About Me

Name:dolfinwriter
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

Jeremiah Wright

Listening to news tonight, something occurred to me about Jeremiah Wright

I highly doubt I'll get any political analyst job out of my ideas : -), but I have some thoughts really burning tonight...

I was driving around tonight looking for stuff for a little lighting and cable job I've been doing in my house the last few weeks. The radio is wall to wall Obama and "Reverend" Wright.

My first thought after hearing Obama's reaction to the talk his "pastor" gave today was that Obama has to be on the phone with him saying "Man, you gotta just shut up and go away if you want a black man to be President!"

That's when it struck me, that's the antithesis of men like Jeremiah Wright. He doesn't want Obama to get elected, and he doesn't care if he hurts Obama! The LAST thing he wants is for Obama or ANY black man to be elected President. Like Farrakhan, Sharpton, Jackson, Rangle, Julian Bond, Cornel West, (and who's the Banana Boat guy?) et al, he has his own agenda.

The really interesting thing I think is that "Reverend" Wright may not even realize it himself, and if asked, would likely deny it, but would probably be evasive and ask something like "Did you listen to the whole sermon? Well, that nullifies THAT question!" The closest analogy I can give is the way the spouse of an addict (drunk, gambler, whatever), will subconsciously manipulate and sabotage things to actually sabotage the drunk if he/she manages to get some kind of help and start down the path of sobriety (someday I should complete that 3rd BS in Abnormal Psychology...) The spouse is him or herself addicted to chaos, and will try all kinds of things to return the relationship to comfortable and familiar chaos.

"Reverend" Wright has personal, financial, emotional, and political reasons to keep the pot stirred up and to be able to thunder on about "The US of KKK-A"!

The day a black man is elected POTUS, he and all those named above are suddenly out of jobs (and their identity—that’s who they are; that is the very essence of their being, even if it is just a big empty hole right through the middle of ‘em).

So I think Obama's judgment is suffering on this front as well, and no one is talking about it. But hide and watch--we have not seen nor heard the last of "Reverend" Wright. He is now hurting Obama, but he will not be quiet, and he will not go away.

Another possibility is that Obama is thinking ahead more moves than I can in Chess, and this is all part of some scheme he and "Reverend" Wright are both party to. I don't know how this ultimately helps him--I suck at Chess, but it's my skeptical side and just a suspicion I have.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Racism and the American Dream

Barack Obama did not feel that he was “authentically black”, and so establishes himself and his family for 20 years in a racist, anti-American, hateful, angry, filth-spewing mockery of a church. He does this for the sole purpose of establishing his black “street cred”.

But apparently Obama slept through every sermon he attended:

“The statements that Rev. Wright made that are the cause of this controversy were not statements I personally heard him preach while I sat in the pews of Trinity or heard him utter in private conversation.

Then when he’s found out (why do they always think they will never get caught?), he comes up with this baloney that this angry, bigoted preacher is just like the crazy uncle you sometimes disagree with.

Hillary, where are you and your campaign on this? Are you asleep or just still dodging snipers’ bullets?!?!?!?

And what is this hollering “First Amendment!” whenever they are called out for saying really dumb things, or endorsing or supporting or at least condoning those who do? First they always say it’s just “snippets” taken out of context, and then they start hollering about the First Amendment! The point isn’t that Jeremiah Wright or even Obama have done something illegal.

For God’s sake, we have given literally millions of American lives over the last 230+ years for Obama and for Reverend Wright to have complete freedom to say and to write any stupid, inflammatory, racist, anti-American thing they wish and not be hauled away in the night to some prison, dungeon or “re-education camp”. This has NOTHING to do with the First Amendment, and no one is saying ANYONE has done anything illegal or that anyone should go to jail!

This is about judgment and therefore fitness to be President of this nation and the Commander in Chief of the most awesome and lethal military in this very dangerous world!

