SamSaid!

ATTACK ADS

     John Kerry and his advisors have decided to make his Vietnam experience the centerpiece of his campaign. A first class, honest-to-goodness war hero  — ultra strong on defense. Forget about him throwing away his medals (or whatever they were) and accusing his comrades of atrocities, just look at the photos with his Swift Boat buddies. It makes a pretty picture even after 30-40 years even though part of it has been embellished for maximum political effect.  

     But now some other Vietnam vets have produced another picture of John and the War, and their TV ad is being loudly denounced as a despicable “attack ad”. So let's get this straight. Kerry's record is being gussied up to make him look good, and that is OK. On the other hand, a group of Vietnam vets paint a different picture, and this is an attack ad. What is good for the goose is obviously not good for the gander.

     Those of us who were not in Vietnam cannot personally vouch for the truth, and there are varied versions of a very messy affair. But Kerry opened the door and literally asked for response considering his very spotty record during and after that war. Is he really in a position to claim “foul”? Let's say that whatever happed 30-40 years ago is of relative unimportance. Re-writing history is something else. But what about Kerry running to Central America to encourage Danniel Ortega nd the Sandinista Communists? Was that just another aberration?

Ask yourself the question  –  if Kerry became President and we capture Bin Laden, what do you think he would do with him?? Turn him over to the UN? Do you have a better idea?

ADVICE

     During the high school and college days, there was no shortage of wordly advice coming from parents, older siblings, friends, relatives, teachers, professors, bartenders, Ex-GIs, and virtually anyone else with experience or opinions. One example that still stands out in my memory is “You will be judged by the company you keep”. For a young man, I am sure that applied to both male and female acquaintances.  That saying, long buried in my mind, has been resurrected by John Kerry. Aside from his obvious waffling, he might earn the benefit of the doubt  — except for the company he keeps.

     When I see him chumming with Ted Kennedy, Bill and Hillary Clinton, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Howard Dean, Michael Moore, Barbara Boxer,Whoopie Goldberg and the remainder of the left wing elite, I don't have to look any further. George Bush may not be beyond criticism, but look at the alternative. John Kerry has made his bed, and will now have to sleep in it. And above all, the image of Kerry turning to the UN as the “great authority” and subverting US autonomy to that lily-livered outfit is more than I can stomach. Sorry John, don't look for help from me or my friends!  It all comes down to the company you keep. Good advice that has stood the test of time.

A TAKE ON KERRY

     John Kerry probably isn't a bad guy to be around. Maybe not the prime joke teller or life of the party  — and never just “one of the boys”  —  but not a bad guy. Soon we will learn more about what John Kerry “is”, but we can be pretty sure about what he is not.

     John Kerry is not a builder” or “creator”. He is not a renowned author nor is he an organization builder. He has not started and grown his own business nor a professional practice, and he has not managed a payroll of thousands of career aspiring people  (discounting the hordes of government employes). True enough, he has military experience – controversial as it may be. His list of accomplishments career-wise compared to his peers is not all that impressive. However, there are 2 very significant accomplishments that have made him what he is  —   he married two  wealthy women. Very wealthy. Those achievements alone have allowed him to own and use several fancy automobiles and mansion type homes on at least 2 continents. He has enjoyed a very luxurious life style thanks to his acquired wealth, without ever worrying about grubby things like making a good living in the workplace. It is easy to see why his close political compadre is Teddy Kennedy, who has never worked a day in his life.

     And these are the leaders who understand the problems and challenges of average Americans?

INADVERTENT

     Most Americans probably never heard of Sandy Berger. But he was a high ranking official in the Clinton White House  –  one of BCs national security top advisors. A while back, he was appointed by Clinton to obtain  top secret terrorism-related documents in the National Archives in order to pass along meaningful information to the supposedly non-partisan 9/11 Commission. Berger went to the Archives and then committed several cardinal sins  — illegal actions  — that he termed “inadvertent”, as in “Oops, sorry”. So what did he do?

     Berger took top secret documents from the files, and made  copies (inadvertently)of them in the process. He removed the top secret documents and copies from the Archives  –   of course, inadvertently. He put some of the documents in his personal brief case, inadvertently. He then stuffed the copies into his trousers, inadvertently. Then he got caught. Oh yes, this process was not a one time affair. It continued over several visits.

