Thursday, December 29, 2005

The Party of "No"

Groucho Marx sings a song in the movie Horsefeathers that ought to be the Democrats’ anthem: “Whatever It Is, I’m Against It!” More and more, they are like the David Spade character in those “No” television commercials. You never see a Democrat smiling. He or she always has a look of pure constipation and misery, with a whiny, nagging voice to match.

Like a herd of lemmings, Democrats have collectively gone off the deep end. They are against the War on Terror, against detaining or rendering terrorists, and against intercepting communications between al Qaeda its sympathizers and agents among us. They are against the military, against the Iraqi elections, against George W. Bush, against Christians, against any Christmas displays (against even the mention of Christmas, for that matter), and against the national motto, In God We Trust. They are against the U.S. Constitution, at least when it comes to the right to keep and bear arms and freedom of speech (though they will use the Constitution to bolster their arguments against common-sense tactics against terrorists, for instance). They are, in short, against our institutions, our traditions and against the truth.

It is a wonder they haven’t caught on by now to how negative and sour and unfulfilled and extremist and, well, whiny they sound. It is a wonder they haven’t figured out that in a time of great peril, as we are now, no sane American would trust them near the White House. That is why Hillary has to “move right” and pretend she is something she is most assuredly not. It doesn’t bother her to do so because lying comes naturally to Democrats; it’s what they do.

As far as I am concerned, as annoying as it is to hear them carp and bitch and second-guess and twist the truth, it is somewhat refreshing. Why? Because they have dug themselves a very, very deep hole and only continue to dig it deeper. Who wants to vote for a party that only wishes the worst for America and only thinks the worst of America?

Friday, December 23, 2005

Democrat Storm Troopers Abuse Their Office to Persecute Political Opponents

Why the U.S. Constitution’s Sixth Amendment grants Americans the right to a speedy trial is underscored by the Tom DeLay case, in which rogue prosecutor Ronnie Earle is abusing his position to pursue a political vendetta against the Texas Congressman.

Earle has a long history of misusing his office to bring down political opponents by charging them with criminal conduct. His record of having case after case thrown out illustrates how baseless his past attempts to criminalize politics have been. Where he has been successful in the DeLay affair is in forcing the Congressman to temporarily step down from his leadership role. By dragging out the trial date, Earle and his fellow Democrats hope to keep DeLay out of his Republican Party leadership position indefinitely.

Why? Because DeLay is effective.

The larger issue is abuse of power by people like Ronnie Earle. That means the entire Democratic Party. They have been trying to get not only DeLay, but President Bush, by throwing anything and everything up against the wall to see what sticks. Of course, this requires lying, which is something the Democrats have refined to an art form.

The danger to the American people is that such behavior thwarts the democratic process, emboldens our enemies in al Qaeda and undermines confidence in government and other American institutions.

The Democrats aren’t about to change and that is why Republicans should turn the tables and start prosecuting people like Ronnie Earle.

Thursday, December 22, 2005

Short-Sighted Senators Sabotage U.S. Energy Security... Again

People, did you enjoy that $3-plus gasoline after hurricanes Katrina and Rita? Well, look for more to come, thanks to 40 Democrats, three Republicans and one Independent in the U.S. Senate who blocked drilling in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR).

Three Republicans—DeWine of Ohio; Chafee of Rhode Island; and Frist of Tennessee (yes, THAT Frist)—sided with 40 Democrats and one Independent, Jumpin’ Jim Jeffords of Vermont to strip ANWR drilling from the defense bill on December 21.

The four Democrats who voted in favor of ANWR drilling were Akaka and Inouye of Hawaii, Landrieu of Louisiana and Nelson of Nebraska.

Once again, shortsightedness and knee-jerk environmentalism killed a provision that would have greatly enhanced American energy security. This, despite the post-hurricane economics lesson that tight supplies and high demand inevitably equal sharply higher prices. This, despite the fact that we are fighting a War on Terror in a region of the world that provides much of our energy needs.