On another level, I can see justification to investigate the legitimacy of Trinity United Church’s tax exempt status. But that is the job of the IRS, not some publicity seeking Congressmen!

In the same article I reference above, Charles Coulter of the Kansas City Star Editorial Board first says:

Rev. Wright is not the first black minister to condemn this country for its racist practices.

Then switches to this:

Sen. Obama has done nothing to indicate he is anti-American. In fact, his whole life is a testament to the American Dream.

Now just to emphasize a bit, perhaps Mr. Coulter didn’t even realize the magnitude of what he said, but these are his words, Barack Obama’s whole life is a testament to the American Dream.

I would love to ask Mr. Coulter, so what’s the problem? Please detail what current American racist practices you’re talking about! Please include how Barack Obama managed to dodge those obstacles, and become a testament to the American Dream!

Let me emphasize again, CURRENT American racist practices! Don’t tell me about slavery. Don’t tell me about Jim Crow. Don’t tell me about Tuskegee or the 92nd/93rd Infantry Divisions. And don’t tell me about long dead anti-Civil Rights politicians.

Creating HIV to kill black people? As precision weapons go, this one must be worse than the WWII carpet bombing of German cities where 160,000 allied airmen died between 1939 and 1945, and killed between 300,000 and 600,000 Germans.* AIDS infections among whites rank second only to blacks, and among gay men, nearly twice as many whites are infected as blacks! Or is that just “collateral damage”?

[*Note: I’m using only figures for German civilians killed. These figures don’t begin to show the importance of the destruction of targets that were significant to the Nazi war machine. In that light, creating the AIDS virus is wildly inaccurate and ineffective if it was intended only to kill blacks!]

Besides, and I haven’t told many people this, but someone close to me died of AIDS, and I take personal exception to this claim.

But really Reverend, instead of blaming America, how about preaching the virtues of abstinence and monogamy, (or at the very least, condoms!)? How about preaching don’t stick needles in your body that have been in someone else’s body? Those two rules could eradicate AIDS!

Coulter goes back to this:

Let's get back to the issue of how to make this country a success for all of its people -- black and white, rich and poor, woman and man.

So America is racist, even though Obama’s life is a testament to the American dream. Is that the racist American dream? Or just regular colorblind America?

I think I need a lifeline. How did a black man become such a “testament to the American dream”? And if Obama can do it, why not others? Was it Obama’s white half or his black half that is responsible for his phenomenal success in the US of KKK-A?

Why is it that Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice, and Justice Clarence Thomas are not testaments to the American dream? Oh! Because they’re not “authentically black”! They’re “sellouts”! They get Oreos thrown at them by “real” black people!

Why is Obama a testament to the American dream, but these three are just sellouts?

In Obama’s apologist speech, he said,

And I confess that if all that I knew of Reverend Wright were the snippets of those sermons that have run in an endless loop on the television and You Tube, or if Trinity United Church of Christ conformed to the caricatures being peddled by some commentators, there is no doubt that I would react in much the same way.

Why is it that what’s good for the goose in this country is not always good for the gander?

I remember other “snippets” for which a Republican senator and two talk show hosts (Don Imus and Michael Savage) each paid dearly. Now I’m not crazy about Trent Lott or really any career politician, nor especially Imus. I think for both, their time has come and long gone, as well as many others.

In each case, “snippets” were ultimately used to justify firing someone (and in Lott’s case, to justify calls for censure, finally leading to him stepping down as Senate Majority Leader). Trent Lott and Imus prostrated themselves repeatedly for one, single, solitary “snippet”, and Trent Lott pathetically so. Not good enough.

And here’s one of the things that irks me about the world we live in today—I know if I don’t qualify my own position, someone will say I’m a racist or a bigot for defending idiotic statements from whatever corner has an iron in the fire. It really would not be the first time I’ve been called a bigot for taking a stand against leftist propaganda or politically correct lunacy. I don’t care for Trent Lott, but I think what he said was used inappropriately by people with an agenda to make political hay.

