Archive for October, 2005

Sex Offenders & Halloween

October 30, 2005

With another Halloween upon us we are faced with the new scare of sexual offenders at the doors when children trick or treat. Several communities have taken preemptive steps designed to protect children on Halloween night.

 

Among these steps will be home visits from probation officers. New Jersey is instituting a curfew of 7 PM for known sex offenders, barring them from answering their doors, barring them from attending Halloween parties where children may be present or taking their own children out trick or treating.

 

In one Texas community known sex offenders will be required to spend the evening in a county office.

 

On the news I heard that Florida is making preemptive moves similar to New Jersey in that they are also forbidding sex offenders from even putting up Halloween decorations or having their lights on at their homes.

 

This is being said to also be for the protection of the offenders, to protect them from false accusations. It has also been said that no community is aware of any incidents of child molestations resulting from trick or treating. An unscientific poll on ABC showed almost 68% of respondents agreed with these steps.

 

Among these registered sex offenders will be the one that may have had consensual sex when 20 with a 16 or 17 year old. Others, the ones we seem to be most worried about, repeat and dangerous offenders, makes me ask, “Why are they out of prison?” Shouldn’t they still be locked away? Do communities think Halloween is the only day they will harm a child? Sentence served or not, if they are still a danger, they shouldn’t be in the community!

 

Personally, I find it totally ridiculous. The easiest and most effective way to protect our children on Halloween is for us parents to accompany them trick or treating. If we know there is a registered sex offender in the neighborhood, walk right past that house, regardless of whether they are offering candy or not.

 

As I have said earlier, we parents are the first and best line of defense for our children, not the government.

 

I see this as another abdication of parental responsibility to the government. No one ever said parenting was easy or always fun, but we have the responsibility to ensure our children are kept safe and raised with the values we wish to instill in them. If we are unwilling to endure the responsibilities of parenthood, maybe we shouldn’t be having children.

 

I also see this as another step towards marking citizens. Will we one day end up marking not only sex offenders, but other criminals and eventually religions and political groups as well? As I said above, if these offenders are considered dangerous, why in God’s name are they free within our communities? For me personally, violations of my daughter’s safety would be referred to my legal team, Colt, Remington, Smith and Wesson!

 

Lew

Advertisements

Greater Love

October 25, 2005
 

With all the mention today of 2,000 families mourning the loss of loved ones, I have to also think of the almost 3,000 families still mourning from 9-11. I also think of the 17 families mourning from the USS Cole.

 

I dare say there are literally thousands of families, American, European, Arab, and Asian that mourn the loss of loved ones at the hands of these terrorists.

 

These terrorists have to be stopped and this war on terror should have been started over 30 years ago, before they gained the support and power they have today. Appease them now and imagine the power they will have 10 or 20 years from now.

 

At the same time as I shed my tears over these 2,000 I also beam with pride that this latest generation has produced such fine young men and women who willingly placed themselves in harms way for the protection and liberation of others and paid the ultimate sacrifice. Their sacrifices are not to be taken lightly or denigrated but deserve to be held up to the entire world as amongst the finest people this country has ever produced.

 

John 15:13 Greater love has no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.

No Outrage?

October 24, 2005
Recently, as everyone knows, Bill Bennett made a hypothetical argument addressing some ridiculous argument over abortion by saying the reverse of a callers argument would be akin to aborting every Black Baby to lower the crime rate. Leftist had a filed day labeling him as a bigot and demanding apologies. It was a total misrepresentation of what he said and meant, but they still raised holy hell about it.
 
Around the same time, a so called college Professor, Kamau Kambon, a Black, while giving a talk at Howard University Law School on Oct. 14, said, "[white people] have retina scans, they have what they call racial profiling, DNA banks, and they’re monitoring our people to try to prevent the one person from coming up with the one idea. And the one idea is, how we are going to exterminate white people, because that in my estimation is the only conclusion I have come to. We have to exterminate white people off the face of the planet to solve this problem."
 
Reportedly, his comment received only slight applause, prompting him to add, "I don’t care whether you clap or not, but I’m saying to you that we need to solve this problem because they are going to kill us." "White people," he said, "had set up an ‘international plantation’ for blacks, which made ‘every white person on earth a plantation master.’" "You’re either supporting white people in their process of death, or you’re for African liberation," Kambon said. "White people want to kill us," he said. ‘I want you to understand that. They want to kill you," he said. "They want to kill you because that is part of their plan."
 
