THE TYGRRRR EXPRESS

Comedian Colin Quinn was deadly accurate when he referred to CNN as Al Jazeera West. It has also been called the Chirac News Network. Democrats run like lily livered cowards from Fox News, but republicans should expect hostile treatment from the Conservative National Nightmare. I will blog in a separate post about how the candidates did, but the big loser in this debate was CNN, which continues to lose ratings because of its blatant anti-republican and anti-Bush bias.

The first question dealt with trying to get republicans to say how they would act if they had hindsight. Mitt Romney politely stated what I screamed out…that it was a stupid question. It made me want to ask Ann Coulter if she would favor abortion if she knew the child would grow up to be a CNN executive.

The next question asked what we should do if General Petraus comes back with a negative report. Rudy Giuliani correctly pointed out that if the report is positive, will the media whitewash that? Of course they will.

Then it was asked if we should have dialogue with Iran? Thankfully most of the candidates took the time to announce that all options, including a preemptive nuclear strike, were on the table.

The immigration bill was the first question dealing with actual legislation. CNN is a blinking VCR, accurate twice a day. The candidates had substantive disagreements. Intelligent discussion actually can take place, it just requires intelligent questions.

They then went back to nonsense, asking the candidates what they thought about Fred Thompson? I like Fred Thompson, but until he enters the race, spend times asking the candidates questions on stage about real issues. Somehow CNN did not bring up Paris Hilton and Sara Silverman. After all, it would lower their brand, if that was possible.

Then CNN asked a question that implied that it is scientific fact that global warming is man made. No! This is not a universal consensus. It is disputed. Mixed in this question was a soapbox about whether we should deal with big oil companies and their profits. Some of the candidates fell into this idiotic trap, others chose not to do so. I feel CNN anchors make too much money, and should be replaced with cheaper, trainable monkeys. May I confiscate their salaries now, or should I allow the free market to work? Even miscreants are entitled to paychecks if the market says so.

They then asked a legitimate question about gays in the military and ending “Don’t ask don’t tell,” which was phrased in a biased manner by stating that England and Israel allow gays to serve. So what? Israel is a Jewish State. Does the American President have to be Jewish? How about we ask Mozambique or Lichtenstein what they think? This idea that other nations should dictate our decision making is one reason John “Global Test” Kerry lost the election. Is it that hard to ask questions in an unbiased way? For CNN, yes.

The question about what role George W. Bush should play after the election was nonsense. The question about what happened to the GOP in 2006 was mildly thought provoking, although the liberal media loves to let republicans discuss what they do wrong. It saves the democrats money and research. These “mea culpas” will be in campaign commercials. Does CNN ask democrats why they keep losing presidential elections, and why for the last 40 years, liberalism is on the run?

The Lewis Libby question was fair, and separated the strong candidates from the mealy mouthed clowns scared to fight back. Before the citizens who were picked by their desire to represent the GOP the least were allowed to ask questions equally designed to hurt the GOP, Candy Crowley remarked how surprised she was that the debate was so civil. What did she expect, the guys to punch Wolf Blitzer for asking horribly slanted questions (it crossed my mind.)? These people wanted republican conflict, but republicans are adults who discuss policies. We do not hurl invective.

One woman asked how we can bring the troops home. My heart goes out that her brother died serving, but she was used by CNN for anti-war sympathy. The candidates handled the question masterfully, refusing to endorse cut and run, for the most part. The question should have been, “how do we win?” I do not fault the questioner, but CNN knew what it was doing, which it rarely does.

After an intelligent question about how we should stabilize the Iraqi government, somebody asked if ONE could be a conservative and a conservationist. Are you kidding me? Why not ask if someone could be a conservative and still be a good human being? One can like the environment without accepting Al Gore’s assault on sanity.

After a prescription drug benefit plan and health care question, somebody asked about a single payer Canadian style health care system. How can somebody proposing something to the left of Hillary Clinton on health care be even a moderate, much less a republican? The Clinton News Network struck again.

The question about the most pressing moral issue facing Americans was fair, and separated the wheat from the chafe. Then one person asked Romney a loaded question about flip-flopping because he was against illegal immigration, but airing ads in Spanish. The question was racist. Not every Hispanic person in America is here illegally, and one can be for border enforcement and still believe in outreach, which is positive. This was an attempt to accuse anyone against illegal immigration as brown bashers. Who are these republicans?

The worst question of the night was when someone asked the candidates how they differed from President Bush. CNN was delighted. They want the candidates rebuking Bush. It will not work, as Al Gore found out when he ran away from Clinton. The republican nominee is tied to Bush, and there is no escape. More importantly, nor should there be. Wolf Blitzer then changed the question and falsely stated that the question was what Bush’s biggest mistake was. That was not the question. One can disagree with him without him being “wrong.” Most of the candidates were smart enough to state what the republican party did wrong in 2006, rather than bash Bush. Those that took the bait should lose out. A question asking how they agree with the President would not be asked, but it is important since the republican candidate in 2008 will be running on the Bush record, and little else.

What it means to be an American was nonsense, and how to bring back republicans moderates and independents implies that 2006 was a realignment. It implied that being “too conservative,” was a mistake. The candidates saw through this.

I genuinely wish CNN’s executives would be deported to Guantanamo Bay, or better yet, a place that is actually dangerous for inmates, perhaps in Pakistan.