     Berger is no stranger to classified material. He is a consummate Washinton insider who knows the ropes, and the rules of handling top secret data. He knew exactly what he was doing, and his biggest crime was getting caught.  And his excuse was that he made a simple mistake —  ”inadvertently”. It is interesting to note that all of the material taken illegally from the National Archives top secret files has not been returned as of this date (still missing), and neither has the nature of the material removed from the Archives been disclosed. But it is clear that there was a specific objective of being selective about what documents were to be given to the 9/11 Commission and those that were not.  

     So ask yourself a simple question  — you take classified Top Secret data from the Archives, make copies, stuff them in your personal briefcase and trousers, and return only part of the documents after getting caught, and then pass it off as a simple mistake made  — inadvertently. Sure! Do you really buy that?

       The liberal left wing big media doesn't want to make a fuss over over this story, so you probably won't hear much about it unless you watch Fox News. Don't expect much from Peter, Dan and Tom. They'll bury it somewhere.

ARNOLD

     So Governor Arnold has called a bunch of recalcitrant Democrats “Girley-men” for being obstructionists in placing special interests above the State Budget. He didn't invent the term  — just used it at an appropriate time. The result?  –  now the left wingers, liberals, gays,  weirdos, feminists  — the whole range — are distressed and critical. But with all the criticism, no one asks the key question  — was the description accurate? I think it was. Of course, if he said he had just called a spade a spade, he would have been called a racist.

     And speaking of racists, what about the foul-mouthed Whoopie Goldberg? At a big Democratic fund raiser should stood at the podium alongside Kerry and the other big-shots and indulged in scatalogical demeaning sexual comments clearly intended to demean the President. Of course, with left wingers cheering her on, that was quite all right. The Democrats strongly reject the public release of Whoopie's garbage mouth comments. Gotta go to the internet for that. And then the Democrats have the nerve to talk about “values”.

     Some things change  — some don't.

ODDS AND ENDS

     As the ACLU continues to wage war on the religious aspects of our society and tries to “secularize” the government, they must have gagged over the TV exposure to the Memorial services for Ronald Reagan. For sure, all of the ceremonies from coast to coast had heavy overtones of religion from the invocations. prayers, hymns,  eulogies, and references to the Deity   –  and all aspects of the proceedings were immensely well received by the overwhelming percentage of Americans. All except the ACLU and Michael Moore. Now we can understand why the strategy of the secularists is aimed at 5 people  — 5 out on 9  –  on the Supreme Court, and that is why court appointments are so critical for all of us. Forget about the people  — get the Judges.

     The O.J. Simpson syndrome is alive and well. Out here in California there is endless TV coverage of the gruesome murder of Laci Peterson and her unborn child. The legal hi-jinks are well underway, and it looks like a Simpson replay  –  i.e., the facts show that a terrible crime was committed but the legal system concludes that nobody did it. The standard isn't justice  — it's facilitating a way to defeat justice. No doubt, Scott Peterson will vow to conduct a vigorous search for the REAL killer(s)  — just like O.J.  — remember??

     Correction. Sometime back I labelled Michael Moore as a slob. One of my readers took issue and suggested that a more appropriate descriptive term would be “pig”  in view of Moore's countenance and corpulence. The guy has a point  –  and very good eyesight! 

ENERGY INDEPENDENCE

     For 3-4 decades the battle cry of political leaders of both parties has been to reduce the US dependence on Middle East oil and to achieve energy independence. The arguments are sound, and the economists say that we need to go in that direction. No one seems to disagree with the basic premise, but we are as much if not more dependent on Middle East oil now as we were 40 years ago. Reasonably, we all might ask “Why”? “How come”?  Naturally, the finger of blame points at the Saudis, OPEC, Iran, etc etc etc. for controlling the flow and price of petroleum. But are they really the primary culprits?