To make matters worse, this wasn’t just said in a private meeting, but was broadcast on C-Span to untold numbers of people, especially other Blacks.
 
Still, I have not heard one peep against this from ABC, CBS, MSNBC or CNN. It was just reported this evening on Fox, 10 days after it was broadcast.
 
I see this as nothing more than race baiting and inciting racial strife and possible riots. It sure doesn’t add a single thing to solving relations between the races.
 
Speaking for myself, I will tell the "professor" that if he chooses to try to harm either me or any member of my family, he will be facing someone well trained and capable in exercising his Second Amendment Rights.
 
It’s pure Bullshit that anyone makes comments like this and escapes condemnation. This moron shouldn’t be teaching in a college, he deserves to be in prison or pushing up daisies.

Impeachment?

October 24, 2005
 

As the looney left cries out for more investigations and calls for Bush to be impeached, maybe they should learn what impeachment would really mean to them.

 

It would appear that many now believe if Bush were impeached and removed from office that Kerry, the close loser from the last election, would become POTUS. Hate to burst their bubble, but there isn’t the slightest chance of this happening.

 

If, for some reason, they actually succeeded in removing Bush from office, Kerry doesn’t get to step in. The Vice President, Dick Cheney, in this instance, automatically becomes President. If Cheney were removed first, Bush gets to appoint a new Vice President and that person would become President.

 

If, for some reason, both Bush and Cheney were removed, Kerry still doesn’t get to be POTUS, it moves then to the House of Representatives and Senate to appoint a temporary President until an election is held for a new President. Since both are Republican controlled at this time, any bets as to what party would get the nod?

 

What we are really seeing in all these rumblings for ‘impeachment’ is just the latest ‘tit for tat’ childish game both political parties have been engaging in ever since the 1950’s when Joseph McCarthy’s commission succeeded in exposing the darling of the left, Alger Hiss, as a Communist spy.

 

I, for one, am growing tired if this silly game at the detriment of our country and society. Call for impeachment if you wish, Democrats, but be careful, you may get what you ask for and you may regret it instantly.

For What? Why War?

October 23, 2005

While everybody is entitled to his or her own opinions, I take umbrage to those questioning our involvement in Iraq today and comparing it to the Viet Nam War. America is the freest land the world has ever seen. We gained that freedom with the help of others and I, for one, feel we owe it to others to help them with their freedom, if they so want.

 

Viet Nam turned out as poorly as it did for several reasons, the not the least of which being that due to anti-war leftists propaganda and efforts by those such as Jane Fonda, Donald Sutherland, Ramsey Clark and many others too numerous to list, to convince other Americans that it was only a Civil War that we were interfering in.

 

Had it been the Civil War they convinced others of, the North would have had the support they felt they would receive during Tet of ’68, which never materialized. Had it been merely a Civil War, untold thousands of South Vietnamese would never had taken to risk of their lives to steal away from the country in rickety boats tying to find freedom, with untold numbers dying in the process. There would not have been "re-education camps" built and filled by the victorious North Vietnamese "liberators" either, with untold numbers again simply disappearing.

 

The only real waste, in my opinion, was tucking tail and leaving those poor people to struggle by themselves against an enemy regularly re-supplied by the Communist Soviet Union and Chinese governments.

 

Today, we are facing an even graver enemy and have extended the battle into Iraq, a nation already in violation of the cease-fire signed after the first Gulf War and of 17 UN Resolutions over a 12-year period. The Iraqi people are not the enemy and are being slaughtered by these animals flooding into their country every day. Our own media makes every mention of every time one of our troops causes an Iraqi or a terrorist to stub their toe, but hardly mention any successes at all, not unlike they did during our war in Viet Nam.

 

Anti-war leftists use every trick they can come up with, such articles of pity towards our troops and their wounds, to convince our fighting people they are being used and their sacrifices are in vain. What next, will the "spitting" on returning troops once again happen? Has the anti-war left forgotten that today’s military is All Volunteer, while they try to portray them as hapless ‘draftees’ being used as cannon fodder and for nothing? If they succeed in repeating history, will they build another cold monument, to appease their consciences, while again they hold the people sent off to fight in distain?