I congratulate the republican candidates for having the courage to enter enemy territory, and can say that they are now all decorated combat veterans. The next time democrats complain about Fox News, they should take their biased heads and shove them up their…what is a word to describe it…oh yeah…CNN.

eric

I lost interest in justice today. I am now interested in vengeance. The only law I believe in is Hammurabi’s Law…An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a death for a death. Conservatives cannot be expected to win the War on Terror if we cannot even win a public relations battle against liberals, who are supposed to be a bunch of peacenik wimps.

First, let me get the obligatory politically correct garbage out of the way. No, liberals are not murderers, no they did not cause 9/11, no they are not evil or anywhere close to Al Queda, despite their thinking that conservatives are all of the above.

In the same way a billion Muslims get blamed for the action of a few thousand because the few thousand speak the loudest, all liberals shall be painted with a sweeping broad brush until the normal, reasonable, mainstream ones make themselves heard over the lunatics.

In the same way terrorists break the rules while American soldiers have to stay within them, republicans and conseratives keep thinking that if they hit below the belt, it will bring the liberals into the gutter. Folks, the liberals are already in the gutter. They are an overflowing cesspool of bile and hatred. In the same way that Yassir “That’s my baby terrorist” Arafat gave out candy to Palestinian children after 9/11, liberals will be popping champagne corks and orgasming at their keyboards over the destruction of Scooter Libby’s life and family.

There will not be classy voices of sympathy. Despite football owner Art Modell’s adage that “Losers should say very little, and winners should say even less,” liberals are prepared to dance on Libby’s emotional grave. Like wolves and jackals, they are licking their chops at the next pound of flesh. It is amazing how liberals hate guns and the second amendment, but celebrate hunting season when republicans are being hunted. They will go on and on about how this conviction is a victory for the forces of good over the forces of evil and corruption. No, what it is is a victory of liberals over conservatives, and it will be a pyrrhic one.

The idea that it takes two to tango is nonsense. Only one side is throwing punches. This poisonous political atmosphere started in 1987 when one of the finest legal minds in this country, Robert Bork, was rejected for a seat on the Supreme Court, but not before nearly being reduced to tears. To destroy someone’s career is now referred to as “Borking.” Despite no direct evidence, Clarence Thomas was slandered and libeled in a most disgusting manner.

The consequences for engaging in the politics of personal destruction is that it keeps the best and brightest from wanting to engage in public service. Why would I want to be President, and earn $400,000 and endless heartache, when I can be a Corporate CEO, make mega-millions, and be given a golden parachute filled with stock options?

People leave Washington and become disillusioned. For a brief time, something so overwhelmingly tragic will happen, such as Vince Foster committing suicide, but then it is back to destruction as usual (It was not republicans bashing Foster).

The liberals have decided that conservatives and republicans are for the most part not human beings. Keying their cars is acceptable. Removing their lawn signs and throwing objects at conservative speakers is normal discourse. So why are liberals happy about Scooter Libby? Why is his scalp so important?

Scooter Libby is the closest that liberals can get to President Bush. They despise him, despite his graciousness and compassion for people. They are angry that republicans went after the Clintons. The difference is the Clintons actually were corrupt. The liberals, rather than seeing going after the Clintons as trying to enforce justice, opted for vengeance. This appetite for destroying all things republican only grew after the 2000 election, and exploded after 2004.

They have Alberto Gonzalez on the ropes for simply doing a lousy job at publicly explaining something completely legal (which seems to be the biggest flaw in this administration). Paul Wolfowitz is being ousted from the World Bank under ridiculous charges, when the entire world knows that he is merely another Neocon scalp. The Iraq War should have nothing to with running a bank, but then again liberals have never been ones to let logic and reasoning and morality get in the way of a good scalping.

Now, a scandal about nothing has engulfed an innocent victim. Scooter Libby has been sentenced to jail, and his family is devastated emotionally and financially. Therefore one of two things should happen.

Nancy Pelosi could go on television and publicly urge President Bush to pardon Scooter Libby, and declare an end to gotcha games. This scenario is fantasy, since Ms. Pelosi would catch too much flack from her base, and why would anyone want to do the courageous morally decent thing when they can placate the scum of American society. In the same way Europe is becoming a Caliphate, the democratic party is becoming the party of Moveon.org and Daily Kos hatemongers.

The more realistic scenario is the democratic party does a victory lap. This should be met by republicans with the same response as when those who knocked down the Towers in Manhattan celebrated (although verbally, not militarily)…with Scorched Earth.

Investigations should immediately be initiated against Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi. If nothing is there, we should create something. We can even hold hearings into Ted Kennedy and Chappaquiddick. Every democrat should be subpoenaed. Now some will say this will not happen because democrats control Congress. Public pressure can be turned up. Or republicans can lay in wait and exact vengeance when they get power back.

Now some will argue that this will further poison the environment. It is too late. It is already poisoned. One cannot make peace with those who only believe in war. The democrats may lack anything resembling coherent policies or plans to govern, but boy can they fight, and fight dirty, and fight to the death to win. Unless republicans hit these bullies between the eyes (again, verbally), the liberals will continue to do victory laps as innocent people see their careers and lives ruined.

There can be no peace with those who see war as the ends and not merely the means. It is time to go after liberals with Scorched Earth ruthlessness until these rats have no place left on this Earth to hide. As I said, there will be some decent and thoughtful liberals tonight praying for Scooter Libby and his family, but they are in the minority.

From Robert Bork to Scooter Libby, the democrats have had a 20 year head start. If Republicans can topple evil men like Saddam, surely they can handle liberals. Or perhaps they can play nice, hope the left does the same, and then be surprised when another one of them gets in trouble over absolutely nothing.