There are probably 10 billion barrels of oil waiting to be tapped in Alaska’s North Slope, possibly more. The land is desolate tundra, virtually unvisited by man, but inhabited by caribou and other wildlife that have been found to thrive amid oil drilling in other parts of the state. Alaskans want the area explored, a majority in the U.S. House wants it explored, but a bunch of idiots in the Senate figure the American people are stupid enough to forget the way they voted and blame the oil companies the next time prices spike. And the sad part is, Americans probably are that stupid, or there would have been a greater public outcry.

Besides ANWR, the East Coast, the West Coast and the Florida Coast are all closed to exploration and drilling. Oil companies operate in an environmentally responsible manner around the globe in many areas far more sensitive than any of those mentioned above. Yet, 44 members of the Senate would rather take their chances on future hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico, tanker oil spills and terrorist attacks on Mideast oil fields than develop America’s own petroleum supplies.

Note also that many of these same Senators who routinely oppose drilling are often the first to charge American security policy in the Middle East is a tradeoff of blood for oil.

They make me sick. And they ought to make you sick. Remember them when the price of gasoline, home heating oil, natural gas and other petroleum products goes through the roof next time. And that time is surely coming.

Monday, December 19, 2005

ALL THE NEWS THAT’S FIT TO MANUFACTURE

Back in the mid-‘70s, when the mainstream news media still had a modicum of integrity, the utility company where I worked as a junior PR executive received a surprise visit by a group of community activists protesting electricity rates.

Accompanied by a local TV reporter, the protestors attempted to gain access to our chairman’s office. Because the chairman had received a death threat from Manson Family member Lynette “Squeaky” Fromme, we’d installed automatic locks on doors leading from the reception area to the executive offices. I met the group at one door, physically barring them so it would require an assault on my person to gain entry. We had reached a standstill until the TV reporter held open a side door through which an employee had just passed and ushered the protestors into the executive suite. It took the police to get them to leave, and the entire confrontation was caught on camera.

I called the TV station to ask that they pull the story because their reporter had been an active participant, rather than a simple chronicler of events. The station complied.

My, how times have changed.

In its latest attempt to undermine President Bush, our troops and the War on Terror, The New York Times last week published a news story exposing a top secret National Security Agency communications intercept program aimed at preempting acts of terror against the United States. The president acknowledged authorizing the program under his powers as Commander in Chief during wartime, and noted that many of the very Democratic Party leaders in Congress who are now feigning shock and outrage were fully briefed on it.

What is important about this story from a media integrity perspective is that The New York Times had it and held it for a year in order to create maximum political damage just as the Patriot Act was coming up for renewal. In other words, the Times was an active participant in manufacturing the news, rather than a chronicler of events, as is their charge.

This is certainly not the first time this has happened; the Times and other so-called mainstream media organizations regularly act as operatives of the Democratic Party, through acts of commission (as in the NSA story), acts of omission (covering only one side of the story) and repetition (I stopped counting after the Times ran more than 60 stories on unauthorized abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib, for which the perpetrators were court martialed).

Examples of blatant media bias and complete lack of integrity abound:
· The Los Angeles Times held its story alleging inappropriate behavior by Arnold Schwarzenegger until just before California’s gubernatorial election, in an attempt to influence voters;
· The New York Times failed to cover a major scandal in its own backyard involving highly questionable “loans” by the Brooklyn-based Gloria Wise Boys and Girls Club to the failed leftist radio program Air America;
· Strong evidence of cooperation between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein dating back to the 1990s that has been completely ignored by the mainstream press (Read The Connection by Stephen F. Hayes);
· Dan Rather’s phony Bush National Guard story;
· The mainstream media’s complete failure to investigate Kerry’s Vietnam medals and involvement with the fraudulent Winter Soldier Project, which had fake Vietnam veterans joining Kerry in leveling untrue war crimes charges against all American forces in Vietnam;
· One-sided reporting on the Joe Wilson-Valerie Plame affair when it was clear that Joe Wilson had a political axe to grind against the president, had inside help (and freedom to publish) from rogue elements within the CIA, and lied about his findings;
· Leftist-spin reporting on the Pennsylvania Congressman John Murtha’s cut-and-run-from-Iraq bill, which, when Republicans called Democrats’ bluff and put immediate withdrawal to an up or down vote, Murtha himself voted against the measure;
· Just about all mainstream media reporting on Iraq or President Bush, which focuses exclusively only on the negative.

