Archive for April, 2006

With Democrats in Charge

April 24, 2006

In an email received today from Rahm Emmanual, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, amongst the usual Bush bashing and pleading for contributions to help Democrats retake control of the government, were the following points that I take as ‘promises’ of what to look forward to.


With Democrats in charge, we will pursue a real energy policy that consists of promoting efficiency and alternative sources rather than pouring tax dollars into the coffers of oil companies enjoying record profits.


“A real energy policy?” Wasn’t it the Democrats in control during the previous oil and gas shortages in the 1970s? Didn’t all they end up doing was raise taxes and encourage Detroit to build little cracker box cars that the American Public hated? That first gas shortage was over 30 years ago and what did they do? NOTHING! The Republicans didn’t do much better, but if they were interested in “real energy policies,” why, during their 40 years control of Congress, did they not act on that while in the majority?


If they are interested in a “real energy policy,” why do they consistently block drilling efforts across our country? We have known oil reserves sitting underground ready for the taking. We have coal resources enough for thousands of years and yes, with today’s technology; it can be burned a lot cleaner than it ever was. Why do they continue to block exploration and drilling of these valuable resources?


If Democrats are concerned over “record profits,” why do they keep raising our taxes as well as businesses? Why do they have Federal, State and Local taxes on every gallon of gas, reaping more per gallon of gas than the oil companies they complain about making “record profits?”

With Democrats in charge, we will fight to extend health coverage to those who need it, not more huge tax cuts for the very wealthiest Americans.


If they are “in charge,” why will they have to “fight?” Won’t they be back in control like they were the first 40 years of my life when they accomplished nothing to help Americans with Health Care?


If you really want any reform in Congress, let’s make them adhere to the same benefits and healthcare we citizens have to work with. Stop their cushy freebies, when they are making record wages, and make them work under what we do. Both parties would reform Congress then.


And why do we always have to hear the old and tired “tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans?” Excuse me, but they are among those “wealthiest Americas as are the loons in Hollyweird and so far, I have seen or heard of any of them sending in more taxes than they have to or refusing to accept a tax refund. Don’t be fooled by the old class warfare cry of “tax cuts for the wealthy.” The tax cuts went to all of us and tax receipts in the US Treasury have greatly increased as a result. Besides, the top 1% of wage earners are paying nearly 50% of all taxes. That doesn’t sound like any tax cuts went to the “wealthiest Americans” to me.

With Democrats in charge, we will return to the fiscal policies that resulted in budget surpluses during the Clinton Administration – surpluses that have been squandered by the reckless spending and tax giveaways of the Bush Administration.


Sorry, but this canard is as laughable as any other lie the Democrats have said before. First of all, there was NO SURPLUS!!! It was a PROJECTED SURPLUS some 10 years down the road.


While I think the Republicans have been remiss in their spending, I have yet to see the Democrats filibuster or try to argue for spending reductions. With their gift of filibuster to block what they don’t want, why did they not block any spending bills and instead, joined Republicans in that “squandering” of money?


You also have to remember; the September 11 attacks in our country drew us into a prolonged war on terror that must be fought, having been ignored for too long when Democrats were in control. Wars are expensive, but must e fought when we are attacked as we were then. Funding our Military in wartime is not what I would call “squandering.”


As for other wasteful spending, if the Democrats were serious about that, wouldn’t they be joining in trying to curb Illegal Immigration and deny Taxpayer funded free benefits to Illegals? Seems as if they actually do cut any spending, it will be to our Military, once again gutting them in their time of need. No thanks.

With Democrats in charge, we will have real ethics reform in Congress and turn the House of Representatives from an auction house back into the People’s House.


Ethics? Democrats? With Ted Kennedy, (chappaquidick), Robert Byrd (Ku Klux Klan), John Kerry (Anti-war slander of Veterans and questionable awards as well as burying the POW/MIA issue), Hillary Clinton (so many scandals from Bills administration as well as extramarital affairs) and so many more. Shaky balloting, denial of overseas Military Absentee ballots, refusal to return donations given by illegal lobbyists, so on and so on. The Democrats have been the most unethical party I can remember and they give no inclination of changing.


Their rhetoric is deafening, but there past conduct is clear as a bell. No ideas, just “we hate Bush and Republicans” and Democrats must be returned to power.


Trusting Democrats on “ethics” is a funny as letting a wolf guard your hen house alone.


Don’t be fooled by Democrats try to copy Newt Gingrich’s “Contract with America” back in 1994. Right now, Democrats have run out of ideas and are down to copying what they think you wish to hear.


Want your taxes raised back out of sight? Want less government responsibility? Want more freebies given away to some who may not deserve them? Want to see the Iraqi people written off, as Democrats wrote of the Vietnamese people? Want more socialism and less freedom for yourself?


Then, vote for Democrats this November. As for my house, and me we intend to vote for true Conservatives and trying to keep returning America to the greatness it knew before Liberal Socialist Democrats ran the country into the mud.





John Kerry, Deceiver and Defeatist part IV

April 22, 2006

The true defeatists today are not those who call for recognizing the facts on the ground in Iraq. The true defeatists are those who believe America is so weak that it must sacrifice its principles to the pursuit of illusory power.


No Senator. The true defeatists are one’s like you how keep calling for defeat in another winnable war we are winning. We are not “pursuing illusory power,” Senator. We are fighting the terrorists that would once again attack our nation in their attempts to force the world into submission of their misguided view of a religion. We are fighting to give others the same chance for freedoms that we have enjoyed.


The facts on the ground, today just as in Viet Nam, seem to escape you, Senator. We are winning today and we were winning in Viet Nam too, before your seditious testimony and advocacy of cut and run. That, Senator, is your policy and I’m afraid your legacy of defeat and submission to our enemies.


And the most dangerous defeatists, the most dispiriting pessimists, are those who invoke September 11th to argue that our traditional values are a luxury we can no longer afford.