For every day Scooter Libby spends in jail, one liberal needs to metaphorically burn. It is up to the democrats to try and make peace. I am done reaching my hand out to them first. They want me at their level. Congratulations. I am there.

May God look after Scooter Libby and his family, and may justice be done to those who went after him for sport. When payback happens…and it will…the liberals will understand why…and they will deserve it. The chance to prevent this is to speak up right now, and allow this good, decent, innocent victim of liberal Jihad to go home to his family.

eric

Sandy Berger committed crimes against America. No, he does not deserve the death penatly, but life in prison without parole would be appropriate. He is a killer of the worst kind.

Now some people may be scratching their heads in confusion. Isn’t Sandy Berger some guy who at worst committed a white collar crime? Is theft or burglary worthy of life in prison? How is that worse than murder?

When a murderer kills someone, unless the family had never taken a picture of the victim in their life, at least there are memories. As bad as killing someone is, burning down their house in addition is worse, especially if their mementos perish in the fire. Killing sacred memories is pure heartlessness.

It is one thing to metaphorically shred the constitution, which apparently for Bill Clinton and his administration was the most popular hobby, even more so than golf, which he cheats at (mulligans anyone?). It is another to sneak into a building and burn an original copy of it. Sandy Berger admitted to removing classified documents from the National Archives. Pieces of American history are forever dead.

The only thing that matters when all is said and done is the judgment of history. Bill Clinton has been doing everything he can to alter how the history books will view him. He has now gone beyond public relations. This was one of the most serious financial crimes ever committed. If anybody thinks Sandy Berger did this without Bill Clinton in mind, then they rolled up the stolen papers and smoked them. Given that the administration were spoiled 1960s brats, that would be a plausible explanation.

This is worse than most of the Clinton scandals. This is not playing slap and tickle with a barely legal girl. This is what was meant when “High Crimes and Misdemeanors,” was set as a standard.

What kind of people do this? What kind of people are willing to destroy parts of history to save their own skin? These are the people who collect FBI files on their political opponents. These are the people that use the IRS against their political opponents, from the NRA to Paula Jones (like a woman making $35,000 per year needs to be audited by the IRS). These are the people that criticize the Bush administration for firing US attorneys, when they fired the travel office staff and accused them of embezzlement, wrecking their reputations (A jury acquitted the head of the travel office, Billy Dale, in one hour). These are the people that vandalize White House computers by removing all the “W’s” and call it a childish prank, rather than what it is, vandalism of government property. These are the people that lie under oath, and have to surrender their licenses to practice law.

Sandy Berger did more than destroy property. Property can sometimes be fixed. When neighborhood hooligans bashed in the family mailbox when I was a kid, we bought a new one (Sadly enough my dad was not legally allowed to rig the mailbox with explosives that would only detonate when severe force such as a baseball bat was applied to it). This property cannot be fixed. It is dead. It is gone forever.

Killers do not value human life. Sandy Berger did not value human history. He did not value the life of documents that were to last as long as this nation. Can anyone imagine what America would be today if Thomas Jefferson or John Adams had destroyed documents out of jealousy towards George Washington?

If a person only owned one possession, or one item of value, and that item was taken, that person would be reduced to nothing. They would be dead inside. The only thing America has is its history. We have nothing without it. People in Richard Nixon’s administration went to jail over misdeeds, and Richard Nixon resigned. Whether one loved or hated him, he spared the country an impeachment hearing, the same way he refused to contest the 1960 election that many believe was stolen from him. His sense of honor, despite his many flaws, put his nation before himself. These are concepts that Bill “Finger wagger and Finger banger” Clinton and Al “I won the popular vote, screw the Electoral College, it’s only the Constitution” Gore cannot grasp.

This is not about right versus left. It is about right versus wrong. Liberals believe that they are good and conservatives are evil, therefore it is perfectly ok to lie, cheat, steal because the ends justify the means. Cash in a freezer? No problem? Lying under oath? Everybody does it, especially about sex. Causing a constitutional crisis to win an election? Hey, what is a constitution if it allows republicans to wield power. Dead people voting? Sure, why not.

Sandy Berger is the bottom of the barrel, the worst of even this lot. He is a cold blooded subhuman abomination. America is trying to win a War on Terror, and Sandy Berger cares more about his own reputation and that of his former boss than of 3000 dead Americans. We will now never know the truth.

Is it possible that those documents that were stolen would have made him and Bill Clinton look good? Sure. It makes perfect sense to steal documents that exonerate one or cast one in a positive light.

I feel like taking Sandy Berger to Guantanamo and torturing him. Not forced interrogation…torture…until he turns over the documents. This may come across as barbaric, but so is murdering pieces in the American historical chain.

Thank you Sandy. Thank you for reminding me that there is no low too low for the Clintonistas. I knew they loathed the military. I did not know they loathed their country.

This was an act of treason. As I said, the death penalty is too severe, but life in prison without parole would be totally appropriate for this historical document butcher.

The tragedy is long after Sandy Berger has taken his criminal body and left this Earth, there will still be memories of him. I wish that could be erased. Then again, of course Bill or Hillary Clinton can have one of their friends steal and destroy those as well.

eric

Louisiana Congressman William Jefferson has now been indicted. Whether or not justice will be served remains to be seen. Those who correctly point out that indicted does not mean convicted have a valid point, but the deeper truth is that many people badly want Mr. Jefferson to be innocent. Unlike the fictional television character played brilliantly by Sherman Hemsley, this Mr. Jefferson decided to move on up the wrong way. He did not moved up with “Weezie, (Isabel Sanford, rest her soul),” but by being weasely.