Imus—I can’t stand him, and what he said was asinine. I don’t want to debate whether it was appropriate to fire him, but it was a bit amusing to watch the left destroy and devour one of their own. Someone said he has a history of saying such things, but the comment about the Rutgers girls was the only one I have ever heard.
 
Savage—I agree with Bernard Goldberg in placing Savage among the 100 People Who Are Screwing up America. I think Savage is brilliant, well-educated, well-informed, and most of the time he’s right and willing to say things that many will not. But his venomous outbursts—even at complete morons—are what turned me to another station. One Democrat NPR fan friend of mine heard him one day and said she would never listen to him again (she’s a helluva nice lady; she’s just a bit misguided!) That’s the danger of Savage—people who really should hear what he has to say, hear him and say “If that’s what a conservative is, I want no part of it!”

Now we have sound cuts from Obama’s 1994 book coming out, voiced by Obama himself, profanity, racial baggage, and all. Wow.

First of all, this man claims to want to be a “race uniter”, yet I hear an identity confused man still carrying a lot of racial baggage. People who don’t have racial baggage just don’t see in color like he does, and apparently always has!

Please don’t anyone tell me I don’t know what it is to be black. I know that. I also don’t know what it is to be Asian, Native American, or even a “rich white folk”!

I submit that not ONE of these angry, filth-spewing, black men throwing down the race card at every perceived injustice has the first clue what it is to be a white man of ANY social standing.

Do they really think that “rich white folks”, let alone poor white folks never experience trials, tribulations, injustices, struggles, sacrifice, hard work, discrimination…?!?!?!?

Do they really think that as a young white boy who grew up basically “poor white trash”, that I didn’t experience discrimination myself by a small town employer who hired only people like the Fire Chief’s daughter, or the State Wrestling Champion (who was black, by the way)?

Or a better question—how do I KNOW that employer hired only those people? The people who worked there seemed to be all the “pretty people” and the people who had all the right labels on their clothes, and all the people whose parents were “somebody” in town. Did that employer discriminate against me because I was a poor nobody, or was it just my perception that he did?

HOW DO BLACKS KNOW WHAT THEY HAVE FACED AND DEALT WITH IS ALWAYS RACISM, AND NOT JUST THE WAY LIFE IS SOMETIMES?!?!?

Obama’s buddy felt that women always turned him down for dates because they must be racist. Maybe they just didn’t want to date black guys! Maybe they really DIDN’T want to date a fat "greasy-mouthed" guy of ANY color! That makes them racist? But beyond that, does he think the average white guy—let alone poor white trash—has it any easier?

Does anyone who believes this really think that white guys never get turned down by these same women?

Obama’s commentary states that he himself did not have much success with women at that time because he was shy.

When did the black community get exclusive rights to shyness or difficulties with women?

If only I’d been born black so that I could blame every problem in my life on institutional racism!

I recognize that Obama claims to have attempted to moderate his friend’s claims of coed racism. But I just recently realized the thing that would convince me of his sincerity is a recognition that “Ya know what? White folks have it hard sometimes too!”

That’s what I mean that these people haven’t the first clue what it is to be white, or any other color for that matter.
 
So if the path to success in modern day America has been difficult for some solely because of race, gender, etc., then I had everything given to me on a silver platter because I’m a white male?!?!?

In my example, I have tried my best to put myself in that small town employer’s shoes and ask “Would I have hired me?” I won’t go into detail, but I have to honestly say that I would not have hired me at that time. Yet I’m certain that if I’d had a different family name, he would have hired me.