     The term energy does not apply solely to oil. It applies equivalently to coal, natural gas, electricity, nuclear power, water power,etc. All forms of energy. And while we bemoan the price of gasoline and other commodities, we ignore all of the limitations placed on domestic US energy sources by our environmentalists on the left. They have strangled nuclear power which is safely and successfully used in many parts of the world. In the US It has been regulated into energy oblivion despite the fact that it is cleaner and more economical that other energy forms. The clean air regulations on coal fired power stations are so stringent that layer after layer of cost has been imposed on the power industry. No more dams for water power because creatures at the bottom of the food chain MIGHT be affected. Tight regulations on burning natural gas. And of course, the prevention of drilling for oil or gas in the Acrtic, in the Gulf of Mexico, off the coast of California, in the mountains  — anywhere. The reason that middle east oil is so attractive to import is that the alternate sounces of energy in the US are burdened by regulations that drive up the costs of domestic sources to record highs. What do we do when it becomes more economical to import middle east oil?  Obviously, we import middle east oil. Lots of it.

     We will never come close to energy independence until we REALLY encourage the use of other alternatives domestically  – and I am not talking about wind power or solar cells. But when it comes to nuclear power, drilling for oil and gas, or burning fossil fuels, the environmentalists just don't care. They go around in green shirts and bitch about importing middle east oil. OPEC is merely obliging our own stupidity. When we are thrashing about in our own regulatory straight-jacket, we have nowhere to go but the Middle East, Venezuela, or elsewhere. Anywhere, say the environmentalists  — just not here. Make the regulations tougher, ban nuclear power and blame OPEC. Simple. Three dollars a gallon?  Oh, we'll find a way. Just invent cars that get 70 miles per gallon. Right?? 

BILL CLINTON

     BC, or #42 as he has been described, is hawking his new book and will probably sell a lot of copies thanks to the tons of free publicity he is receiving from his media buddies at NBC, CBS, ABC, Oprah, et al. I have not bought a copy of the book and don't intend to. Eight years of Bill Clinton was enough without another 960 pages of “explanations”. He has an obsession  about being  well regarded by everyone, and if stretching the truth is required,  he doesn't hesitate a minute. No doubt, he is smart and is glib if not articulate –  but when you strip away all if the self generated “spin”, he is a pathological liar and a moral degenerate.

     It's to bad he has these indelible shortcomings, because I'll bet that he would be  a fun guy to be around in social situations. Over a couple of beers, I'd wager that he has a long retinue of off-color jokes that he tells very well. On a “can you top this” basis, I'm sure he would hold his own well into the 3rd or 4th round. And it would be a treat to play golf with him assuming we had a tough scorekeeper who would  prevent or at least minimize his legendary cheating. But well beyond his virtues, you have to be leery of a guy who figures that the only fault in his long career of womanizing and infidelity was getting caught  –  both in the act and in the lie.

     He is no different than the other world leaders who want to leave an impressive legacy, and his book is structured to paint that warm fuzzy image while explaining away the warts and scars. And so how will history regard him? George Washington was The Father of his Country; Abraham Lincoln was the Great Emancipator, and Ronald Reagan was the Great Communicator. And Clinton?? Way back in his first term, many of the mainstream folks dubbed him “Slick Willie”. That's my vote  –  it fits!

IMMIGRATION

     With the Iraqi War, political campaigning, economic worries, same sex marriage, etc., it is easy to lose track of other issues, such as immigration. I readily concede that an element of immigration is a positive thing for our growing and expanding country. But there is the distinct possibility of too much of a good thing. I am personally concerned over immigration in this day and age  — for 2 reasons.

     The common cliche is that we are a nation of immigrants. I suppose that is true if you assume that the forbearers of all of us came from somewhere else  — including the Indians. But in days of global terrorism, massive immigration has a significant downside. It is currently esimated that there are about 12 MILLION illegal immigrants in the US right now. Think of it  — 12 MILLION. The bleeding heart do-gooders prefer to call them ”undocumented” because they just can't bear calling illegals illegal. Not only that, we don't know where these people are, when they got here, who they are or what they are doing. And while some folks register concern over this state of affairs, others on the left keep creating benefits that inevitably attract more and more illegals. Doesn't make much sense, does it?