No, Senator. The actions being taken today are not to declare them luxuries we can no longer afford. They are so we may preserve them and grant them to others. Your pessimism and defeatism, in your banal grasping for personal power, are the luxuries we can no longer afford.


Half of the service members listed on the Vietnam Memorial Wall died after America’s leaders knew our strategy would not work.


No, Senator. More than half of those names are there because when the leaders of North Viet Nam were contemplating negotiating surrender, they saw you and those like you “dissenting” and advocating their Communist policies and saw our weakness. So, they hung on, engaging in a war of attrition, wearing away at the American public, sacrificing untold numbers of their own citizens until the end they desired and knew would come, did come. We withdrew and gave them a clear road to invade and defeat the friend we abandoned at your behest. Given another chance, I have no doubt you would replicate that shameful defeat and ignore the human suffering you brought on to others.


Our valiant soldiers can’t bring democracy to Iraq if Iraq’s leaders are unwilling themselves to make the compromises that democracy requires.


How dare you call any soldier “valiant” after the way you slandered us all 35 years ago. Incidentally, even America required help in getting our own Democracy off the ground. We did not do it by having time tables forced upon us as an enemy waited there ready to pounce as soon as that help retreated away.


No American soldier should be sacrificed because Iraqi politicians refuse to resolve their ethnic and political differences.


No American soldier should be sacrificed because leftist politicians desire the failure of a war to bring Democracy to a struggling country and the leftist see causing that failure as a road to regaining political power.


So we must set another deadline to extricate our troops and get Iraq up on its own two feet.


You helped bring about a deadline and retreat from Viet Nam, Senator. You also advocated the victory of Communist forces and they indeed did win by the deadline you helped bring in. Given the chance, you would impose that again and once the terrorists overtake Iraq, cry that it was Bush’s failure. Have you no end to your shame, Senator?


When we protested the war in Vietnam some would weigh in against us saying: “My country right or wrong.” Our response was simple: “Yes, my country right or wrong. When right, keep it right and when wrong, make it right.”


Yes, Senator, many of us have been trying to make it right by retaking it away from you and the socialist elites you have aligned yourself with. It’s not “my country right or wrong,” it’s “my country tis of thee.” It’s seeing that we are not the bad guys when we try to help others be free and shake off the bonds of oppression you would impose on us as well.


We intend to keep making it “right” by exposing you for the liar, deceitful defeatist you are. It is your lies we expose and your cheap underhandedness and cheating to get ahead. It is you that makes America wrong, Senator. You are your leftist socialist cronies that have taken over the Democratic Party. Your days in leadership are numbered as America gradually wakes up to your own corruption and redefining of Patriotism to mean oppose only the Republicans, but blindly go along with anything the socialist Democrats do.


Senator, you have failed in every step of your life. You have been consistently on the wrong side. Once again, you are true to form and face sure failure.



John Kerry, Deceiver and Defeatist part III

April 22, 2006

The fissures created by Vietnam have long been stubbornly resistant to closure. But I am proud it was the dissenters—and it was our veterans’ movement—and people like Judy Droz Keyes—who battled not just to end the war but to combat government secrecy and the willful amnesia of a society that did not want to remember its obligations to the soldiers who fought.


Finally, a shred of truth. Yes, the separation has been resistant to close. But, the real reason is because the vast majority of those of us who served full tours and more there, unlike both Kerry and Al Gore (who also served 5 months as a News Reporter) have perpetrated the lie of the “deranged Viet Nam Veteran. Back in his 1971 ‘testimony,’ Kerry stated that we were “murdering 200,000 Vietnamese a year,” and that “the government was creating a MONSTER, a MONSTER in the form of men who are trained to deal and trade in violence.”


In essence, we returning Veterans were robbed of our Valor, we were scorned and have been for over 35 years now. Little known is that the American Military then never lost any significant battles throughout the entire Viet Nam War. As many of us said, “what happened? We were winning when I left.”


Does not the country have an ‘obligation’ to respect those that have fought for it? Does that respect only go to cowards and opportunists as Kerry? Was it actually his own amnesia that is apparent in his forgetting the silent oath we have to support each other when he slandered over 2.5 million Veterans who served in Viet Nam?


And, he is one to talk about “combating government secrecy.” As a member of the Senatorial Commission on POWs & MIAs, was it not him who shredded all documentation about this investigation and never released any findings publicly, only stating there were none, while getting his cousin a multi-billion dollar contract with the Vietnamese for building a port there? It would appear Mr. Kerry has little knowledge of an “obligation.”


Because we spoke out, the truth was ultimately understood that the faults in Vietnam were those of the war, not the warriors.


“they told stories that they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Ghengis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam…”


“there will be some recrimination, but far, far less than the 200,000 a year who are murdered by the United States of America."


The country doesn’t know it yet, but it has created a monster, a monster in the form of millions of men who have been taught to deal and to trade in violence…”


Looks to me as if all the blame from him goes straight to those of us who served there. There is his “speaking out” and what was said. He did not blame the war or the government, but the Military people serving in the war! Amnesia again?


Fourteen years elapsed between the first major American commitment of helicopters and pilots to Vietnam and the fall of Saigon. Fourteen years later, the Berlin Wall fell, and with it the Communist threat. You cannot tell me that withdrawing from Vietnam earlier would have changed that outcome.


In all of his speech, nothing is more laughable to me than this canard. He appears to actually be trying to tie his anti-war and anti-America activities to the fall of the Soviet Union and the Berlin Wall. The fall of the Soviet Union and the Berlin Wall came about because those people enslaved behind the Iron Curtain desperately wanted their freedom, just as the South Vietnamese people, the Afghani peoples and yes, the Iraqi peoples do today. It was brought about because another Republican President, who was also shamelessly vilified in the media and by leftist like Kerry, convinced the Soviets we were building a “Star Wars” defense system and their economy couldn’t keep up with that. It was those of us who the likes of Kerry feel the need to “dissent” against that brought about that major change. Kerry’s actions only prolonged it by his pro-communist advocacy during this time of dissent he is so proud of. In fact, right after the death of President Ronald Reagan, it was Kerry who stood and proudly proclaimed, “I’m proud that I stood against Ronald Reagan.  Then, as during his anti-war days and even now, Kerry looks the fool as he stands in support of a Communist regime that opposes the very country he claims to love and support. Now, of course, he aligns himself in support of Islamofacist Terrorists winning the war that would enslave even more Muslims and bring more death and sorrow to America’s shores.