William Jefferson, not to be confused with William Jefferson Clinton (who is also black if you listen to some people), the more famous convicted felon (Yes, he by legal standards was convicted of a felony, surrendering his law license), is a Louisiana Congressman who has been accused of taking bribes. Not helping his case is the fact that he was caught on videotape taking $100,000 from an FBI agent. A further problem for those who think the tape might have been doctored is the fact that when the FBI raided his home, they found $90,000 in cash in his freezer.

Randy Duke Cunningham sits in jail for bribery. So why is William Jefferson still standing politically? Simple. Randy Duke Cunningham is a white republican from San Diego. William Jefferson is a black liberal democrat from Louisiana. This is where some people raise their hand Oprah Winfrey style and say “don’t go there girlfriend.”

Girlfriend…puh-leeze. I just did. Not since Eddie Murphy in a comedy routine talked about adultery has a man had such a set of brass cojones on him. That is the routine where the girl catches Eddie in bed with another woman, and he responds “Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?”

William Jefferson had $90,000 in his freezer. Of course, girl scout cookies are expensive, and cable companies send bill collectors to the door for cash rather than just have people pay their bill online. Of course, if $90,000 was in the freezer, and the bribe was $100,000, where is the other $10,000? This is called money laundering, when money of such large quantities disappears. It is used for activities such as drugrunning, gunrunning, prostitution, etc. I am not saying William Jefferson engaged in these activities, but money funded by illegal activities is normally not used for positive society building purposes.

Now, about William Jefferson being black. Yes, it is an issue. It is the reason why the rest of congress is falling all over itself to criticize the FBI from doing their jobs. Congress is not above the law, and Dennis Hastert never seems to understand that when the tables are turned, liberals will not hesitate to destroy them. Or did I miss the groundswell of support for the Duke? People, especially republicans, are so scared of being called racists that they will tolerate behavior by black individuals that should be unacceptable for anyone.

The black community is also responsible for this travesty. Yes, I am a white conservative, a non-racist, and mad as hell that the black community makes excuses for the indefensible. When republican  Mark Foley was caught in an underage sex scandal, he was rightly immediately drummed out of congress. When liberal black democrat Mel Reynolds was caught, his defenders fought tooth and nail for him to have the right to do everything to young black women short of R. Kelly.

Marion Barry was caught on videotape smoking crack, and yet he was reelected. This was not the fault of white people anywhere. He smoked crack, and was deemed fit for office.

Yes, black people have had hardships in society. My great-grandparents were murdered by the Nazis. Cry me a river. There are an overwhelming number of black Americans that teach positive values to their children, and these children become successful members of society. When William Jefferson engages in criminal behavior, it hurts them the most.

The NAACP and the Congressional Black Caucus are worried that dragging this man down will lead to white racists going after other black men and women in power. This is valid only if you believe that they all have something to hide.

In the same way that Jim McGreevey was not a gay governor, but a corrupt governor who happened to be gay, William Jefferson is a corrupt Louisiana Congressman who was caught in a sting committing financial crimes. Oh, and by the way, in the irrelevant statistic of the month, he also happens to be black.

The issue is not black or white. It is green. It is $90,000 in his freezer. It is not about slavery, reparations, 400,000 man marches, Selma Alabama, white racism, or any other ism dating back 400 years. It is about one corrupt Louisiana Congressman with a stash of cash in a place where it normally would not be.

When he is replaced, which lord willing will be soon, his replacement will most likely be black. White Americans will look at this new black congressman and say “Welcome to the club. Now don’t be a criminal.” If he has a sense of humor, he should look at his 434 brethren, many of them white and say “The same goes for you.”

eric

Ronald Reagan’s 11th commandment is as sacred as the first 10…”Thou shalt not speak ill of any other republican.” Yes, moderates and right wingers can have our healthy disagreements. That makes us an intellectually stronger party than the democrats, which do not allow for dissenting views from the party orthodoxy (Joe Lieberman anyone?). However, we must not question each other’s motives. We are not liberals. We do not cannibalize each other, since we need every one of us to govern.

As a Jewish republican, I have always thought of republicans as the Jews of politics. Everybody outside of us hates our guts, and even those inside our group are often angst ridden, hand wringing, guilt ridden and self loathing. Wow, that sounds like Jews to me. Republicans and Jews would both be better off if instead of begging our many enemies to like us, we just told them (Syria, Iran, Moveon.org, Jayson Blair Times) to go (insert bad word here) themselves. Those plotting our demise will fail. We need to stay strong as republicans and govern.

Yes, the goal is to govern. There are no moral victories. Yes, the republicans in congress in 2006 needed a wake up call. That is fine. Congress is not the White House, and never will be (Nancy “Damascus” Pelosi anyone?). The reasons liberals can’t govern is because they blackmail “normal” democrats into veering hard left in order to be palatable to their fringe elements.

My blog deliberately refuses to write about red meat social issues, such as abortion, gay marriage, and immigration. I have not taken a public position on the immigration bill, and my blog is officially neutral on the issue. I will simply say that while there are some right wing bigots in this world, not all people on the right who want to protect our borders are guilty of “brown bashing.” They believe our laws are being violated, and simply want to enforce the rule of law. Also, the “moderates” that are not as riled up about illegal immigration are not democrats or even republicrats. Wall Street is filled with staunch republicans that focus more on economic issues. Criticizing someone for not sharing your passions on every issue is counterproductive when they might be your ally on most other issues. We cannot act like liberals. We have to be tolerant of each other. This does not mean embrace views we find wrongheaded, but it means not questioning the motives of our fellow republicans for holding such views.

