3.4.04 @ 12:01AM
NO ORDINARY JOE
Re: George Neumayr's Kerry's
Dirty Diplomacy:
I'm an Ohio native who attended college in Massachusetts and
have resided here for three decades now in spite of the dreadful
political climate. As follow-up to your column of Tuesday, March 2:
Perhaps you're aware of the brewing debate and dispute here over
the disposition of John Kerry's Senate seat in the event (heaven
forbid) of his election to the Presidency. The wildly Democratic
state legislature is considering legislation to block Republican
Governor Romney from appointing an interim successor to the Senate
seat, as the state constitution allows. And further: guess who is
the current favorite among Massachusetts voters, according to a new
survey, to succeed Kerry should his seat become available? Why, the
moronic Joe Kennedy! Yikes and double yikes!
-- M. Young
Westborough, Massachusetts
HARD TO SWALLOW
Re: Shawn Macomber's Bitter
Pill:
The California courts condone illegal acts by the mayor of San
Francisco but punish those who follow the law. In order to comply
with the ruling of the California Court and to stay true to
Catholic beliefs, Catholic Charities could eliminate their health
care benefit plan for all employees and provide each with a monthly
payment equal to its present contribution to the plan. Using this
money plus their own contribution, if any, the employees could
enroll either in private plans as individuals or band together and
seek a group rate from a health care provider.
-- E. Patrick Mosman
Pleasantville, New York
I agree with Shawn's article, although, I would like to take it a
step further. We truly are on course to a state-imposed religion --
self gratification. This is a capitalist nation with employment at
will; therefore, if you do not like the health benefits provided to
you by your employer, then GO FIND ANOTHER JOB! No one says you
have to work for a company that does not provide birth control
pills free of charge. I find it absolutely reprehensible that any
judge can order churches, religious organizations, or any company
to provide benefits that are against their beliefs. What's next?
That the Catholic Church is required to pay for abortions? I am
beginning to think that the constitution, both federal and state,
is a figment of our imagination. How else can you explain this
flagrant disregard for the First Amendment?
-- Jennifer Johnson
As a Catholic who accepts all of my Church's teachings, I am appalled by the California Supreme Court's decision to force Catholic Charities to offer contraception coverage as part of its prescription drug benefit. I say: the Church needs to "just say NO!" Come and get us if you dare! If the goons of our nascent dictatorship come after us with guns, then I say we have every moral right -- indeed the duty -- to defend ourselves, our families, and our properties in like manner as these [so-and-so's] come after us. They shoved us into a corner, then we need to shove back, and get into a knock-down brawl if necessary.
The usurpation of power by the courts all over this nation these last 30 to 50 years constitutes a slow-motion revolution by the Left. And I do mean revolution, in the sense of a forcible power-grab. My feeling is that it's way past time to start a counter-revolution. For starters, let's ignore the courts: the executive and legislative branches need to reassert their co-equal status within a government of three branches.
Private citizens and organizations such as Catholic Charities need to commit multiple, massive acts of civil disobedience. Judges' homes need to be picketed; they and their families need to be confronted by vociferous, angry citizens wherever they shop, or go to school, or (gasp!) go to church or synagogue. The aggrieved leaders of the Catholic Church need to speak up, take out ads, march in picket lines, and preach that the Church WILL NOT OBEY these illegal diktats from the robed Caesars. We must be prepared to go to jail for our beliefs. We will NOT knuckle under to the robed dictators any longer! The judges themselves are outlaws and ought to be arrested and jailed for betraying the Constitution. Who sits in judgment of the courts? It's time that WE THE PEOPLE did!
Unless and until the leaders of the Church learn to shove back
at these [so-and-so's] on the courts, they are just going to keep
pushing and shoving us until there won't be any freedom left in
America.... All conservative Americans have a stake in this battle,
because all believers who don't want to hide their faith under the
mattress will one day be in the same situation. Indeed, such is
already often the case when it comes to open practice or showing of
religious faith in the America of AD 2004.
-- John G. Boulet, M.D.
BEN IS RIGHT
Re: Ben Stein's Riefenstahl
Madness:
I just read Ben Stein's article mentioning the recognition of
Leni Riefenstahl at the Oscars. I too was thoroughly disgusted.
Having spent five of my teen years under German occupation
(1940-1945) while living in Norway I was probably too forgiving of
the gaffe. I attributed it to youth and short memories. I am almost
82 years old and the memories of those years are nothing to
memorialize, except as the scary lesson that if we do not learn
from history we are bound to repeat it. I do not hear much about
the fact that we are fighting WWIII.