 

All the hype about "no WMDs" is just that, hype. That was but one reason to go into Iraq. Saddam and his sons ran a horrible dictatorial regime, responsible for the senseless slaughter of untold thousands and more, of his citizens. The Hussein regime has been tied to supporting these terrorists that carried out 9-11. While no direct evidence is showing Saddam was responsible for the attack of that day, nearly the entire world stated he still had stockpiles of horrendous WMDs, including several prominent members of the political party today crying they knew all along they never existed. Even the past challenger for the office of President, in 1997, made a speech on the floor of Congress calling for severe attacks against Iraq, alone, if necessary, and removal of Saddam’s regime.

 

I don’t see this as a war started over oil or to appease someone’s ego. This war was declared on us back in 1979 with the attack and capture of the US Embassy in Tehran, Iran and subsequent holding of American Hostages. Since then, American interests have been continually attacked overseas and even one other attack on US soil against the World Trade Center. None were criminal acts, they were acts of war and ignored by both political parties.

 

Through the efforts of the anti-war left, terrorists have been shown that they only need cause some lives lost and keep up a hit and miss system of attacking and the public will grow weary of the war and listen to the cowards of the left that misrepresent what is really going on. They know that America will soon tuck tail and run and allow them to once again enslave an entire people, just like happened in South Viet Nam. Our military will be looked upon as losers, wimps and ineffective while people desiring freedom are once again written off while the anti-war left celebrates the very freedoms they had to have help to gain.

 

Eventually, that freedom itself will be challenged and who will the anti-war left turn to for protection then? Will they expect our military to be an effective fighting force once they have again gutted the ranks of the military and denied them weapons needed to protect the country? Will we again become the laughing stock of the world and open ourselves to attacks from every little anti-American group that hates our freedoms?

 

It is not my intent to ruffle feathers, but if history repeats itself, who will be able to stand against these terrorists that are not just interested in installing a totalitarian regime in Iraq or Afghanistan, but wish to see the entire planet under their radical view of Islam?

 

When questioning "what for," look back to the outcome of the Vietnamese people, the possible outcome of WW2 had the left succeeded in causing appeasement then. Look back to our own Revolutionary War over 200 years ago and then look at news reports of Iraqis and Afghanis smiling and holding up fingers with purple ink on them, voting in defiance of terrorists threatening them with death for voting for a more democratic rule in their countries. War is not pretty and horrible sacrifices are made, but freedom, theirs, and ours doesn’t come free. I cry for every single one of these people who are killed or maimed. Still, I cannot help but feel pride in that they were willing to pay this price to better someone else’s life. These sacrifices do not deserve denigration, but are deserving of being held up to the entire world and nation for the heroism they represent.

 

Support our Troops and their mission.

 

Lew

Melvin Laird Pipes In

October 19, 2005

A voice from long ago, yesteryear, has added his aging opinion on Iraq now. Melvin Laird, the former Secretary of Defense under Richard Nixon has added his cry for troop withdrawals, to prevent Iraq from becoming another Viet Nam.

 

Although I too am aging, it would seem to me that the fiasco of Viet Nam is exactly what Laird and several others are calling for today in Iraq. From the article on this, we read;

 

·  As in Vietnam, U.S. troops were sent to war in Iraq without understanding the history, culture, and ethnic differences in the arena of combat.

 

It would seem to me that lessons in History and culture aren’t all that necessary when fighting to kill those that would kill us. I don’t recall lessons in history and culture being prevalent during WW2 when we went back after Japan, Italy and Germany.

 

·  In Vietnam, we were fighting a guerrilla war where it verged on the impossible to differentiate ally from enemy, as is true today in Iraq.

 

After Tet of 68 the Viet Cong became a mostly ineffective force. When your enemy isn’t in uniform, yes, it becomes difficult to know who is who, until the start shooting at you. Still, a well-trained soldier, well armed and allowed to fight will endure and overcome.

 

·  Like the communists in Vietnam, Iraqi insurgents have infiltrated the government and security forces.

 

It seems to me that there are a few enemies of the United States that have infiltrated our own government and are shoving us towards Socialism, subjection to the United Nations and a general end of life as we have known since our Constitution was adopted over 200 years ago. These people can be found, exposed and eliminated, if we try.

 

·  The president is losing credibility with the people over the war, as did both Nixon and President Lyndon B. Johnson.

 

One difference today, even though it happened in Viet Nam also, is the media is about 100% against Bush. They were critical of Johnson also, but he didn’t face the onslaught of hatred Bush has since winning the 2000 election.