Ronald Reagan united people because everybody wanted to be on his side. They all thought he agreed with them, when it was they who agreed with him. No matter how fiercely he disagreed with you, he was pleasant.

Concerns that the immigration debate will blow the republican party to smithereens are a tad overblown. The media does not understand that these disagreements are why we are so strong intellectually. The same people who accuse the Bush administration of group think are the ones who also accuse it of secrecy. The President has every right to want dissension in the ranks kept behind closed doors from people who wish the administration only harm.

However, private citizens in a democracy are supposed to criticize things they disagree with (Are you listening Hillary?). These are major issues, and the republican party allows for adult discussions. Try deviating from San Francisco values and see how hard the democratic party smacks you down in the name of tolerance. Talk about group think.

This blog will continue to disappoint people in the republican party that have contempt for other members of our coalition. I say that we have our disagreements forcefully but respectfully. Then we can hammer the democrats on why they are wrong about virtually everything, once we are united. We can discuss turning Iran and Syria into 50,000 whole golf courses, and shoving the American flag up Guantanamo Bay prisoner’s hides until they go to the toilet red, white and blue. We can have tax cuts and grow the economy.

Yes, every family has disagreements, but we cannot let the outsiders overrun us by weakening ourselves. We are all we have.

I will not agree with the moderates, the libertarians or the social conservatives on every issue. However, if you refer to me as a democrat, or God forbid, a liberal, I reserve the right to show my pro-military stance by decking you as if you had insulted my parents (who are both good republicans).

There will never be another Ronald Reagan, but we can honor his memory by living up to his ideals and portraying his optimism. As Rush Limbaugh says, we should be optimistic and be of good cheer. Of course we should. We are winning, and have been since 1980. The liberals had their time from 1932-1980. It is our time now. The country is moving rightward, with the occasional victory by democrats being an aberration. They cannot govern because the American public at this stage in history does not agree with their ideas. We can govern, except when we get our guns together and fire in a circle. The 2nd amendment gives us the right to keep and bear arms, but nowhere does it say we should shoot each other. That is electoral suicide, and suicide is illegal.

We are Ronald Reagan’s children, and he ordered us to play nice. We are different and unique, and he loved us all. That is why we loved him. None of us were his favorite. We were like the different color jelly beans on his desk, equally sweet.

There are dangerous people out there wishing to hurt us, from liberals to terrorists. Yes, there are varying degrees, with liberals being nuisances and terrorists being evil, but if we cannot even defeat the most pathetic opponent we have, that being liberals in a country that does not have a true left at all, then how can we beat the terrorists.

2006 was a disgrace. We lost to people that believed nothing, because no beliefs were better than what we were perceived to have been offering.

So let’s fight these divisive social issues in a civil manner, and be done with the squabbling by the time the primaries are over. The winner of the general election must have enough fight left to take on the Clintonistas. They cannot be damaged goods. We have the strongest group of candidates since 1980, and if we lose in 2008 we will only have ourselves to blame for beating ourselves.

For those republicans who take the ten commandments seriously, they had better remember to obey Ronald Reagan’s 11th commandment. It should be in big chiseled granite on every republican desk top. “Thou shalt not speak ill of any other republican.”

Thus saith Mr. Reagan, God rest his soul.

eric

An article in the Chicago Sun Times discusses the shrinking anti-war movement. While the conclusions of the article are off base, at least it brings up a worthy question of why this is happening.

“Despite a rising tide of public discontentment with the war, turnouts at protest rallies nationwide have shrunk precipitously. The Democratic Congress, swept into office on a wave of anti-war sentiment, showed the timidity of a neurotic deer mouse as it handed President Bush the war funding he requested without any stipulation for troop withdrawal.”

Rising discontent about the war is a myth. Congress are by nature lily-livered cowards who stay in power by listening to their constituents. If there was rising discontent about the war, we would have pulled out troops. What the liberals never grasp is that many people do not agree with them. Many people have concerns about the war, but want us to succeed, see the current surge as working, and are patient about getting results. Yes, that patience is less than it was four years ago, but just because liberal activists scream loudly does not make them the majority opinion. Polling has many flaws, too numerous to mention here.

“I think what’s extraordinary right now is how there hasn’t been a major street presence at any point during the war, said Jeremi Suri, a history professor at the University of Wisconsin at Madison and author of the book Power and Protest: Global Revolution and the Rise of Detente. If anything, that presence has declined in the past months, even as the public outcry against the war has been increasing.”

What public outcry? Two million leftist lunatics scream at the top of their lungs, a few liberal members of congress cave, and that is supposed to represent the 268 million that do not feel this way. Many people may have concerns about the war, but that is not a public outcry. These two million people are talking to each other, and no one outside of them is listening. The troops are not listening. Neither are the majority of legislators. If the Deaniac Moveon.org filth truly was a groundswell, they would be represented. They are a fringe movement, so they are not.

“Today’s activists seem easily bored and distracted, content to simply blog away their angst and then move on to the next issue that flares up.”

That is because the cause is wrong. If one cares deeply enough about a cause, they will follow through. Do not blame activists for being lazy and worthless. It is hard to get worked up for a cause that will be stopped dead in its tracks. Oh sure, they can blame Fox News, Rush Limbaugh President Bush, and Karl Rove, but the truth is if enough people agreed with the protesters, things would change. Once again, the silent majority is right.