When you consider these and countless other violations of honesty and objectivity by the mainstream media and add to that the scandals involving phony reporting by The New York Times’ own Jason Blair, among others, it makes you wonder how anyone but a Democrat ideologue could have any faith whatsoever in what passes for news today. The question is: What is to be done about it?

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees freedom of the press, so it is difficult to imagine any circumstance under which the government would try to abridge that basic right, although in past conflicts, including World War II, the news media were subject to government censorship. Another right granted under the First Amendment—freedom of speech—does have some legally recognized restrictions, such as the “crying fire in a crowded theater” exception. Moreover, public figures, primarily actors, have had some success in recent years suing supermarket tabloids for liable or invasion of privacy. But there are some things government, and we, the public, can do to make the media more accountable for their actions.

First, we can cancel our subscriptions to offending newspapers and magazines and turn the channel away from biased television and radio news. This is already happening. Nationwide, newspaper circulation is plummeting, as more and more people turn to the internet or other sources. In part, this phenomenon is due to an ever-expanding array of media choices, as is the case with the equally alarming decline in motion picture box office receipts. But an equally valid reason may be that Americans can recognize basic fairness and are turned off as much by biased reporting as they are by political views pushed by know-nothing singers and actors.

Next, the White House should ban reporters from the most egregiously biased media outlets (The New York Times being one of the worst), as well as correspondents who do not exhibit proper respect for the office in their manner of questioning. Cut them off from press conferences and other events and let them get their information from other elsewhere.

When secret information is leaked to the news media by government personnel, as was the case in the intelligence intercepts and The Washington Post’s story on CIA terrorist prisons overseas, Republicans should take a page from the Democrats’ Valerie Plame playbook and appoint a special prosecutor to track down and punish the leakers, while forcing the reporters to reveal their sources.

Finally, smug editors and television news executives need to start policing themselves if they hope to hold onto their rapidly dwindling audiences. Leftist media moguls may scoff at Fox News, but there is a reason why the cable network is cleaning their clocks when it comes to ratings…

It’s a little thing called “fair and balanced.”

Tuesday, December 13, 2005

Stop Kissing Up to the Cut and Runners

Republicans, we need to stop kissing Rep. Murtha’s posterior and that of Sen. John Kerry for their service in the United States military in Vietnam. Just because they are veterans (as am I, though I did not get sent to Vietnam as requested) doesn’t mean that they or I have one ounce more moral authority when it comes to what the country should do in the Iraqi Battleground of the War on Terror.

All of us have equal standing when it comes to this war. It is the equivalent of World War II, the War Between the States or the American Revolution, in that it is truly a war for national survival. The terrorists want to kill all of us—men, women and children, Christians, Jews, Muslims, and atheists—just because we are Americans. They ask no quarter and deserve none.

Contrary to what the anti-war crowd, Cindy Sheehan, Michael Moore, Howard Dean, Jimmy Carter and most of the Democratic Party claim, this isn’t Vietnam. If we lose this war, we lose our lives and our country to the vilest people imaginable. Look at Afghanistan under the Taliban. Look at the murders committed in the name of radical Islam by that regime. Look at the stoning and humiliation of women. Look at the wanton destruction of historical monuments. And remember that Afghanistan was the launching pad for 9/11 and provided sanctuary to its plotters. This is a war we cannot afford to lose, but lose it we can. We cannot allow Iraq to become another Afghanistan.

As Sen. Joe Lieberman so eloquently explained, and as President Bush has so often noted, Iraq is an essential battle in the War on Terror. When the President declared that war, and Congress assented, it was against the perpetrators of 9/11, radical Islamic terrorists, and those who provided aid, comfort, weapons, training, sanctuary and support for the terrorists. Not just the 9/11 terrorists, but all terrorists who would do us harm. That meant Iraq, as well as Afghanistan. Eventually, it may mean Iran, Syria and North Korea.

The President’s job and Congress’ charge is to prevent future 9/11s, and that requires going on the offensive.