Reparations? I grew up poor, worked my butt off in the Navy, sacrificed a lot of nights and weekends in class and doing homework or research, and writing papers, and managed to complete my BS and about 90% of a Master’s while I was on active duty. My wife (who also grew up poor), and I actually graduated together and both got our Master’s the same day. That wasn’t easy to do. We juggled and staggered class schedules to make sure one of us was home with our boy. We scrimped, saved, and paid a lot of her tuition, but still ended up with some student loans. But I would be expected to pay reparations to black folks for what some of my ancestors did to some of their ancestors 150 years ago, notwithstanding those of my ancestors who fought and died in the Civil War to free the slaves?

This victim culture we have created and allowed people like Al Sharpton, Louis Farrakhan, Jesse Jackson, Bella Abzug, Betty Friedan, and Robin Morgan to perpetuate minimizes the struggles, difficulties, and hardships that people have faced who are NOT a member of the same victim group as those making a claim of bigotry, not to mention their hard work and sacrifices that they have made to achieve whatever they consider success.

And I’m truly sick of it.

I look forward to the day that we all recognize that not every struggle or injustice we face in life has to do with race, skin color, social standing, gender, sexual orientation, etc.

Most of all I look forward to the day that men like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are exposed for what they really are. At first it occurred to me that what they do amounts to enabling.

They enable the black community to continue to live in ignorance of how they are being manipulated and used by the DNC for political purposes.

They enable the black community to continue to live in poverty and squalor.

But what Sharpton and Jackson and others like them do goes beyond simply enabling. They are pushers. They are dealers in the drug of race victimization, and so is Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr. They profit off of it, and they are given credibility by the black community and by the MSM because they are themselves black.

That makes their crime (a crime against humanity, in my book) even more abhorrent to me, that they profit from deceiving and manipulating their own, while proclaiming themselves the righteous representatives of their race.

That would probably not be so bad if what they do ever actually helped anyone. But it doesn’t.

Instead it ensures that the masses of the black community will not look at itself in a mirror, thereby trapping them in poverty, poor inner city schools, single parent households with no fathers in the picture, drugs and gangs and hip-hop culture, and then blame it all on the institutional racism of “rich white folks”. This is identical to the thought process of an addict, in that their life troubles brought on and exacerbated by their own behavior in reality, become in their own mind, anyone’s fault but their own.

Sharpton and Jackson extort money and apologies from whomever is foolish enough and willing to pander to this nonsense and let themselves be victimized by it. And whomever is willing to place their own interests above those of the black community as a whole. I place Trent Lott and Don Imus both firmly in that camp. These two and others like them are the enablers. Desperate to save their own careers, they prostrated themselves before the likes of Sharpton and Jackson, begging, PLEADING for their forgiveness!

So some of us “white folks” are guilty as well, if not of overt racism, then of a subtle racism in placing their own careers a peg above doing the right thing for the black community. I don’t think we have a prayer of improving things for blacks (by first making it possible for them to see that they have to change within themselves), until men like Trent Lott and Don Imus are able to tell Sharpton and Jackson where to insert the apologies and monetary reparations they seek to extract.

That said, Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr. goes yet a step further to the sinister. It’s one thing to peddle the notion that white racism is institutional and widespread, if not universal, but this Jeremiah Wright Jr. actually hates this country. God Damn America? US of KKK-A? Deliberately creating and infecting people of ANY race with the AIDS virus to wipe them out? He’s either deluded, or insane, or both.
 
It's fascinating to see the masses of sycophants and apologists march out and claim that Reverend Wright says these things because he really loves this country and just wants it to be better. I expect this from the brainwashed and ignorant American Idol and hip hop masses.
 
But to think that the man who wishes to be the next most powerful man in the world seeks the counsel and guidance from someone who so obviously hates this country?

Wow.

Obama at least has one thing right;
And for as long as I live, I will never forget that in no other country on Earth is my story even possible. … It is a story that has seared into my genetic makeup the idea that this nation is more than the sum of its parts — that out of many, we are truly one”.

Too bad his spiritual mentor doesn’t think so.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

We CANNOT turn the White House over to the Democrats again!