“So what’s keeping people from raising hell? Where is the fervor and esprit de corps of the American protester? Why were the rabble-rousers of the ’60s and ’70s so potent, while those of today are so, to put it politely, non-potent?”

The protest movements of the 60s are overglorified by relics who actually think they contributed something positive to this world. Most normal people see the 60s protesters as what they were…people who had reckless sex, leading to the Aids crisis of today. They were people who took hard drugs, leading to the drug problems we face today. They were people who glorified cutting class, which combined with the drugs led to less intelligent and educated children. Those who offer the “life experience” argument can spare me such nonsense. Doing LSD or dropping acid is not life experience. If Joe “Lean on Me” Clark had taken his baseball bat to their class cutting skulls, they might have actually been productive. Instead they led to a retreat in a war that humiliated America, and made it fashionable for equally idiotic people to call soldiers “baby killers.” Somehow developing a lack of respect for human beings trying to save American lives became chic. As I said, they did not learn this in math or science class because they did not go.

One theory offered by the Chicago Sun Times is that people are more cynical and jaded today, and less likely to protest. This is nonsense. Most young people are optimistic about the future, and believe that they do not need to change every aspect of the world. Yes, some of them have angst over places they cannot find on a map, but most young kids today are happy, and do not want to be bothered complaining about everything. The 60s kids were simply narcissistic spoiled brats. My generation, especially post 9/11, thinks that technology has given so many opportunities for young people, including entrepreneurship, that rather than agitate and complain, we would rather actually “do things.” What an amazing concept…accomplishment instead of carping.

Yes, protests are down. Yet this is something positive. The 60s kids don’t understand that protesting for the sake of protesting is ridiculous. Inventing causes and convincing people these causes are widespread is not an adequate substitute for being a productive citizen. Throwing bottles and other objects at police officers is not noble resistance. It is thuggish criminal behavior.

America is fighting a global struggle on terror, and singing kumbaya and getting stoned on a peace pipe is so…well…60s. The internet has allowed people to make friends all over the world. Yes, there are angry bloggers out there. However, if the cause does not motivate you to actually get out and do something, then perhaps it is not that worthy.

I am going to lead by example today. I say I support the troops. Well today I am going to drive in my car and go to a place where thousands of volunteers are going to be sending care packages to the troops. “Operation Gratitude” is happening, and it is producing a real groundswell of people making a difference. Why are people actually showing up? Because they believe the cause, helping the soldiers, is worth it.

The 60s kids who complain about the lack of protesting today are complaining that society is better, and therefore there are less reasons to protest. Is society perfect? No. However, telling white kids who are hooked on Snoop Doggy Dogg and other Gangsta rap to sing “We shall overcome” does not make much sense. What are we trying to overcome? Long lines at McDonalds? Slow internet access?

Liberal 60s kids mourn the slow death of activism and protest marches. For productive, respectful citizens everywhere, I say “Thank God.”

Let the protesters grow more and more dispirited, more and more isolated, and more inclined to talk to each other as the rest of the world moves forward and, to flip their own phrase against them, “tunes them out.”

Protests are down because the protesters are…and were…wrong. As time goes by, people, including young people, with more access through technology to better information, simply see less and less reasons to protest.

Despite the best efforts of the 60s kids, America is getting stronger and better. The 268 million Americans who understand this do not have the time or will to protest. They would rather be productive and work on solutions.

Ok, I am off to go help the troops today. Maybe some 60s relics can criticize my actions on some street corner while stating how much they love the troops conducting a war based on oil. Actually high gas prices can be a good thing. It will force them to stay home. Spared of their hot air, the environment will be better off as well. So yes, when liberal protesters sit down and shut up, the globe is truly better off.

May God bless people everywhere who would prefer actually doing positive things rather than protest causes due to nostalgia over idiotic destructive behavior that took place almost 50 years ago.

Besides, if I get bored, my friends and I can always find some meatballs and throw them at vegetarian protesters. They will be too stoned to run away.

eric

I have done everything I can as a private citizen to help America in my own small way win the War on Terror. In his book, “They just don’t get it,” Colonel David Hunt, the retired military analyst for Fox News, outlines the problems we face, and what we can do about them. His book, like his personality, is a battering ram, a needed belt to the chops. This gruff former marine puts aside political correctness and tells us exactly what we need to do to eventually win this war.

First of all, we have to get mad. Then we have to stay mad. Many people turn off the television when they see images of 9/11, preferring to watch Paris Hilton or Anna Nicole Smith coverage. I watch it, and I still well up with rage when I see 9/11 coverage. Who the hell did these animals think they were? How dare they try to blow up my nation. If we do not love and desire to protect our nation as we would our family, is it no wonder our nation would weaken? We need to be part of the solution, and it starts with getting fired up about fiercely cherishing and protecting our homeland.

The US military does a spectacular job. We need to let them do it, and without restrictions or touchy feely politically correct concerns. Unless you have boots on the ground or lived in a foxhole, you have nothing to carp about. When I need somebody to drive a humvee over a bridge and into a lake or ditch, I will consult Ted Kennedy, since that seems to be his area of expertise. Nancy Pelosi needs to spend more time in San Francisco and less time in Damascus. When I hear liberals say they support the troops and want to bring them home, I want to scream Colonel Hunt style “You just don’t get it.” Until liberals realize that Islamofacism is the enemy, and not George W. Bush, they won’t get it.