 

Sheeple in our country have been spoon-fed propaganda against Bush and the successes our military has gained in Iraq. All the media ever focuses on is Abu Ghraib and every single death regardless of how it happened. For those that do not seek other sources and depend on the leftstream media for information, what else would they believe since they have never heard one positive thing from them since Bush was inaugurated?

 

Then again, since Melvin Laird was knee deep in decisions on Viet Nam, along with Robert McNamara, who waited 30 years to write a book claiming he was always against involvement in Viet Nam, does he not bear a large portion of responsibility on how Viet Nam turned out? Does he now expect us to believe he has the answers when he advocates doing pretty much the same thing the Nixon Administration ended up doing that resulted in Viet Nam becoming the fiasco it became?

 

As an American Citizen, Melvin Laird has as much right to voice his opinion as anyone else does, but I think history shows he is the last one I’d be willing to listen to. As an architect of failure during the Nixon Years, why should we believe he would advocate anything less today?

 

Full article here:  http://newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/10/19/155802.shtml

 

Lew

 

 

 

Racial Separatists

October 17, 2005

This past weekend, we saw a “Million More March” led by Louis “Calypso Louie” Farakhan. We also saw a Neo-Nazi Organization in Toledo, Ohio attempt to express their freedom of expression with a march, only to be denied because of racial tensions in place and a riot starting up.

 

Farakhan was free to spew as much anti-American, anti-White, anti-Jew or whatever “hate speech” he felt he desired. The Neo-Nazis were denied their right to march and with only a small number on hand, seemed to stay fairly peaceful, instead focusing attention on the rioters, the reason for their march and assembly in the first place, drawing attention to Black gangs out of control.

 

I can’t say I agree very much with either group, seeing both as ridiculous and as racial separatists in their own right. Still, why is one group allowed the freedom to express their hate of the others, and one is denied? Even if we dislike what a group stands for, are we not free to express ourselves in a peaceful manner? Is this now an example of “reverse discrimination?”

 

Calypso Louie says he wants an international investigation into white people blowing up levees in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina, but offers no evidence that they were. I have heard members of the New Black Panther party on TV express nothing but admiration for this moron, saying they will be self governed someday. Do they advocate segregation again? Is this not contrary to everything Dr. Martin Luther King stood for?

 

We have good examples of what Nazis stood for during WW2 and I have no doubt they would return to the same manner of action, if ever they came into power. But, does Farakhans group sound any less horrible?

 

I often wonder why Black Americans such as Condaleeza Rice, Bill Cosby, Colin Powell, Starr Parker, J.C. Watts are not held up as examples of Blacks that have worked to make something of themselves and have become very successful? Are they not representative of what Blacks, as well as Whites, can do if they work at bettering themselves and applying a good education? Is it because they are Conservatives that other Blacks look down their noses at them? Or, is it because they got off the Government Plantation, built and maintained by the Modern Liberals?

 

How will the races ever come together and be one people, as I believe our Constitution was written, if we keep seeking to divide ourselves like this?

 

Freedom of speech is a good thing, but as I’ve said elsewhere, it comes with responsibilities. I see neither group, Neo-Nazis nor Calypso Louis New Black Panthers, doing anything but further dividing an already divided nation and a house divided cannot stand, this we know.

 

Lew

 

 

ONE NATION UNDER WHO?

October 12, 2005
Yes, once again, American tradition is under assault. I guess I should say that it is still under assault. As most know, the Pledge of Allegiance to our very flag has been ruled ‘unconstitutional’ by a single lone judge in a suit brought by another atheist who seems to feel he knows best for all.

 

Our original pledge did not contain the words, “Under God,” it was added by Congress in 1954. This seems to be how the phrase is being assaulted today, it having been added.

 

Two little harmless words seem to have stirred a strong controversy, not unlike Madeleine Murray O’Hare’s suit ended reciting the Lord’s Prayer in schools every morning. Both decisions leave our country worse off, in my opinion.

 

First off, God is not a name, it’s a title. We all recognize it as meaning the God of Christianity, but so what? If anyone believes in the Bible, check back and you will find that this God, Jehovah, Yahweh, Yehowah, or YHWH, is the same God recognized by Jews and Muslims as well. All 3, Christians, Jews and Muslims, are descendants of Abraham. This is the God of Abraham. Regardless of what we may think his name is, the three largest religions in the world worship the same God, albeit differently.

