In August of 1864, Abraham Lincoln called a cabinet meeting.  A spring campaign in Virginia had just ended badly, and Lincoln had a memo he wanted some officials to sign.  It began in a rather interesting manner.  "This morning, as for some days past, it seems exceedingly probable that this Administration will not be re-elected."http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/jala/27.2/monroe.html  

President Lincoln knew he was not revered among the masses.  And he knew it even though Gallup did not yet exist.
 
One might write this off as a transitory moment for Lincoln's administration, owing only to a low ebb in the morale of the citizenry riding the tides of  war.  But Abraham Lincoln was never particularly popular while he was in office.  One writer attributes this to "Confederate sympathizers in the border states and lower Midwest; and the peace wing of the Democratic Party, often referred to as 'Copperheads.'  The latter group believed that the Civil War was undermining the Northern economy, civil liberties, and states' rights.  Particularly objectionable to the Northern Democrats were two Lincoln administration policies: emancipation and the military draft." http://elections.harpweek.com/1864/bio-1864-Full.asp?UniqueID=17&Year=1864
 
Tonight, on televisions we would never have had in the time of Lincoln, we saw another president, also not terribly popular at the moment.  George Bush made references to an angry left in his speech. 
 
It seems like history truly may repeat itself, whether the writers at Salon want to believe it or not.  http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2006/08/23/bush_lincoln/ 

Lincoln was not a beloved president.  He was not adored by those actually living his administration's policies.  The average person walking down the street had little time for Abe Lincoln, and the peaceniks of his time, well, even less.
 
And so it has been with George Bush.  Mocked and despised by the left and its incredibly objective Fourth Estate, he has been beset upon.  Once again, it was the same with Lincoln. "Lincoln was called just about every name imaginable, including 'a grotesque baboon,' 'a third-rate country lawyer who once split rails and now splits the Union,' 'a coarse, vulgar joker,' a dictator, an ape, and a buffoon.  The Illinois State Register [published in his adopted home state] labeled him "the craftiest and most dishonest politician that ever disgraced an [American political] office."http://mistersnitch.blogspot.com/2005/08/bad-press-for-president.html
 
Bush has also been besieged by haters of his nation (who actually exist in ready suppoly outside of his own nation as well) and natural disasters.  With 9/11, Iraq, Katrina, Gustav, and a host of other storm names to boot, this president has run the gamut of catastrophe.
 
Has he run it well? 
 
Although Gallup won't reflect it now, history books and the children of our time may someday do so.  Should George Bush's Iraq produce a more temperate and just Middle East, with a strong foothold for the west to better protect its ally, Israel, George Bush will go down in history as one of the greatest presidents in it.
 
He will have brought change as Lincoln did, as Kennedy did, and as Reagan did.  It will be change of such a magnitude as to alter the world as we have known it in todays long gone by, and in the todays before us, which will themselves be discarded.  And like the dying leaves of the autumn now just ahead, they will one day be cracked and brittle, the pages of a decades-old history text.    George Bush will quite possibly find his place in this book.  His opponents now say they are on the right side of history, and they are the ones fighting for change.  But Lincoln's legacy shows its own bright-line rule, and that is that the vast majority of people often don't at all care for the right kind of change while they themselves are the living history. 
 
As the discarded warrior prepares to vacate his office, one has to realize that the battles he has fought have not been just those abroad.  George Bush has known the angry left, indeed.  And they have revelled in his every faltering.  But the right kind of change owns the future. 
 
Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past. This is another quote by George Orwell.
 
 In the end, this man will have been like an ensign on a hill.  Having owned the present, past, and future for his string of moments, he will have delivered his nation into a new global landscape. 
 
It is a little-discussed fact that Winston Churchill lost the 1945 election in Britain in a landslide to the Labour Party.   That May, his approval ratings were at eighty-three percent.  Popularity is not always a reliable measure of either just or unjust result.  That result, being history itself, will endure to speak for itself. 
 
Pundits today saracastically note that You, George Bush, are no Lincoln. 
 
And by the way pundits of Lincoln's own time responded, we would have to note that today's pundits are no different.  No, they are more of the same. 
 
You, the members of the Fourth Estate, are no change.  And in the end, you'll be no judge, either.
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (4) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

ATTENTION: A STATEMENT FROM N.O.W.

Posted by beltway girl on Monday, September 01, 2008 1:24:58 AM
It has come to our attention that certain individuals are advocating against a woman and her right to choose.  Now, when we say, 'a woman' like that, we know it sounds like it's not anyone actually speaking.  We only say it that way because we're also thinking of the right to privacy.  It's none of your business if it was one of us.  Never mind that it emphasizes the fact that no one ever wants to lay claim on actually having done the thing we're advocating.  That's not the point.  And that's certainly not why we say it that way.
 