I talk to soldiers. My travels to places with military presences such as Honolulu and San Diego allows me to ask soldiers what they think. Many have been to Afghanistan and Iraq, and they support and believe in what they are doing by an overwhelming margin. On Memorial Day, a young man just back from his 3rd tour of duty was asked in front of his mother what Americans can do to help. He said that while care packages were nice, the best gift the American people could give the soldiers was their unwavering support and total belief in the mission. That is not ambiguous. Unwavering support and total belief do not add up to withdrawal, retreat, and defeat. “These colors don’t run,” is not a slogan. It is how our troops behave. Private citizens need to back them.

We need to stop fighting polite wars. We need to stop apologizing just because the Jayson Blair Times hates President Bush more than they are love our troops. Abu Gharaib and Haditha were nothing. That’s right, I said nothing. Rougher hijinks can be found at college fraternity initiation ceremonies. The enemy beheads people. We make them feel bad and hurt their feelings, and we get criticized.

We need to name the enemy.The War on Terror is a War on Islamofacism. It is a religious war. Those who wage Jihad have been bitter since the Crusades, and they need to be humiliated even more this time. We do not need to fight a more sensitive war, as John “anti-war protester” Kerry would prefer. We need to fight a more ruthless, cutthroat war.

When our soldiers have the chance to take out an entire town, we cannot have politicians be afraid that “collateral damage” would look bad on the nightly news. If people want to avoid being collateral damage, get the hell out of the war zone. We are afraid to blow up Mosques because that would be seen as anti-Muslim. Wrong. Under the Geneva Convention, which terrorists do not seem to abide by anyway, when a Mosque is used for criminal activity, it loses its protected status. If terrorists are holed up in a Mosque with weapons and battle plans, blow up the Mosque since it will save innocent lives. We can always rebuild another one, but the goal is to kill the terrorists. Most decent Muslims understand that terrorists who seek refuge in Mosques do damage to the Mosques anyway. Guns are forbidden in a Mosque to begin with.

Also, is there any city in Iraq that is not a “holy” city? When we damage enough holy cities, these monsters might decide to stop thinking that they can hide in the remaining holy cities and fire at us indiscriminately. New York City was a holy city to me. We should have pounded Fallujah the first time, and stopped worrying about public relations.

We have to immediately commence profiling. Now while sending the ACLU to Guantanamo Bay until this war ends is tempting, a simpler solution would be to simply overpower them. Stop donating money to them until they get it. Cut off their budget. Then commence profiling. Not all Arabs and Muslims are terrorists, but virtually all terrorists are Arab Muslims, mostly young single male Arab Muslims. Do we really need to delay my plane flight so that we can search 86 year old Etta Mae Johnson, retired librarian from Hattiesburg, Mississippi? Does her knitting apparel really need to be confiscated? As a Jewish man, I am asked to remove my black hat sometimes (consistency would be nice), but Arab Muslims are not required to remove their turbans. This is nuts.

We need to stop being politically correct. The Danish cartoons were deadly accurate. They should be published repeatedly. Will it anger Arab terrorists? Yes, and water is wet. So what? Everything angers Arab terrorists. We need to give them repeated helpings of “get over it.”

We need to understand that this is not a battle far away. Today some Arab Muslims tried to blow up JFK. For those who still don’t get it, they tried to reduce a major US airport to rubble, just as they did the World Trade Center towers. These animals were homegrown. However, they needed help from overseas. The plot was foiled, but how many plots need to be foiled before we realize that they still want to kill us?

Colonel Hunt, I will do my part. Last year on 9/11, I took a flight from LAX to Oakland. One week before that I flew to New York. This year, on 9/11 of 2007, a Tuesday, I will be flying straight into JFK. I will be in the air at 8:46am. This is my way of telling the terrorists to go f*ck themselves. They cannot stop me from getting on that plane. All I ask is that everybody else fulfill their responsibilities as well. Airport security needs to step it up. Military leaders need to support their soldiers. Politicians need to shut up and get out of the way. Those who are disgusted by anti-war protesters need to shout them down. They are bullies, and when hit between the eyes, will retreat. That is what separates them from American soldiers, who conduct themselves with dignity on and off the battlefield.

What can we do to win the War on Islamofacism? As Colonel Hunt says, we have to start by “Getting it.” We have to know who the enemy is. Our soldiers have to go after them with overwhelming brute force. Our politicians and military leaders have to support them. Private citizens have to get mad, stay mad, and provide unwavering support. When you see soldiers, thank them. Tell them “thank you, and welcome home.” Tell them you support their mission. If you do not, then you will never get it.

I get it Colonel Hunt. The War on Islamofacism reached JFK Airport today. Luckily, it was foiled. This will be a long hard struggle, and we need to be prepared to either win all out, or go home. Our military needs to be allowed to do what it does best…kill terrorists, destroy their hideouts, burn their villages, and break their wills. Force works, and the only solution is a military solution. The troops have my overwhelming support. They will get the job done, and get it done right, provided that those in the way get out of the way and get it.

I am burning with rage over 9/11 and the JFK plot. I will be angry until I get on that plane to JFK on 9/11 of 2007. When I touch down, I will go to ground zero and drive a stake through the pictures of the bad guys’ hearts, and pray that my US soldiers do the same in real life. I know they eventually will. They clearly get it.

eric

In business it is called “put up or shut up.” The reason the business world works is because intentions are worthless. Results are what matters. Wall Street is a meritocracy. Those who bring in the most revenue get the largest bonuses. The system works, with the only people carping from the sidelines being the useless individuals that contribute alot less but want their “fair share.”