 

This matters little to an atheist, though. They are offended that children are required to recite this and may grow to adulthood believing in a Supreme Being and Power. The main problem here is that according to our Supreme Court, in a ruling handed down during WW2, brought by the Jehovah’s Witnesses, no child is required to recite it and no school may require them to recite it. As in the case of JW children, they merely stand respectfully while others choose to recite it, no fuss, no muss.

 

This also seems to matter little to an atheist, it’s the mention of God that offends their delicate senses. Well, search as hard as I may, I cannot find a single mention anywhere within our constitution that says citizens are not to be offended and are Constitutionally protected from being offended. It’s called life and I suggest they learn to deal with it. We all are offended several times a day and we have to deal with it and eventually, get over it. Just because you don’t believe in something doesn’t mean no one else may believe it or express their belief publicly.

 

And what of ‘tolerance?’ Isn’t it those from the leftist circles always bragging about how ‘tolerant’ they are compared to us on the right? We have to be tolerant to all their decadent whims, but they don’t need to show tolerance to others religious beliefs? It would appear that they are not the ‘tolerant’ ones they think they are.

 

Whether they like it or not, our country was indeed founded on Christian principles and some mention of God may be found in the State Constitutions of every single state within our union. The First Amendment does not force anyone to accept or worship a God; it just says Congress will not endorse any religion as a State Religion. With this move by Atheist and Secular Humanists, which are both considered religions as well, Courts are now endorsing their religious views over others.

 

These same cretins claim Government may not include God in any manner and attack our schools, since they are public and taxpayer funded. Sorry, but schools are not the government, they are supposed to be learning institutions for our children to get a free education. Why judges cannot see this escapes me, but schools have become little more than Liberal indoctrination centers today. In the ever-expanding quagmire of Political Correctness, our schools will not stand up for what they are and most take the PC nonsense to extreme measures. Christmas parties have given way to Solstice parties, or winter harvest. Kwanzaa, that long lived celebration of something originating from the mid sixties, seems to have survived the PC guillotine, though. And now, at least in one circuit, our Pledge of Allegiance is ruled unconstitutional due to mentioning God and in the PC quest to satisfy one moron.

 

Long ago, January 1969, Red Skelton, a comedian well known on TV, explained the Pledge very succinctly, word by word. Towards the end of his presentation, he said, “Since I was a small boy, two states have been added to our country and two words have been added to the pledge of Allegiance… UNDER GOD.    Wouldn’t it be a pity if someone said that is a prayer and that would be eliminated from schools too?” How prophetic he was to ever think this could happen, but happen it has, unless the Supreme Court overturns the decision. If it does, I fear this will not stop the atheists and Human secularists hell-bent on bringing down the traditional America we have all known and loved for so many years.

In closing, I must also say I find this entire effort at banning God in our Pledge hypocritical. Why, you ask? These same cretins who are so offended and worrisome that mentioning God in our pledge, have no problem handling and obtaining just as much US money as they can, which all carry the phrase, “In God We Trust!” If the mention of God is so offensive to them, shouldn’t they also refrain from accepting or using money that also mentions God?

 

I think so.

 

Lew

 

Protect Your Daughters

October 6, 2005

Reality check, America. There are predators abounding that will do physical harm and even kill our daughters, mostly young ones.

 

One disappears in Aruba. Another disappears her first few weeks in college. Some were taken by neighbors, raped and killed and their bodies discarded like yesterdays garbage. Boyfriends, husbands, neighbors, strangers and friends are killing our daughters all too often.

 

Black, White, doesn’t matter, we are letting our daughters down by not teaching them basic safety.

 

Why are we sending young teens off on their own? Why are we not watching over our children better and teaching them to be on the watch for predators?

 

Hardly a day goes by that we don’t hear of another young lady missing and later found dead. Tragically, a 4-year-old little girl was found wandering the streets at 1 AM in the morning, her Mother’s body hasn’t been found. A College student has been missing and a body was just found in a shallow grave. A husband was found to be lying about medical school and shoots his wife while she slept. Another is on death row after the body of his wife and unborn child washed up near his fishing hole. An attractive teen disappears in Aruba and I doubt her body will ever be found. She wasn’t the first to disappear in Aruba.

 

We need to train our daughters to not be so trusting. We tell them sex is great and they are entitled to as much of it as they can get. Early pregnancy isn’t the only problem with that. We let them dress in the most revealing clothing, exposing as much of their young bodies possible. Granted, men shouldn’t act upon this and nothing excuses what a few do, but our daughters are being harmed just the same.