The lesson here is not that some of us were right about Vietnam, and some of us were wrong. The lesson is that true patriots must defend the right of dissent, and hear the voices of dissenters,


Kerry couldn’t be any more wrong than he is here. Of course, it does matter and is a lesson that we abandoned an important ally and let them be over ran by a despotic regime that slaughtered and caused untold millions of innocent people to die. Another Democrat supported bolstering freedoms around the globe. Kerry claims to pattern himself after that same Democrat, John F. Kennedy. Kennedy was for supporting the freedom lovers in South Viet Nam. Kerry was opposed to their freedom and actually brought back and advocated the Communist stance after he illegally and improperly met with Communist Representatives of the Hanoi Government in Paris France, while he was still a Commissioned Officer in the naval Reserves.


If dissent is true Patriotism, perhaps he can explain why no dissent was allowed during his slanderous and treasonous testimony before the Fulbright Commission? Perhaps he can explain why dissent isn’t tolerated during Democrat administrations? Perhaps he can explain why dissent expressed at any of his rallies ends up with the dissenter being forcibly ejected? Sorry, but opposing your country during a time of war isn’t Patriotism nor do I consider John F. Kerry one little bit the Patriot.


Truth is the American bottom line. Truth above all is fundamental to who we are.


Very truthful! Now, Mr. Kerry, why not sign an SF 180 and open your entire Military personnel file to the country, not limited release to 3 friendly reporters? Explain all the discrepancies that are known in your record. Mr. Kerry, start being truthful yourself!


But today our leaders hold themselves above the law—in the way they not only treat prisoners in Abu Ghraib, but assert unchecked power to spy on American citizens.

A couple more blatant lies! Our leaders did not mistreat anyone in Abu Ghraib. A small handful of out of control troops did that and every one of them has been prosecuted and sentenced for their crimes. American Citizens are not being spied upon, either. Only those within our shores who have been communicating with our enemies have been watched and some brought to justice. Would Kerry tie the hands of the very people he also complains did nothing to prevent the horrific attacks of 9-11? Apparently so.


America has always rejected war as an instrument of raw power or naked self-interest.


Unless of course, you need a war to distract the public from multiple scandals and a sexual involvement with a young White House intern your daughters age? Is it okay then to attack another country and almost see the start of WW3? Senator Kerry seemed to have no problem with any preemption into Kosovo where there was absolutely no danger to America. Where was his dissent then?


In recent weeks, a number of retired high-ranking military leaders, several of whom played key combat or planning roles in Afghanistan and Iraq, have come forward publicly to call for the resignation of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. And across the administration, from the president on down, we’ve heard these calls dismissed or even attacked as acts of disloyalty, or as threats to civilian control of the armed forces.


Senator Kerry must have his blinders on as well. Did he miss the equal number of retired generals who have come out in support of the War and Secretary Rumsfeld? Oh yes, they must be “dissenters” to the Kerry agenda, therefore, must be silenced or ignored.


We have even heard accusations that this dissent gives aid and comfort to the enemy. That is cheap and it is shameful.


No, Senator Kerry, it is truthful. Your “dissent” brought America shame once before. You helped show the world America cannot be trusted to stand beside her allies in their time of need. That is aid and comfort to our enemies and that, Senator Kerry, your conduct, is what is cheap and shameful.


How dare those who never wore the uniform in battle attack those who wore it all their lives—and who, retired or not, did not resign their citizenship in order to serve their country.


How dare one who went out of his way to appear to be a hero, falsify actions for combat medals and cheaply oppose the band of brothers fighting and dying for someone else’s freedom declare himself first, a war hero, then an anti-war activist. Those of us on the right and in support of America, the restoration of real American values and who wish to see Democracy take hold in the Middle East also did not resign our citizenship, Senator. We have been watching as leftists as you have taken over the Democratic Party and have imposed more and more socialism upon us and slowly stripped us of freedoms and rights granted us by the founding fathers.


We too “served our country” Senator, much longer than you did and we still love it and have not once advocated it’s retreat or submission to another agency such as the United nations, as you have.



John Kerry, Deceiver and Defeatist part II

April 22, 2006

As mentioned in the previous post, Kerry was to deliver his all-important speech today at Faneuil Hall, in Massachusetts. He did deliver that speech and even wrote an op-ed for the Boston Globe, which is basically a condensed version of his speech.


Having obtained a copy of both the op-ed and the speech, titled “Dissent,” I can see that this man has no scruples about him. In his never ending quest for attaining the highest political office in the land, President of the United States of America, he will stoop to whatever level he feels will gain him enough votes to take over the government.


After his scant 3 months serving in Viet Nam combat zones, after almost one month of in country training in Swift Boats, something he said he only signed up for because they engaged in off coast patrolling, he returned to the U.S. and began his quest as an anti-war activist. In his highly publicized activities, which included throwing his medals (most of which remain very questionable as to his actually meriting them) he lost his initial bid for public office.


Laying low for a few years and during the Reagan administrations renewal of pride in America, he again ran for the Senate, but this time as a “war hero” complete with the medals he had claimed he threw away years before.


In the 2004 Presidential election, he again tried to play a “war hero,” but a group of highly decorated and honorable Viet Nam Veterans, the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, came forward and exposed him. They were later joined by another group, POWs, and became known as the Swiftboat veterans and POWs for Truth. Included in the group was Colonel Robert Day (retired) ex-POW and recipient of the Congressional Medal of Honor, the highest award for bravery in the country.


Largely through the efforts of these honorable men, who had nothing to gain and who lost a lot, being slandered and fired form jobs because of their political opposition to Kerry, he was narrowly defeated.