The Republican Presidential candidate nomination for 2008 is basically over but for the cryin’. I never thought I would support a McCain candidacy, but the people have spoken, and apparently the masses would rather have a McCain than a Mormon. I think they're wrong, but there's nothing we can do about that now.
 
He would not have been even my second or third choice.
 
War hero—absolutely.
 
Great American—absolutely.
 
He gets it right on the need to cut spending.
 
And he gets it right on the war, and on defense in general.
 
But he has been a lousy senator. He’ll go on Larry King, but not Laura Ingraham or Hugh Hewitt. I think it remains to be seen if McCain is sincere when he says he gets the message loud and clear that the people want the borders closed, immigration laws enforced, and the fence completed as expeditiously as possible. I thought that on just about every thing that conservatives care about, he is to the left of where I want our next President to be.
 
Now he has the nomination virtually in the bag, and I see that I will have to choose between him and a Democrat. It’s a no-brainer that there is a great yawning chasm of difference between McCain and either of the two remaining Democrats, and especially between him and Obama who now seems to have the Democratic nomination all but sewed up.
 
I also never thought I would say this, but I think I would prefer Hillary to Obama for two reasons. First, I think McCain could more easily beat Hillary. But in the end, I think she would be less harmful to the country than Obama, who is naïve, still wet behind the ears, and has been named the most liberal Senator.
 
I can only scratch my head and wonder what people are thinking who voted for McCain, but then most Americans have not had the privilege to be Navy shipmates with a Mormon. Mormons are kind and decent people. They don’t sacrifice small children or even animals. They’re patriotic, and they love this country. They fear a God that we both believe will one day judge us all.

Having been brought up Baptist, I find some Mormon beliefs to be alien to me, but we’re not voting for national pastor. We’re voting for the person best qualified to be President and Commander-in-Chief, and while I could not bring myself to vote for a Muslim in today’s world, there is not supposed to be any religious test for that office. Most importantly, the God that Mormons believe in doesn't tell them to slaughter civilians--especially women and children--in his name!

I think it's pathetic that we’re down to voting for the candidate who will be less harmful,but that's where I find myself.
 
And I can’t believe my ears when I hear that there are people who say they will stay home or vote for the Democrat this time out of protest. Are you out of your minds? If you can't have everything you want, then you will betray EVERYTHING you say you value and help turn the country over to the naïveté of that far left Obama?
 
What sense does that make?
 
I’m going to offend some people with this, but I think that’s part of what’s wrong with this country today—we’re too scared that we’re going to offend someone, or that we’re going to bloody the bully’s nose too badly.
 
In my view, these people are acting like Liberals—acting out of emotion rather than out of reason. It’s pretty childish, actually.
 
If I can’t have my way, then I’ll just take my marbles and go home!
 
They say if we're attacked, the Dems will be destroyed for years to come. First of all, it could be me, my family, or someone I love who is killed or injured in that next attack, or maybe the guy who would have discovered the cure for cancer. I’d just as soon put the guy in office who I know will do all in his power to prevent that attack and ensure our common defense and safety.
 
It won’t do any good to wait for it to happen and then point fingers at those we know NOW will only make that attack more likely. That won’t bring my son back nor bring me back to my son, and it won’t work that way in any event!
 
In fact, we are just as culpable if we put Obama in office and then point fingers when we’re attacked as we KNOW will be more likely if he is President. That’s not Conservative.
 
These folks say "I won't compromise my principles".
 
Principles like that are going to destroy this country.
 
In fact, compromising their principles is EXACTLY what they’re doing.
 
They are also forgetting the power of this liberally biased news media on the ignorant, the brain-washed, and the gullible. Remember how they blamed Bush for the 2001 recession that actually started in 2000? Remember how the 9/11 Commission grilled Condi over why didn't Bush respond to the attack on the USS COLE? That attack occurred October 12, 2000. A special team of investigators had proof by October 19 that al Qaeda was responsible (sorry, no source—I saw it in a documentary, but there is a ton of information here.
 