So these individuals are advocating against a woman and her right to choose.  This is nothing new in our war against men.  Notice that I don't say our war against mankind.  The fact that the word "mankind" is the word we would use in such a reference is itself a product of men, made by men.  But not by mankind, which obviously includes women.  But returning to the point, the individuals advocating against the woman and her right to choose are, in this case, claiming to be women.
 
N.O.W., in cooperation with the Democratic Party of this nation, has always fought to make the general population aware that no individual that advocates against a woman's right to choose is a woman.  Regardless of what you may initially think, please remember that the individual advocating against the right to choose is not a woman.  N.O.W. does not appreciate such charades, and knows that you don't, either. 
 
So if someone should enter into the current presidential election wearing a skirt, and cute shoes, be aware that this individual is not a woman. 
 
The woman was there, but she was wearing a pantsuit.
 
And the guy at the top of the ticket refused to put her on as vice president, even though she, herself, should have been the nominee.  The reprecussions for such an act will be felt, but returning to the matter at hand.  Please be aware that any individual advocating against the right to choose who claims to be a woman is perhaps attempting to engage in voter fraud.  Know that your rights can, and will, be protected. 
 
Thank you.  We hope we've been as clear on the issues as we have always been.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (30) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Turning Of The Page For The Maverick

Posted by beltway girl on Sunday, August 31, 2008 3:08:39 AM
"When the soldiers came home from Vietnam, there were no parades, no celebrations.  So they built the Vietnam Memorial for themselves."  --William Westmoreland
 
Who is John McCain?
 
John McCain was crushed when his plane was shot down over Hanoi in October of 1967.  His body broken, he nearly drowned.
 
When the Vietnamese recovered this twisted and fractured, but certainly animated and alert remnant of a human being, a crowd attacked him.  He felt the bayonet and the butt of a rifle.  His body absorbed the hatred of his country, and of western civiliztion.
 
The soldier, now a prisoner, was taken to the Hanoi Hilton.  What life was like in this place can only be imagined from the details available.  That was Hoa Lo, which means "Fiery Furnace," or "Hell's Hole."  "Stove."  Another nearby prison was known as the Zoo.
 
Why did they call it the Zoo?
 
Well, all the windows had been bricked off, and the doors had padlocks.  But there was a small crack where the prisoners could look out, and livestock could look in.  http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/honor/sfeature/sf_prisons.html  Perhaps the most important note to this aside is that the North Vietnamese truly did view creatures of the west as no better than animals; but the Zoo was not the Hilton.
 
The Hanoi Hilton was built by the French, who were not very popular with many of the locals.  It became a hot point for what was to come.  Men destined to lead the North Vietnamese communists were no strangers to it.  When they got their chance, they decided to make John McCain familiar with its hospitality, which somehow hadn't changed all that much, except, perhaps, to have become more savage.
 
Rusted shackles.  Rats.  Lt. Ronald Bliss reflected, "You could look at this place and...  just hear the screams of about fifty years because it was-- it is-- a hard place."  http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/honor/sfeature/sf_prisons.html
 
The article goes on.  "Some of the most brutal torture of Americans took place here in specially equipped rooms."
 
Our servicemen, mostly pilots at this place, were tortured and interrogated.  There were "rope bindings, irons, beatings, and prolonged solitary confinement."  (Wikipedia)  The North Vietnamese wanted good press.  They wanted U.S. policy denounced by these men. 
 
"In 1968, he was offered early release, and when he refused, because others had been there longer, his captors went at him again: he suffered cracked ribs, teeth broken off at the gum line, and torture that lashed his arms behind his back and that were progressively tightened all the way through the night."  (http://hotair.com/archives/2008/03/25/he-left-his-teeth-in-the-hanoi-hilton/, quoting Vanity Fair)
 
The piece continues that he suffered from dysentery in solitary confinement and attempted suicide.
 
"I took one look at him, and my brain said, 'They dropped this guy off on me to claim that we let him die.'"  ((http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/05/08/mccains-former-hanoi-cell-mate-describes-character-in-deplorable-conditions/)
 
These were the words of Col. George "Bud" Day, a celebrated soldier also being housed at the Hanoi Hilton at the time, as quoted in CNN.
 
Watery soup and bread were the least of their worries.  Starvation, beatings, tortured for hours and hours.  Hate America, my brother.  Some did at home without any torture.  The Hilton uniforms are eerily reminiscent of Adolf Hitler's concentration camp uniforms.
 
John McCain lived there for five years.  Atrocities.  Many in the quest for good press for the North Vietnmanese. 
 