Reading over the speech and op-ed today, with us embroiled in another war, the War on Terror, and in another one Kerry’s famous ‘flip-flops,’ it appears as if he is returning to his anti-war roots to criticize President Bush and the War on Terror. As always, Kerry takes whatever road he feels will gain him support and election to the office he is seeking, the Presidency this time, again.


His quotes from the speech will be italicized as I show you his return to the anti-war side and the depth of his shamelessness in slandering others. Due to the length, it will be broken up into multiple parts.


I know that some active duty service members, some veterans, and certainly some politicians scorned those of us who spoke out, suggesting our actions failed to “support the troops”


Some? Nearly 80% of Viet Nam Veterans opposed him in 2004. As one recipient of the treatment brought on by Kerry’s “testimony” in 1971before the anti-war Fulbright Commission, which also disallowed any dissenting comments to Kerry’s, I can honestly say it was a bit more than just “some” of that oppose him. Keep in mind about no dissenting comments allowed in either the Fulbright Commission or Kerry’s “Winter Soldier Investigation.”


I have come here today to reaffirm that it was right to dissent in 1971 from a war that was wrong. And to affirm that it is both a right and an obligation for Americans today to disagree with a President who is wrong, a policy that is wrong, and a war in Iraq that weakens the nation.


So, he feels it was right to “dissent” in 1971, but no “dissenting” views of his “testimony” were allowed. One person, John O’Neill, of Swift Boat Veterans fame, had a speech written and prepared to give, opposing Kerry’s comments. He was not allowed to give it. So much for “it is right to dissent.”


While it is my right to “dissent,” as he says, it is not an “obligation” for me to oppose the War on Terror, even the Battle of Iraq. I see neither the President wrong, the policy wrong, and the only weakening I see of America is leftist opposers such as Kerry who will stop at nothing to oppose the President. Need I remind you that back in 1997 it was Kerry himself, in a speech titled “We Must be Firm With Saddam Hussein” that was calling on Democrat President Clinton to take actions almost identical as those President Bush has taken today? Was he actually proposing a wrong policy back then? Or, is he just opposing the actions today in his quest for public office, and the hell with how many more will be killed due to his actions emboldening our enemy?


I believed then, just as I believe now, that the best way to support the troops is to oppose a course that squanders their lives, dishonors their sacrifice, and disserves our people and our principles.


Sorry, but you do not Support the Troops by opposing their mission and emboldening our enemies. That ends up costing our Military more casualties as the enemy, just as North Viet Nam did, engages in limited strikes and not full engagement. A war of attrition, wear down the American public support and convince the public to “cut and run” clearing the way for them to swoop in and re-enslave the people of Iraq, just as the North Vietnamese did back in 1975, costing untold millions of innocent South Vietnamese their lives. That is the true disservice and dishonor of these brave troops lives.


By then, it was clear to me that hundreds of thousands of soldiers, sailors, Marines and airmen—disproportionately poor and minority Americans—were being sent into the valley of the shadow of death for an illusion privately abandoned by the very men in Washington who kept sending them there.


Please note the bolded section above. That is a FLAT OUT LIE! Subsequent compilations of service records revealed that the poor and minorities were not disproportionately sent to Viet Nam. This is something known well throughout the public and should be known by a sitting US. Senator. Apparently, a little lie to plant the seed of racism into the public’s mind was in order, he felt.



Bring Back The Draft?

April 21, 2006

With the ending of the draft in 1973, young men across the country breathed a sigh of relief that they would not receive the dreaded “Greetings” from the Selective Service System that would require them to serve 2 years active duty in the U.S. Military and another 4 years in the in-active reserves. The end of the draft coincided with the end of America’s involvement in the Viet Nam War, being forced to cut and run and abandon the people of South Viet Nam as they struggled to keep free.


I received my own draft notice right after New Years of 1969. For reasons I won’t go into here and now, instead of letting myself be inducted, I went down and enlisted and ended up spending a little over 8 years active duty in the U.S. Army, traveling nearly ¾ of the way around the world. For me, even though I initially did not want to serve, it was an education I would never have gotten. Traveling to foreign lands and seeing other cultures first hand led me to appreciate our own culture even more. It also gave me discipline and a sense of teamwork that I might not have received otherwise.


It seems America has all but forgotten the benefits many young men received when they were drafted into the Military between WW2 and the end of the Viet Nam War. As I said above, millions of men received similar educations and discipline, learning how to get along with others and tolerate differences that really don’t matter. It also gave respect for authority and taught many how to lead others without being overbearing or overly demanding.


Yes, the down side is when drafted during war many will die in whatever conflict is ongoing. Still, those are in the minority. The “Wall” in Washington D.C. is emblazoned with the names of some 58,000 who died during that conflict. Yet, even though that number appears very large, over 2.5 million Americans served in the country of Viet Nam during the many years of the war. That comes out to about 2%.


Today, we are embroiled in another war and once again, anti-war critics are going out of their way to make it as unpopular as ever. We are also facing what can only be defined as an invasion of illegal aliens, mostly from Mexico, to the south of us. Many come just to earn better wages to care for their families. Many others come to take advantage of free benefits. Still others come to join in with groups bent on taking back the Southwestern U.S. for Mexico. In all, the invasion of Illegals is getting out of hand and must be dealt with.


Some have proposed a fence be built. I disagree with that idea, having flown the border between East Germany and West Germany and West Germany and Czechoslovakia for nearly 3 years in the early 1970s, after my tours in Viet Nam. A fence makes me envision that fence the Soviet Communist erected, not to keep us out, but to keep their people in. So, I oppose a fence along the entire Southern Border of the United States.


However, we do have a Border Patrol that appears to be seriously understaffed. Some have called for our Military to be stationed along the Southern Border, but they are busy now fighting for the freedoms of the Afghani and Iraqi peoples and to snuff out Terrorism as best as can be. Cries of the Military being stretched too thin come to mind and such a deployment would really stretch them too far, I feel.