When running for President, many Americans have actually gotten to the point where a good speech matters more than actual real accomplishments. In looking at the top candidates in both parties, it is easy to see that the only thing saving democrats from a 2008 electoral disaster is Iraq. They need and want Iraq to fail because they have nothing to offer. This is not news, but it needs to be reinforced. The democrats running for president are against President Bush, and for…well, that is unknown at this time.

John Edwards built a successful career suing people. He is a flim flam artist who managed to play on people’s emotions in a courtroom. His theme of “Two Americas” is so powerful because he plays into the class warfare theme with unparalleled success. Juries are often working class people, and giving them motivation to soak rich evil corporations is not complicated. They are supposed to leave biases behind, but they are human. Yes, John Edwards is qualified to teach law, practice law, or negotiate a deal here and there. However, his political record is undistinguished. He served one term in the US Senate. Let’s be clear why governors win the Presidency and senators don’t. Senators make speeches, while governors actually do things. It’s called governing. Executives have to make decisions and take responsibility. The buck stops with them. Senators can, and do, blame anyone and everyone else for their failure to read what they sign on such trivial matters such as whether to go to war. Senator Edwards is a charismatic speaker with zero significant political accomplishments.

Barack Obama did not even have six years of being peripheral before running for President. He had two. He is a celebrity candidate who offers feel good platitudes. He has no signifianct accomplishments in the Senate, perhaps because the paint is not even dry on his office wall. He is a likable guy, but so is the neighborhood guy at the local newstand. He is an intelligent man, but so is my former 5th grade teacher, who as far as I can tell, retired after a distinguished career teaching 5th grade. At some point somebody might point out that the Presidency is not for lightweights, and Obama is light as a feather in tersm of what he has actually done.

Hillary Clinton is not the strong successful careerwoman that many make her out to be. She is a lucky woman who married well. If this enrages some feminists, who cares? These same feminists suported Hillary when she as the first enabler. I could care less about her husband’s bimbo eruptions. What I care about is this nonsense that she is entitled to be president because she says so. Her political career has been marked by spectacularly colossal failures on a major level. Now her defenders say she learned from her 1994 health care debacle, but she didn’t. In 1980, only two years into her long running stint as first lady of Arkansas, she urged her husband, then Governer Bill Clinton, to take an aggressive hard line with the Arkansas Teachers Unions. Bill Clinton was subsequently fired, and only resurrected his career by bringing in Dick Morris in 1982, apologizing, and vowing to be less confrontational. Does this sound familiar? Hillary Clinton did mind her manners for a certain amount of time, but make no mistake about it. Attaching your name to popular legislation that 90% of Americans approve of and 90% of Senators have signed off on does not count as actually doing anything to make a difference. It is called jumping on the bandwagon, also known as frontrunning. This is why she is a New York Yankees fan, rather than a Chicago Cubs fan. It is easy to be popular when you are a follower. Her attempts to lead have been disastrous. She sees her opponents as evil, and then wonders why nobody of consequence wants to work with her on anything that matters. The bills that become law with her mild imprint would have happened without her. I am no fan of Ted Kennedy, but he is a leader in the Senate. Hillary Clinton has not been. Her most significant accomplishment has been to win over people in a blue state that should have liked her to begin with, if she were not her.

Spending time analyzing the top republican contenders could take eons, so the basics will be covered.

Rudy Giuliani took a failing city and turned it around. He cracked down on crime, reduced the welfare rolls, and cleaned the city, all under the eyes of newspapers that watched his every move waiting for him to fail. He became an American hero after 9/11, and rightfully so, but through 9/10 he had already become one of the great mayors of all time. His critics disliked his abrasive management style, but those are the same people that prefer warm and fuzzy words to actual deeds. Rudy gets things done, and successfully.

John McCain is a Senator, but he has been their 24 years. He has an actual record of real accomplishment. He is also a war hero. Being a former POW does not entitle him to the Presidency, but it does give him unique insight into war and foreign policy issues that few other people will ever possess. Before Bill Clinton normalized relations with Vietnam, he consulted McCain first, and made sure McCain was in every photo. He was the kingmaker in the 2004 election, because both candidates understood how much gravitas he had with the public. He has a long list of legislaive accomplishments, and even though I fiercely disagree with some of them, especially campaign finance reform, he has a record as a workhorse. He actually “does things” in the senate.

Mitt Romney is a successful businessman, which makes him no more qualified than John Edwards except that Mitt Romney did not have to sacrifice his nitegrity to do it. He also saved the Olypics in Salt Lake City Utah, which by itself would not make him qualified. However, his being Governor of Massachussetts does qualify him. He took a state that was once known as taxachussetts, and continued his predecessor Bill Weld’s record of tough fiscal discipline combined with tax cuts. He was a successful governor in a state that many think is ungovernable.

The other candidates are either 3rd tier, 4th tier, or undeclared. For now, this three on three battle is to succeed George W. Bush, a man who is not a brilliant speaker, but leaves a legacy of brilliant achievements, from his tax cuts to his Supreme Court choices to his fiercely leading the War on Terror, polls be d@mned. The three democrats have some rhetorical flourishes, but speaking well about what you will do is hollow when you have not done anything as of yet. The three republican candidates have records of real successful accomplishments.

When choosing a candidate, forget what they promise. See what they have actually done.

eric