 

We can’t lock them away, but we need to start training them to be more careful and maybe even, give them some old-fashioned morality lessons. We need to watch over them better and not send them off to a foreign land hoping they will have fun and be protected by a couple chaperones.

 

I don’t know, I just feel we are letting our daughters down by not protecting them more. Maybe it’s the Dad in me, maybe I’m just tired of seeing all the pain inflicted on families as they wait and wonder what happened to their daughters. Maybe it’s just the thought of young lives ruined or snuffed out all too early.

 

I don’t have any real answers to this; I just feel we need to handle raising our children better than we have been. It’s our job, not the governments.

 

Moms and Dads, protect your children, please.

Bush Will Destroy Our Lives (Barf Alert)

October 2, 2005

Those words were spoken by that bastion of knowledge and understanding of leftist Hollyweird, Donald Sutherland. I guess since he plays at politics on TV now, he’s the latest expert emanating from Hollyweird.

 

From the Drudge Report http://www.drudgereport.com/flash4ds.htm  Sutherland is quoted as saying, concerning Iraq and the recent hurricanes; "They were inept. They were inadequate to the task, and they lied." "And they were insulting, and they were vindictive. And they were heartless. They did not care. They do not care. They do not care about Iraqi people. They do not care about the families of dead soldiers. They only care about profit."

 

Oh please, Mr. Sutherland. What makes you the expert on these matters? Is it your role as Capt. Benjamin Franklin ‘Hawkeye’ Pierce in MASH? Maybe it was when you played the stoned tank commander Sgt. Oddball in Kelly’s Heroes? Perhaps it was when you played the demented arsonist, Ronald Bartel, in Backdraft, seeking a parole?

 

I have to wonder why it is that only the Bush Administration is destroying lives through the hurricanes and not the actual first responders, the Mayor of New Orleans and Governor of Louisiana?

 

They are vindictive? If so vindictive, how is it possible for Sutherland to be able to freely espouse this garbage?

 

They don’t care about the Iraqi people either? They aren’t the ones advocating abandonment of the Iraq war, leaving those Iraqi people to fend for themselves against a heavier trained terrorist organization or advocating the return to power of Saddam Hussein.

 

They only care about profit? Odd choice of words coming from a multi-millionare who probably has a great deal more money from his years of mediocre acting than all of the Bush Adminsitration combined, wouldn’t you think?

 

So, we now have a new voice ripping conservatives apart, just like the other super intelligencia of the fantasy word known affectionately as Hollyweird.

 

Babs Streisand says Global Warming is a National Emergency. Sutherland says Bush is Destroying the Country. Sean Penn actually met with Saddam and apparently felt him to be a good guy. Oh, talk about inept? Wasn’t it Sean Penn who traveled to Louisiana with his boat and full regalia of aids and photographers to “help rescue people,” but forgot to plug the transom and nearly sunk his own boat?

 

Tim Robbins said it best not too long ago, “There’s a chill wind blowing across America.” He's right, except it isn’t a chill wind, it’s a bunch of hot air emanating again from the hypocritical nutcases that live and work in fantasy trying to lecture the rest of us on how we should think and live.

 

No thanks, Donald. You and the rest of your cronies can stick to your drugs and drunken revelries and blow all the smoke you wish. I’ll stay straight and look ahead and see what Bush is doing right.

 

I also will not pay a red cent to rent or watch any movie coming from the Hollyweird nutcases who feel they are better than the rest of us and demand we give up what we have to give to others, while they keep theirs.

 

Babs, Donald, Sean, all of you in Hollyweird. Stick to acting and singing, you aren’t all that shabby, not star material, but not shabby. I’ll trust my tried and true conservative values and what few trustworthy politicians and all those great Soldiers, Airmen, Sailors and Marines we have in our military today. Their job isn’t fantasy like yours and they don’t receive millions of dollars to play act, they fight for what they and the rest of us believe.

 

What does frighten me is that much like Hanoi Jane Fonda and her co-horts like Sutherland did, they will continue to embolden our enemies once again and end up costing several thousand more American lives than should be.

 

What’s the matter, Sutherland? Didn’t you and Hanoi Jane cost enough lives in Viet Nam? You want to see more American Military Heroes killed so you can run off at your mouths over something you haven’t a clue about? Go home, smoke another joint, snort some coke, do something you’re good at, it sure isn’t speaking for America about our President.

 

Lew