Leave aside the fact that it was the Clinton “Peace Dividend” that caused refueling ships to be decommissioned, and making it necessary for COLE to pull in to refuel in a Persian Gulf port known to be infested with al Qaeda, Egyptian Islamic Jihad et al.
 
Seven years later we have still not seen Bill Clinton answer why HE didn’t respond, despite this statement, "If, as it now appears, this was an act of terrorism, it was a despicable and cowardly act. We will find out who was responsible and hold them accountable".
 
The bottom line? We were afraid of offending someone by bombing al Qaeda in Afghanistan while Madame Halfbright futilely tried once again to unite the Israelis and the Palestinians in peace, harmony and choruses of Kumbaya.
 
You’re sadly mistaken if you think we will have seen the end of Bush Derangement Syndrome after January 20, 2009! If we’re attacked again with Obama in the White House, they’ll just blame Bush. They will blame everything bad on GWB for years to come, and they'll get away with it, because the ignorant, brain-washed American Idol worshipping masses will BELIEVE it! They'll say Bush told us the Iraq War would make us safer, and see! See! We told you so! They still got to us! Bush lied to start an illegal and immoral war, and it was all for nothing because it just pissed them off!
 
The most important issue of our day is the war, and our posture against radical Islam. And we can’t forget North Korea, China, Russia, Venezuela, and Cuba. The world is a dangerous place, and McCain gets it.
 
The next most significant issue is the courts and judicial appointees. As Hugh Hewitt put it, with McCain, the worst we get is Anthony Kennedy who gets it right 75% of the time. But with Hillary or Obama, the worst we get is Ruth Bader Ginsberg, former counsel for the American Communists and Liars Union (ACLU). SHE gets it wrong 100% of the time!
 
They say there is no guarantee McCain's nominees will be conservative. I say if you want a guarantee, buy a toaster. There are no guarantees about ANYTHING in this world, except that none of us are getting out of here alive! Otherwise, the only thing we can really be sure of is that Obama's nominees will ALL be liberal!
 
Don’t throw the keys of the Pentagon, Intelligence Services, Congressional Budget Office and the IRS to the Democrats. I don’t know that we could ever recover from four or even eight years of a Democrat in the White House, and especially THIS most liberal of Democrats!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Social Security

I never cease to be amazed at the ignorance of some people. I was listening to Medved this morning when someone called and tried to tell Michael he was all out to lunch on Social Security.
 
Unfortunately I didn’t catch all of it due to work obligations, but what I heard was staggering. The man actually believes that there are $3 Trillion in Social Security surplus sitting in a lockbox somewhere. When Medved tried to educate the man and tell him that Congress has been spending that surplus for 20+ years and filling the “lockbox” with IOU’s, the man said something to the effect that Americans would rise up en masse and rip Bush’s throat out.
 
When Michael tried to further educate the man and tell him it has been going on since long before Bush, the man said something to the effect that Americans would rise up and rip all their jugulars out.
 
Ya know... This is something that Congress has been doing since the time of Reagan, and four Presidents have now been party to it, including Bill Clinton, but it is somehow uniquely Bush’s fault.
 
Not only am I not a Bush apologist, I think he leaves much to be desired by true conservatives, and many of us are quite disgusted by his complete refusal to secure our borders. However, I am blown away by the idea that this ongoing fraud is his fault (as well as any natural disaster that befalls us, such as Katrina)—especially when Democrats have opposed him at every turn and tried to claim that he was going to "dismantle" Social Security whenever he has tried to give attention to permanent fixes.
 
I will be adding more to this post later, but I had to say this now.
 
Please, Republicans, Democrats, and Independents alike, if you’re reading this, educate yourself about what it was that FDR actually proposed in 1935, and what it is that Bush has been trying to get done to fully implement that plan.
 