We are all soldiers in this war; and as 9/11 so aptly demonstrated, we are all its potential casualties. So, when politicians of any stripe put electioneering and undermining the President and the war effort above national security, they deserve to be taken to task. Murtha allowed himself to be used to undercut the Battle of Iraq and bring the troops home prematurely. At the end of the day, he didn’t even have the courage of his convictions to back his own proposal. Kerry equates our soldiers to terrorists on the one hand and throws around his military service credentials with the other to the point where he has taken stands on all sides of the issue, but the bottom line is, he would cut and run if he were in charge and that would be a disaster for the rest of us. We might as well paint targets on our foreheads if the retreat crowd wins out.

Murtha and Kerry may have been servicemen once, but now, they are tired, old politicians who are just flat wrong when it comes to protecting America’s national security—that means you and me.

So, let’s stop kissing their behinds and call them for the surrender monkeys they are. Let’s continue to take the fight to the enemy until the terrorists and their allies realize that the United States of America is a country to be respected… and feared.

Monday, December 12, 2005

Rumsfeld v. FAIR: Important Supreme Court Ruling Pending

The U.S. Supreme court is currently reviewing the Solomon Amendment, which would bar federal funding to universities that do not permit military recruiters on campus. Early indications are that the court will uphold the band, in which case the universities will have to decide whether to forego the estimated $35 billion a year they receive in federal financial support.

The case, Rumsfeld v. Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights (“FAIR”), according to the universities opposing the Solomon Amendment, supposedly revolves around gay rights. Because the military “discriminates” against homosexuals in its don’t ask, don’t tell policy, the universities have a right to exclude military recruiters, the academics say. They argue it is a question of free speech; the court appears skeptical.

Of course, the academics—leftists all—are doing what leftists do best: lying. Their real objection is to the military itself. The discrimination argument is only a fig leaf for their anti-American bias. Many of these same universities have banned military recruiters, as well as ROTC programs, since the War in Vietnam, whereas the Solomon Amendment only dates to 1996.

With the nation at war with brutal terrorists, we owe our military all the support we can muster, and denying anti-American universities federal funding if they ban the defenders of freedom from their campuses is not only right and just, but long overdue.

You won’t find much discussion of the pending court decision in the so-called mainstream media, because it looks as though the leftists are going to lose this one.

We already know just what academics are; now we’ll see what their price is. My guess is that they will take the money.

Tuesday, December 06, 2005

More Democrat Gutter Speech

This just in from Drudge:

Statement by Kerry spokesman David Wade: 'Ken Mehlman’s filthy and shameful lie about a decorated combat veteran is disgraceful. Political hack Ken Mehlman and draft dodging, donut eating Rush Limbaugh have something in common. Neither of them know anything about how to make American troops safe. John Kerry will continue to speak out about how to succeed in Iraq and protect brave American troops'…

This sort of spitting mad language is reminiscent of watching Democrat shill Lawrence O’Donnell go ballistic on fellow Houstonian and Swift Boat Veteran John O’Neil during the election campaign. O’Donnell was rude and crude and simply lost it in shouting, “Liar, liar” at the calm O’Neil. He looked and acted like a madman.

But then, the left has lost it completely in every way. From “Hee-Yaw!” Howard Dean and his outrageous claim that President Bush knew of 9/11 in advance to his recent characterization of the Iraq War as “unwinnable,” when we are clearly succeeding, to the Paul Wellstone funeral rally, where Republicans were disinvited and booed, Democrats are raving maniacs on virtually every subject. But especially when it comes to President Bush and the War on Terror.

They have lost all perspective and all objectivity. And they are oblivious to the way they look to the rest of us, who just want to live our lives in peace and safety, celebrate Christmas and behave more civilly.

They, like the French in Paris who simply watched the cars burn, want to wave the white flag of surrender. In doing so, purely for perceived political gain, at whatever cost to our fighting men and women and U.S. security, they are hoping for a future they truly do not understand--a future where the terrorists are emboldened and more Americans will surely die.

They and their willing allies in the so-called mainstream media have sold their souls. No lie is too big, no omission of the truth so grand, no insult so low, no language too corrosive or crude. The end justifies the means, and the end is power, but to what purpose?

They can’t tell you. They won’t tell you. So instead they lie. And shout. And undermine.