This brings me back to the draft, dreaded as it is. Young men are required to sign up for the Selective Service once they turn 18 years of age now, just in case a draft is ever needed. We have the manpower to patrol the borders sitting right there within the Selective Service system.


I propose reinstating the draft and instead of drafting for the Military, draft for the Border Patrol. Draftees can go through Military Basic Training and receive special training in accord with the needs of the Border patrol and then be assigned where needed. As before, a 2-year enlistment would suffice.


As before, these young men could also receive an education they won’t get otherwise. As before, it would teach them responsibility and discipline as well as serve our country, something every freedom loving person should be willing to do. If they decided to and met the criteria, they could extend their enlistments and become career Border Patrol Officers, serving alongside Professional Border Patrol Officers, becoming one of them. Many draftees between 1948 and 1973 ended up doing the same and made successful careers out of the Military.


While there will always be those who seem to feel they should not have to serve their country or who perform poorly, overall, most who were drafted before did their jobs admirably, simply finishing their 2 year hitch and moving on with their lives, but with a free education and a sense of discipline and respect for authority. I see no reason it wouldn’t work the same draft for the Border Patrol.


The adoption of this could result in increased enforcement and protection of our borders as well as return to the civilian sector men who now have a renewed sense of pride in our nation, respect for authority and the discipline needed for raising families and running our communities.


Overall, I see a big plus for the country and our citizens.



John Kerry, Deceiver and Defeatist

April 18, 2006

John Forbes Kerry, junior Senator from Massachusetts, failed Presidential candidate, elitist, anti-war activist and self proclaimed hero (you do know he served in Viet Nam) seems to either feel he won the 2004 election or he has never stopped campaigning. In his never-ending bashing of President Bush and his endless anti-war stance (when a Republican is in office) is now calling for yet another deadline in Iraq.


The consummate flip-flopper, who voted for the $87 Billion to fund the war before he voted against it, and who has cried that the President has not consulted him once for advice on the War on Terror (you do realize Kerry served in Viet Nam, don’t you?) has sent out an email reeking with his defeatism. In an email titled “10 Days That Will Get Their Attention,” Kerry fist lets us know that there is One general after another demanding Rumsfeld’s resignation.” Sorry, Senator, but six retired generals from the Clintonian era do not make one after another.


Somewhere along the last few weeks, he has decided it is his place to impose a May 15 deadline for the Iraqi people to “form a government!” I thought it was President Bush being accused of “Nation Building.” Setting a deadline with the threat of our support being withdrawn sounds to me like he intends for the Iraqi people to set up a mirror of his failed policies that Americans rejected. Maybe he can’t fathom that America and upwards of 80% of all Viet Nam Veterans rejected his wishy washy ways and instead, chose a real leader, George W. Bush.


Not that Bush is perfect, mind you. I feel he could do a lot better in certain areas, but overall, he is a lot better than what we would have gotten under either Al Gore or John Kerry.


Kerry states, “If Iraq’s leaders can’t move past their infighting and endless delays to form a new government by May 15, we should immediately withdraw all of our troops. If they meet the May 15 deadline, we’ll bring America’s combat troops home by the end of the year and put the future of democracy in Iraq where it belongs — in the hands of the Iraqi people.”


Where does the junior Senator from Massachusetts get the audacity to make this sort of demand? He is not in the White House and he is but one vote out of 100 Senators.


Iraq is struggling to get to its feet. It isn’t as smooth a process, as we would like. But, we have not lived under the decades of despotic rule they have. We also were not around when our own fledgling Democracy struggled to get itself set up. Ours took several years to get going and we are still working on it, over 200 years later.


After WW2, we kept troops in both Germany and Japan to help them get on their feet. In fact, over 60 years later, we still have troops in those countries. When does Mr. Kerry propose we bring those troops home?


His demand is exactly what Al Qaeda would like to see. As in Viet Nam (you do know Kerry served there), our enemy will just lay back and wait us out, swooping in knowing no one will oppose them and knowing America will turn a blind eye, again.


He goes on to say; The clarity and precision of our plan stand in sharp contrast to the aimless approach of the architects of this war — Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld. All across America, people are strongly dissenting from the Bush administration’s "stay for as long as it takes" policy — and, just as important, standing up to the administration’s attempts to vilify and question the patriotism of those who dare to speak out.”

“Clarity?” “Precision?” Since when is “cut and run” clear and precise?” Since when is abandoning our allies, when they may need us the most, a “clear and precise” stand?

Kerry and his leftist minions have long advocated a repeat of Viet Nam, (you do know he is a Viet Nam Veteran?), doing everything they can to paint the Battle in Iraq as another Viet Nam, calling it a “quagmire,” “winless,” “hopeless” and whatever. Iraq is nothing like Viet Nam, other than the drive-by leftstream medias slanted and one-sided reporting of set backs and shortcomings only that are common in ever war. We never read of successes, just every negative thing they can drum up.

Kerry should open his eyes a bit wider too. President Bush has never questioned his patriotism. The people of America have and decided he was not worthy of holding the highest office in our nation. He and the left’s pitiful attempts at redefining the definition of Patriotism have not gone unnoticed, either. We have every right to question his, or any candidates for President patriotism. In my estimation, a true Patriot does not advocate the defeat of America.


Kerry next brags, “Decades ago I stood up to the Nixon administration and spoke out for a change of course in Vietnam. Four days from now, I will be delivering a speech at Boston’s Faneuil Hall on the critically important topic of war and dissent. It’s time to remind America that, when a stubborn president has America headed profoundly in the wrong direction, only citizen action can change our country’s course.”


Decades ago, Kerry lied about and maligned every single person who served in Viet Nam. He advocated the Communist position of taking over South Viet Nam and as far as many are concerned, committed treason by meeting on his own with delegates from North Viet Nam in Paris France while still a Reserve Navy junior Officer.