But most importantly, you MUST educate yourselves about this “Trust Fund” fraud that Congress has been perpetrating on us for more than 20 years now.
This is not a partisan thing—Democrats and Republicans alike have their hands in this mess. There is no trust fund! It’s not there! Congress has SPENT it and dropped IOU’s in its place! Furthermore, even if every dollar were there, it would not be enough to make up the shortfalls that will be coming in future years. Baby Boomers will become eligible for benefits in increasing numbers, even as the number of working age folks paying into the system decreases.

Think about this--if Congress can't pay the country's bills NOW without spending this surplus, what are they going to do when the surplus dries up and then entitlements begin to grow beyond the surplus? Congress will have to either raise taxes or cut benefits.

I'm sick to death of partisans on either side playing politics with our children's future and with our very survival in the face of radical Islam and its many facets of evil, a rising industrial giant in Communist China, and a Russian President hell bent on reviving the Cold War as he slowly works to consolidate and gain absolute power in Russia. Too many in DC have forgotten why they were sent there and who pays their salary.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Rebuttal to Be All You Can Be Without The Army

About 18 months ago, in September 2005, the small local "newspaper" the East County Californian (actually a local branch of the Democrat Public Relations arm, posing as a newspaper, just as the NY Times and the LA Times do), published an article by a "journalist" named Miriam Raftery. The article was titled Be All You Can Be Without The Army. It was full of leftist slant against the military, and against the War in Iraq. Worse, it used either deliberate lies or careless inaccuracies to underscore certain points. I was furious, and so I wrote a rebuttal, well documented and thorough.
 
Unlike the school newspaper, they actually published my letter—after I neutered it down to 700 words, of course (to rebut an 1800 word article). Had that been all, I would not have been irritated. But the publisher did not have the courage to print my letter on its own, even after I chopped it from 3500 words to 700. He gave the “journalist” an 800 word space for a rebuttal next to my rebuttal, full of yet more lies and/or inaccuracies, and capped it with a typically whiny complaint asking whether I advocate censorship for the press. No, I don’t want censorship! I just want them to tell the truth, or at the very least to correct errors or lies when readers point them out!
 
Of course, I would like to have my own voice to comment on their lies, but I would have to buy them or start my own newspaper, I guess.
 
When it appeared in print, I wrote a new rebuttal, but they refused to publish this one, citing a once every three months policy. When I asked if they intended to at least print corrections to what reasonable people should be able to agree were falsehoods in that rebuttal, the publisher added insult and said no, citing Bush Administration announcements such as “Mission Accomplished.” So in other words, his journalistic integrity is a function of his assessment of the Administration’s integrity. I find that disturbing, appalling, maddening, disgusting, hypocritical, and just plain sleazy.
 
I can’t impact them, but I can finally have my say in this forum!
 
Here is the text of an early version of my letter to the editor in response to the article:
 
I’m writing in response to Be all you can be without the army by Miriam Raftery, in the September 22nd East County Californian. I find it unfairly biased against the military and littered with half-truths and falsehoods. Ms. Raftery quotes the New York Times, “Recruiters desperate for warm bodies to be shipped to Iraq are prowling selected high schools and neighborhoods across the country with sales pitches that touch on everything but the possibility of being maimed or killed in combat.” The ignorance, bias, and short-sightedness of this statement is stunning. What sane person wants a world without our military? Remember Hitler? Hirohito? The Berlin airlift? Libya’s Qadafi? Panama’s drug lord dictator Noriega? Kuwait under Saddam?
 