This man is clearly someone to be considered for the White House this year.  He should not be denied that if he is shown to be the clearly superior candidate.  Many on the left don't like to remember Vietnam; it doesn't sit well with their "world view."
 
As our own press has already launched an attack on his running mate's "inexperience," let's try to make sure that the quest for good press doesn't once again besiege this soldier.
 
A good leader, even in our nation, isn't easy to come by.  We have many presidents in our history, the names of whom escape the memories of school children and investment bankers alike. 
 
But the competition is stiff.  Barack Obama offers a whole gamut of gifts, including a brilliant mind, beautifully crafted speeches, and an enhanced opportunity for racial healing.
 
But please remember that this man has a story, too.  Some among the left like to make light of this story, knowing how powerful it truly is.  John McCain came home from his "Vietnam experience" like many others.  Many in the nation didn't embrace these men, didn't love these men, didn't cherish these men, and did not celebrate these men.
 
Men like him built their own building, and, like McCain, they built their own legacy.  The good press the North Vietnmanese craved wasn't in Vietnam; it was here.  There was a very receptive audience for them.
 
McCain came home and turned the page in his life, and he chose the life of a public servant.  More recently, he has turned the page by making Sarah Palin his running mate.  It's a page worth turning.  Because the audience the North Vietnamese sought out in this country is to be found on the far left. 
 
They in this flank of the American political landscape say this vice presidential candidate is light, but their own presidential candidate floats like a duck feather. 
 
America, don't turn back.  Heed Barack Obama's advice and know that you cannot turn back.  This was a good man you had in John McCain, and he still is.  He is the same man that survived America's lost war, and the brutality that followed that loss.
 
For once, show the left that the quest for good press has gone too far.  Saying that this man's building is the White House is not partisan, it is just.  Give this man, and the men who served with him, the building they really deserved.
 
It is, seriously, the right kind of change.
 
His opponents in his own party say he's a "maverick," and doesn't do as he is told.
 
It's the turning page for "The Maverick."  Let's ask, if you had been through what this man had, would you be anything else?
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (11) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Welcome to Dogtown

Posted by beltway girl on Saturday, August 30, 2008 1:18:25 AM
Dogtown.  A place where dogs were brought to lick their physical and emotional wounds.  Little animals subject to tremendous abuse at the hands of the curiously interested Michael Vick.  Michael Vick, himself a perverse and bizarre type of victim of his times.  Had it been a hundred years or so ago down south, he would have attracted people to his theater of the uncaring, completely unacceptable, and arguably insane.  As it is, though, he was skewered and his career went down in flames.
 
Dogs in our culture are loved.  They are revered.  They are cherished.
 
But imagine a different world.
 
Imagine a world where dogs are not really considered...  human!  Imagine a world where dogs are considered to be non-viable life forms, incapable of actual survival, in many cases, without their owners. 
 
Imagine a viability test for dogs.  Imagine the Supreme Court noting that some dogs are able to survive outside their homes, without the life-giving support of their owners.  But others, well...
 
You know, the cut, it's gotta be made somewhere.  Some of the owners, well, they just don't want their pets.  Now did they choose to make their pets in the first place?
 
Yes, They, Did!
 
Right.  But do they want them now?
 
No, They, Don't!
 
What if these owners are teens?
 
If your daughter...  made a mistake.  Would you want her punished...  with a puppy?
 
Once the pet is a pet, it is a pet.  Is it possible for it to be anything else?
 
Well, the Supreme Court might devise a test.  A horse is a course, of course, of course.  But what about this problematic dog?
 
The statement with the horse might leave this open to a discussion about equal protection under the laws.  But that aside for the moment, the Supreme Court might devise a test to see if the pet's viable.  Imagine this viability test for dogs.  Again, is the pet capable of survival outside the home without the support of its owner?
 
And is there a compelling interest on the part of the state to step in and prevent a Vick from hurting this non-viable pit bull?
 
You know, it's a necessary evil.  Pets happen.  Sometimes, owners are in a comfortable position to accept them.  But sometimes not.
 
What if this owner has no money?  What if this owner is on welfare?  What if this owner is a senior, and eating dog food herself?  A living testament to the Reagan legacy.
 
What if the pet is unwanted?  What then?  Can we actually force the owner to sustain the life of the pet?
 
Such a thing could never happen in the United States of America.  Were it to happen, and someone asked you whether you could live in such a society, how would you respond?
 
Yes, We Can!  That's Senator Obama's response.
 
No, We, Can't, answers Senator John McCain, and Sarah Palin seconds the nomination.
 
Conservatives!  Welcome to Dogtown!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (10) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous123456Next »