Will this speech he intends to deliver be an echo of his slanderous speech against Viet Nam Veterans and soldiers in the field back in 1971 that he gave to the Fulbright Commission? At that time, he stated that soldiers in Vietnam, “had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Ghengis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam…”


Addressing what would be happening to the South Vietnamese in the way of retribution, he stated, “there will be some recrimination, but far, far less than the 200,000 a year who are murdered by the United States of America." I have asked several supporters of Kerry and to date have not received a reply, but just who are these who were “murdering 200,000 a year?” There is only one answer and they will not state it. The Soldiers and Marines in Viet Nam were the ones he was accusing of murder. The common fighting people is who he labeled as “murderers,’ not the Nixon Administration. He also said of those who served and were serving, The country doesn’t know it yet, but it has created a monster, a monster in the form of millions of men who have been taught to deal and to trade in violence…”


Not only were we murderers, but we became ‘monsters’ as well. I have to ask, just who was questioning who’s Patriotism? Surely, he was not considering the over 2.5 million people who served in Viet Nam as “Patriots” when he made these misleading and slanderous statements?


Is this the direction he wishes for the country to take? Will be end up labeling the brave men and women fighting the War on Terror the same as he did us back in 1971?


Back in 1997, when President Clinton, a fellow Democrat, was at the helm of the country, in a speech to Congress titled, “We Must Be Firm With Saddam,” Kerry was calling for almost exactly the same actions against Iraq as President Bush has now taken. Now, Kerry calls it “the wrong direction.” Why is it wrong, because a Republican is leading the way?


Kerry, towards the end of his email says, “The fight is just beginning. I recognize the importance of the United States Senate as an institution that can help change America’s course. And I know that we can’t force George W. Bush to confront reality in Iraq until we force the Senate to do the same.”


No Senator Kerry, the fight is not just beginning. We have been fighting the likes of you for a very long time. The course you wish to take America down is one only the former Soviet Union would be proud of. You advocated the Communist position back in the early 1970s and as far as I can determine, still do.


The reality in Iraq is one neither Kerry nor his willing lackies in the drive-by leftstream media wish to face. That being, we are winning there. Just as we were winning in Viet Nam up until the time protesters like Kerry convinced the public that it was we Americans who were the enemy and the Communist North Vietnamese were the good guys.


Will Kerry travel to meet with Al Qaeda next and bring back their plan for Iraq? Elect him to office and don’t be surprised. The country cannot afford to fall for this mans lies again. Iraqis can’t afford to have this man in a position of power either. Only Terrorists wish to see him at the helm. It is my firmly held conviction that Senator Kerry would like nothing better than to see another defeat of America while being governed by Republicans, with no regards to how many lives would be lost.





Washington States Shame

April 18, 2006

If you think the bungled Gubernatorial election of 2004 was shameful and the stripping of Private Business Owner’s rights weren’t shameful enough for our state, Elected Legislators have outdone themselves again.


With emotions running high over the War on Terror and the Battle of Iraq, a small group of phony Christians from Kansas have decided it is their right to Freedom of Speech to show up at funerals of deceased soldiers. In their protests, they display signs such as, "God blew up the troops,” “Thank God for IEDs,” “God Hates Crippled Soldiers,” “Thank God for Maimed Soldiers,” “Thank God for Dead Soldiers,” and much more.


While realizing that we do have Freedom of Speech in America, we do not have the Freedom to impugn innocent people in a time of grief. These families are hurting and suffering, some in support of the war, some not. Still, a funeral is a very private time for solace and grieving, not for sending any political message. Morons like the Reverend Fred Phelps of Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, Kansas and of the “God Hates Fags” fame, abuse the right to Free Speech to spread his message of hate against Gays by tying the death of soldiers in war to acceptance of Gays.


For the record, I do not embrace homosexuality and think it is a deviant lifestyle, at least for me. For others, that’s their business, as long they don’t try to push it off on me. I do not support gay Marriage but do not condone violence or discrimination against them simply because they are Gay. If that confuses you, contact me and I will try to explain.


This is the stance Phelps has taken to justify his hate of the American Military, claiming God is killing our troops because America is more tolerant of Gays today. Saying he is an idiot does an injustice to idiots everywhere.


Recently, Washington State Republicans made an attempt to head off hate filled protests by groups as Phelps’s. HB 3293, banning protesters at Military funerals was proposed. Republican Minority Leader Mike Hewitt made the bill’s passage one of his highest priorities. Democrat Majority Leader Lisa Brown agreed to guarantee a floor vote on one bill from each party. Hewitt chose HB 3293. Brown ignored the deal, and after passage of the bill she chose, had been she officially ended the session 24 hours early. A vote on HB 3293 would have taken about 10 minutes.


This leaves our Military families vulnerable to the likes of idiots like Phelps and his misled followers.


Contacting Lisa Brown, a reply was received that said, “Thank you for sharing your disappointment with me regarding the Legislature's failure to pass House Bill 3293 this session.

Please be assured, I support the bill as it came before the Senate this year. But because of a miscommunication in the final hours of the legislative session, it did not come to a full vote of the Senate.”


What kind of “miscommunication” could have prevented 10 minutes to vote on the bill but shut down the session 24 hours early?


I contacted Democrat Senator Craig Pridemore with;


As a Viet Nam Veteran, I am shocked that this bill was not even brought up for a vote in our Senate. Losing a loved one during war is heartbreaking. Funerals are a very emotional time for families. To think that Washington State would allow the likes of Fred Phelps to invade that stressful time with his misguided and outlandish protests is unfathomable to me.
Regardless of how one feels toward the War or the opposition party, funerals are not a time for protests, I feel.
I respectfully urge you to vote yes on this bill as a priority during the next session and not go along with any more attempts to block it.
Thank you


To his credit, Senator Pridemore answered,I agree, Lew.  I wasn’t watching this one closely this past session but will be working hard on it next year.” However, it is also to his shame and to the detriment of our Military families that he “wasn’t watching this one closely this past session.


I can only hope he is true to his word and both parties come together and pass this bill banning protesting at Military funerals. In the meantime, it is our states shame that the likes of Fred Phelps can appear in our state and make a painful time much worse.