Recruiters desperate for warm bodies…” Ms. Raftery writes “Some recruiters, under pressure from falling enrollment numbers and an all-volunteer army buckling under the strains of war, are resorting to high-pressure tactics, exaggerations and in some cases, outright falsehoods.” She fails to list any falsehoods or that recruiters are competing with a booming U.S. economy. The August 2005 unemployment rate was 4.9%, a four year low (U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics). This is an example of a conveniently omitted inconvenient fact that betrays her true agenda. A second inconvenient fact is that recruiting declined much more sharply during the entire Clinton Presidency, from 1993 and accelerating into the late 1990’s (Have Improved Resources Increased Military Recruiting and Retention?). Recruiters were competing then with the Internet bubble economy, and no one can dispute that on numerous occasions, Bill Clinton ran from any engagement that resulted in casualties, or that might have. In other words, difficulties in recruiting and an ongoing war are not dots you can just draw a line between.
 
…warm bodies to be shipped to Iraq” No, not everyone goes to Iraq! Does Ms. Raftery support shipping “warm bodies” to Afghanistan to hunt down al Qaeda and Taliban? Our Armed Forces stand vigil around the world ready to defend freedom. They are also among the first on scene, providing relief after natural disasters. Some of those sent to the hurricane battered Gulf Coast were the very same 4th Infantry Division soldiers who pulled a dirty and humiliated Saddam Hussein from his spider hole in Iraq almost two years ago. The 82nd Airborne (now also known as the 82nd “Waterborne”) helped evacuate some 6,000 in New Orleans (82nd Airborne Division Becomes 'Waterborne' in New Orleans). The Air Force Reserve 304th Rescue Squadron (of the elite pararescue “PJ’s”), saved more than 1,040 people (A PJ's Night in New Orleans).
 
When deployed overseas, the troops build or renovate schools and hospitals—whatever is needed. They give native children everything from chocolate bars to baseball gloves, and lifesaving or life changing medical treatment unknown in their own countries. If you dare, read the story of Saleh “Lion Heart” Khalaf, a 9 year-old Iraqi boy nearly killed by unexploded ordnance, and saved by an Air Force Reserve surgeon deployed to Tallil Air Base, near Nasiriya. It’s unfortunate that anyone would think only of Iraq or their own politics when recruiters call.
 
…prowling selected high schools and neighborhoods across the country…” This is over the top. You have to believe that the military which defends our freedom to make such statements is some dark predator. I wonder if Ms. Raftery would even describe in such terms the registered sex offenders living closest to our schools.
 
…with sales pitches that touch on everything but the possibility of being maimed or killed in combat.” This is either a lie or complete ignorance of the paperwork that a candidate must read, fill out, and sign. From DD Form 1966/5, RECORD OF MILITARY PROCESSING:
 
Block 25 ABILITY TO PERFORM MILITARY DUTIES, subsection a. “Are you now or have you ever been a conscientious objector? (That is, do you have, or have you ever had, a firm, fixed, and sincere objection to participation in war in any form or to the bearing of arms because of religious belief or training?)”

(Emphasis my own.)
 
Ms. Raftery quotes an absolute falsehood, "Did you know – this is absolute fact – that your 17-year old doesn't need your permission to enlist?" Again from DD Form 1966/5:
 
Block 40 PARENT/GUARDIAN STATEMENT(S), subsection a. “I/we certify that (Enter name of applicant) has no other legal guardian other than me/us and I/we consent to his/her enlistment in the United States (Enter Branch of Service).
 
“I/we acknowledge/understand that he/she may be required upon order to serve in combat or other hazardous situations. I/we certify that no promises of any kind have been made to me/us concerning assignment to duty, training, or promotion during his/her enlistment as an inducement to me/us to sign this consent.”

(Emphasis my own.)
 
Ms. Raftery quotes “Leave My Child Alone” in San Francisco “Recruiters 'commonly say you can get $50,000 or $70,000 for college, yet statistics show that 57 percent of kids who join the military don't get a dime for college.'’” This is a misquote. The cited pamphlet says “Since 1985 when the Montgomery GI Bill program (MGIB) began, 57% of military personnel who signed up for the program (Presumably the MGIB program), received nothing!” But their numbers are inconsistent. On one page, “