     We are spending millions to tighten security at our Ports of entry, airline terminals, bridges, etc, yet the illegals continue to pour in. To observe that our borders are porous is like concluding the the Pope is Catholic. While we fear the actions of terrorists who have mass murder on their minds, it is not very  comforting to know that there are millions of foreigners running around loose  — totally anonymous to our law enforcement authorities.  And of course, the denizens of the left want to gut the Patriot Act so that it will be more difficult for our law enforcement agencies to track both legals and illegals. When a country cannot control its own borders, it is asking for trouble  — possibly very big trouble.   

     My second concern is over the breakdown in assimilating immigrants. I was born and raised in the ethnic melting pot of western Pennsylvania. Fully 50% of the population of our town was made up of non-english speaking Czechs, Slovaks, Polacks, Germans, Russians, Italians, Ukrainians, Lithuanians, Croats, Serbs, Yugoslavs, Macedonians, Bulgars  –  and the list goes on. I went to grade school and high school with their kids. Those people WANTED to be in America, WANTED to become citizens, and WANTED their kids to speak english. No bi-lingual nonsense. The first generation of American born kids were assimilated fully within 20 years. I still correspond with some of them.

     But nowadays, our social architects encourage the different ethnic enclaves  — groups that live together, keep their own dress and customs, retain their own religions and speak their own language. And our do-gooders are encouraging this separatism rather than inclusion into the mainstream of US life. These immigrants  — many illegals  —  really aren't Americans  –  they are ethnic identities who just happen to be living in the US. The breakdown of the assimilation of these people into our society should a major concern to all of us. Divided loyalties can have devastating effects in days of global terrorism. Balkanization is the term used by most political scientists, and just look at the awful ethnic environment in the Balkans. And it hasn't changed much in 100 years.  

     To me is is utterly insane that we should adopt an umbrella of benefits over illegals and make it easier and more attractive for them to defy our laws. I don't know which is worse  — to take advantage of the rest of us or to endanger the rest of us. Looks like lose-lose to me.

     What ever became of that old saying, “When in Rome……….?

FAIR AND BALANCED

     Media bias in reporting can be very subtle and not easy to spot. On many occasions, it isn't so much what is said by the TV and print journalists that counts  — it's what isn't said. The other day, I ran across a very good example that makes the point.

     The Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse fiasco has been headline news for weeks, and there are those who simply don't want the story to die. Since the prisoner abuse story broke several weeks ago, there have been over 200 news items (as of 6/1/04) broadcast by CBS, NBC, and ABC. During the same time period there have been any number of military citations (medals) awarded to men and women who have displayed valor and courage in the performance of their duties. Do you wonder how many of these medal winnig stories have been carried by CBS, NCS, and ABC during this time period?  That's right, NONE. Obviously, these network gurus  prefer to portray the military at its worst rather than show it at its best. Fair and balanced??

     Go one step further. Ted Koppel and Peter Jennings made much of showing on TV the photos of soldiers killed in the Afghan and Iraqi wars. Hundreds of them. At the same time there have been over 3700 Purple Hearts issued to  soldiers, sailors and marines wounded in action. How many stories have you read about those who have received Purple Hearts? Have you seen their photos extensively displayed during the evening news shows?? Not hardly.

     We see on TV what the producers want us to see, and they prefer that the impressions we form are solidly based on one side of the story. It is truly a sad state of affairs when we watch or read the news and immediately wonder, “What aren't they telling us? Is this the whole story?”  Clearly the predominance of the media are aligned against the Iraqi War and against George Bush.That's OK as long as it is broadcast as commentary or analysis –  not news. We cannot directly control how the news is presented to us. But we can change channels.

    I sincerely believe that much of the left wing bias stems from a rejection that we are engaged in a war with terrorism. They concede that there are a bunch of renegade degenerates in the Middle East who intend to harm us, but stop short of “war” in the sense that has historically been meant. And  if there is another major terrorist incident, they immediately jump to the defensive position that it is “our fault”. Now is the time when we all should be rallying behind our troops, not degrading them and nit-picking. I just don't buy the idea that protesting against the war initiated on 9/11 is just another form of patriotism. And neither to I believe that anything is to be gained by breathing life into the Abu Ghraib affair week anfter week.