United States of Aztlan

April 17, 2006

Aztlan is the mythical place of origin of the Aztec peoples. In modern times, it is what some people of Mexican origin wish to turn the Southwestern and Western United States into. Indeed, some have already claimed it as such and have even drawn maps of such.


In many recent protests and rally’s held in support of illegal immigrants, signs can be seen declaring the Illegals are in their homeland and that we Americans stole the land from them. Some even feel Aztlan encompasses the land that America won in the Mexican/American War of 1846, then paid the Mexican government of the time 15 million dollars for it. The exact location of this mythical land remains unknown.


Cries can be heard at these rallies for the “White Europeans” to return to Europe and get out of “their” land. But, do these people forget who Cortez was? Did he not travel from Spain and conquer Mexico and the Aztec and Inca peoples long before America was founded? Do these people protesting for rights for illegal immigrants not realize they are speaking a language not native to either Aztecs or Incas, but are speaking Spanish, the native language of Spain? Which, last I heard, is in Europe also.


How can people of similar mixed heritage as Americans demand others give back land that was first won in war two centuries ago then paid for, when they are not prepared to give back Mexico itself to those indigenous peoples that occupied the land before Cortez conquered it?


Like it or not, lands are conquered throughout the worlds history and yes, one day it very well might be America. If we keep turning a blind eye to what is behind the rapid invasion of Illegals into our country, it just might come sooner than we realize. And, this time, without a shot being fired.


American Liberals, with their feel good and everybody is okay, except for Conservatives with old fashioned values, will end up giving it away, being too much of cowards to fight for what our forefathers left for us. Why else would Liberal Democrats be passing out voter registrations to Illegals at these rallies?


While many do come here to make a better life for their families in Mexico, many also come here just for free benefits offered by America. Do they not realize that if they reclaim the land for Mexico they are right back where they started? Mexico is a corrupt nation with the wealth held by a few and the poor receiving little or nothing. If Mexico retakes the West Coast of America, do they honestly expect Corporations to remain and fund their freebies? Do they expect the American taxpayer to keep paying exorbitant taxes to ensure they receive decent healthcare and welfare? If Mexico were to reclaim the land, wouldn’t that responsibility fall back to Mexico, who doesn’t or can’t take care of their people now?


And what of the 15 million dollars originally paid for the land in 1846? Who is prepared to repay that, in today’s money? That amount staggers my mind imagining how much it would actually be.


What really amazes me at the same time is how many of these same people have no regard for Israel, aligning themselves with the Palestinians and encouraging Arabs to eliminate the Jews in Israel. Many of these people are Catholics with Bibles the same as ours, outlining how the Jews were originally given that land by the same God they worship. Israelis have the oldest claim to any of the disputed lands there, but that makes little or no difference to the La Raza or MEChA people advocating retaking the Western United States to Mexico.


They wish for later comers to take over the land of Israel that was given to them by the God Mexicans worship over 3,000 years ago, but also advocate retaking land their ancestors lost in war and accepted money for just over 200 years ago.


So here we are, in the middle of an invasion and facing the possibility of our culture being overthrown. You think we aren’t in danger? Ask yourself why so many come up here and make no efforts to assimilate into the American culture. Why do they hang together speaking loud and brash Spanish and make no efforts at learning the language of our nation, English? Ask yourself why are American communities now celebrating Cynco De Mayo? What does that day have to do with American history? Why are American cities funding celebrations for Mexican Liberation from Spain and lessening our own day of celebration of our liberation from Britain?


Don’t let yourselves be fooled by this invasion. Honest Mexicans that wish to make better lives for their families in America have been coming here for a very long time, legally. They have assimilated into American life and learned the language, even if broken. They have kept their native culture, but for themselves, not pushing it off on America. Invaders have come here not to join the American lifestyle, but to destroy it and replace it with the poverty seen so prevalent in Mexico still today.


This is what we face if we don’t wake up to what is going on around us and demand our lawmakers pass or at least enforce out immigration laws. Every nation has immigration laws, Mexico’s are amongst the harshest, but they want ours ignored. Wake up or don’t be surprised to walk into a store one day and not be waited on because you don’t speak Spanish or look Mexican.


View video and listen to sound clips at



Rumsfeld allowed prison abuse

April 14, 2006



Report: Rumsfeld allowed prison abuse – U.S. Security –


In the never ending battle of trying to destroy the Bush Presidency, during a time of war and shortly before the 2006 mid term elections, with high hopes of returning Democrats to power, the drive-by leftstream media is out doing themselves in attacking President Bush through Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld.


Here is yet another inflammatory article attacking Secretary Rumsfeld, as if they feel the attacks by some retired General Officers isn’t enough. If we didn’t read anything but the headline we would be led to believe that Secretary Rumsfeld personally traveled to Guantanamo Base and personally authorized abuse of detainees. According to the article;


“U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld allowed an “abusive and degrading” interrogation of an al-Qaida detainee in 2002, an online magazine reported Friday, citing an Army document.”


Apparently, some report says ONE detainee was abused and now, that is Secretary Rumsfeld’s fault. And, an “online magazine” is the drive-by medias source? Haven’t they been bellyaching about “online sources” as not being journalistic or reliable? Maybe they become reliable when it suits the leftstream drive-medias agenda?


“In a report a Pentagon spokesman denounced as “fiction,” Salon quoted a December 2005 Army inspector general’s report in which officers told of Rumsfeld’s direct contact with the general overseeing the interrogation at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.”


Oh, the horror!!!! The Secretary of Defense, during a time of war, had contact with a General overseeing operations at a Detainee camp in Guantanamo! This is a problem? Isn’t the Secretary of Defense expected to be in contact with Field Commanders? I would certainly hope so!


“Rumsfeld spoke regularly to U.S. Army Maj. Gen. Geoffrey Miller, a key player in the treatment of detainees in Iraq and Guantanamo, during the interrogation of Mohammed al-Kahtan”


Again, isn’t this what is expected of a sitting Secretary of Defense during a time of war?


"Over 54 days in late 2002, soldiers accused him of being a homosexual, and forced him to stand naked in front of a female interrogator, to wear women’s underwear and to perform “dog tricks” on a leash, Salon reported."


Salon, the “online source” that is now to be trusted claims these actions. Similar actions by a small handful of our Troops at Abu Ghraib Prison in Iraq resulted in prosecution and conviction of those responsible. Who has been charged or convicted in these abuses? Given the horrible acts of September 11, 2001, are they even abuse? Of course, some say yes others say do whatever is needed to extract information.


A Pentagon Spokesperson has said labeled this report that Salon has relied on as “fiction.” Since this spokesperson may be in support of President Bush and the Battle of Iraq, my guess is the drive-by media has decided they are “unreliable.”


Salon quotes this questionable report as, Lt. Gen. Randall M. Schmidt, an Army investigator, as saying in a sworn statement to the inspector general that “The secretary of defense is personally involved in the interrogation of one person.” In the very next paragraph, “Schmidt is quoted under oath as saying he concluded that Rumsfeld did not specifically order the interrogation methods used on Kahtani, but that Rumsfeld’s approval of broad policies permitted abuses to take place.


Wait a minute! This whole slam is built around the notion that Secretary of Defense; Donald Rumsfeld was “ personally involved in the interrogation of one person.” Yet, here their source says, and under oath, “Rumsfeld did not specifically order the interrogation methods used.”


This returns us to the old claim from a couple years ago, Rumsfeld’s approval of broad policies permitted abuses to take place.” So, by approving “broad policies,” it becomes Rumsfeld’s fault that a few interrogators may have exceeded their acceptable methods of interrogation. Talk about grasping at straws!


Jeffrey Gordon, a Pentagon spokesman, said in a telephone interview, “We’ve gone over this countless times and yet some still choose to print fiction versus facts.” Mr. Gordon also said, “Twelve major reviews, to include one done by an independent panel, all confirm the Department of Defense did not have a policy that encouraged or condoned abuse. To suggest otherwise is simply false.”


So, what is the intent of this “report?” Another source, both online and broadcast that the drive-by leftstream media doesn’t care much for, Rush Limbaugh, had this to say about it, “There was a Democrat strategery memo written by Dingy Harry. It did target the military. They were going to come out and they were going to accuse Bush of being incompetent in use of the military, and Rumsfeld would be part of that. Okay, so this is the fruition of that memo? I’m sure. This is not coincidental….”


Is this what is behind all the trash Rumsfeld drive-by media reporting we have seen this week? Is this why we are being treated to three-year old “reports” published as if they are new? Is this how the Democrats have decided to grab control of both the House of Representatives and Senate, with no regard to how many of our troops may be killed or injured because of their inflammatory remarks that will embolden our enemies?


This is all reminiscent of how the anti-war left sold out our Military during Viet Nam causing several thousand more American deaths and untold Vietnamese deaths. Is political power so precious that Democrats are willing to sacrifice the lives of our fighting people just to grab power away from Republicans? From where I sit, it appears so.


Winning the Battle in Iraq is about a lot more than simply saving face as a nation. We have committed to giving several million Iraqis and hopefully, those in surrounding nations, a free opportunity to set their own destiny and become a free people. Our Military have given their lives and spilled much blood to give the Iraqi people that chance. Their sacrifice should not be besmirched simply so politicians can dance on their graves to regain power and further erode the greatness America once had and is trying to rebuild.


Don’t fall for this latest attempt at a power grab. Democrats seem unable to build on solid ideas and have resorted to these ridiculous methods. Instead of joining forces with the Bush Administration to support our Military, once again, under the leadership of the likes of Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and even John ‘F’in Kerry, they have apparently decided to repeat the misguided steps taken during the 1960s and early 1970s that caused the Military to withdraw from Viet Nam before the job was done, to the detriment of millions of South Vietnamese.


We cannot allow the blood of our heroes to be wasted again for political gain.




Rumsfeld feels ire of ex-generals

April 14, 2006



WP: Rumsfeld feels ire of ex-generals – Highlights –


In this latest example of the “let’s get the Bush Administration,” we now have a few ex-Generals coming forward complaining about Donald Rumsfeld, President Bush’s Secretary of Defense. Much of the drive-by leftstream media can’t seem to get enough of these ex-Generals.


As with any other citizen, ex-generals are welcome to their opinions and to voice them. But, we have to ask if there is another reason behind these new outcries, other than the obvious of disliking President Bush and trying to get at him through Rumsfeld.


Looking over the list we can see some who were involved in the early days of the very war they are now complaining about. Some are Clinton appointees, raising the aspect of partisanship.


By and large, though, these few ex-Generals should know better. There are troops in the fight that need the support of all Americans. There are Iraqi and Afghani people struggling to institute Democracy’s in their country. Are these ex-Generals advocating a return to America’s defeat in Viet Nam with another cowardly cut and run policy? Can the world afford to let terrorists groups like the Taliban and Al Qaeda win this struggle and re-enslave millions of people?


Veterans’ speaking out against politicians isn’t new. Many of us took sides in the last election as we have done in every election. However, this last Presidential election saw something like never before. A group of over 250 highly Decorated Viet Nam Veterans, representing both Major Parties, banded together to oppose the Democratic Candidate. This group, the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, with nothing personal to gain and not in support of the opponent, as a group, faced the onslaught of the drive-by leftstream media, castigating them as political hacks, Republican funded, liars, deceivers and other nefarious labels.


In contrast, the drive-by leftstream media seemingly as embraced these ex-Generals who obviously have their own agenda, likely backed by opponents to President Bush. If they have no agenda, we must ask why the disparity between coverage of these two groups.


If these ex-Generals and other anti-war loons win their way again, we can look forward to yet again millions of people being summarily executed and once again, enslaved under despotic regimes.


Shame on all of us if we allow this happen again!