-- Edith S. Payne
While I can empathize with Ben Stein's howl at Riefenstahl's recognition at the Oscars, I had a different reaction.
This was an uncharacteristically honest moment for Hollywood. Yes, Riefenstahl's politics were abominable. (As is the case for many current stars.) But not only was her filmmaking effective, it was seminal. The dirty secret in Hollywood is just how copied Triumph of the Will is. Including her in the salute was almost a tacit admission of how influential she still is. Just because you're on the wrong side of history doesn't mean you don't know how to use your medium.
To see Hollywood admit in public how important Riefenstahl is to
them was, in a perverse way, refreshing.
-- Craig Good
Emeryville, California
LOOK WHO'S TALKING
Re: James Bowman's Repression
Night:
James Bowman remarks in his Repression Night piece that "It
would probably never occur to a plumber or a grocery bagger to take
for granted his own qualifications to evaluate those of the leader
of the Western world -- and to find them wanting." Bowman must not
get out much if he believes this. Politics is the mother's milk of
lively conversation among plumbers, grocery baggers, auto glass
repairers, meter readers and forklift operators throughout the
land. Very often they are as knowledgeable -- and at least as wise
-- in their views and opinions as not only Hollywood's elite, but
the media elite, the Ivy League elite or any other elite you can
name. They are Americans, after all, and as Michel-Guillaume de
Crèvecoeur wrote, in the far long ago, of farmers, fishermen
and frontiersmen in Sketches of Eighteenth Century
America, "... they carefully read the newspapers, enter into
every political disquisition, freely blame governors and others."
Nothing has changed in 250 years.
-- Chris Mark
A good piece. I would only point out that the plumber and grocery
bagger will certainly evaluate the qualifications of the leader of
the Western World. It happens this year they just need to step into
a voting booth.
-- John McGinnis
Bowman may be a scholar, but he isn't smart enough to buy a
television like mine -- one with a channel selector! I used mine
and didn't suffer through a second of the self-serving Academy
Awards. To quote George C. Scott: "The (Academy Awards) ceremonies
are a two-hour meat parade, a public display with contrived
suspense for economic reasons." To expect anything else is truly
dopey!
-- Tom Marcucci
RICH MAN, POOR MAN
Re: Brandon Crocker's The
Immigration Things (Part II) :
Congratulations Mr. Crocker on your success! You obviously are fortunate enough to live in a section of San Diego that is rich enough not to be besieged by illegal aliens. Having lived for many years (including the year of the first amnesty in 1986 and several years thereafter) in several parts of town that are not so fortunate, I may be a little more familiar with the actual (as distinguished from official) immigration policies of the U.S. government and their consequences where most people live.
Mr. Crocker can't understand why so many people believe a guest worker program will be an amnesty in all but name. What he doesn't understand is that the government has always lied about illegal immigration and lied about the first amnesty. The real policy is to help rich people get cheap, obsequious laborers while forcing their less affluent neighbors to live with them. The job of the INS agents that rove the county is to see that the illegals are off the streets of the rich neighborhoods at night. The neighbors get to live with the trash, the crime, and even get to subsidize the illegals' children (which is the only reason their labor is so cheap).
The first amnesty sounded like a good idea when it was proposed. Illegals who had been here for a long time and had jobs and paid taxes would be legalized, while the government would actually start enforcing our borders and fining the rich people who would not stop luring more illegals here by offering them jobs. Once it got through Congress, the amnesty applied to illegals who could produce easily forged rent receipts showing that they had been here a few months during the preceding year. And it became extremely obvious in the next few years that the government had never intended to keep its end of the bargain.
In fact, where most of the illegals before amnesty had been single men, immediately afterwards there was a massive wave of entire families moving across the border. That was all during the first Bush administration; the problem got worse and spread nationwide under Clinton.
So those of us who have had to live with illegal immigration
know that America's rich want an amnesty and that politicians of
both parties are willing to engage in any deception to get one.
-- D. Duggan
NO KERRY TRIFECTA
Re: Enemy Central's Career
Moves:
Anytime Naomi Wolf earns an EOW it is well. She being the arch
feminist and Alpha male adviser to two metrosexual losers that she
is. How this Feminazi is seen as credible to anyone with a half a
brain is even more incredible. In this case, John F-ing Kerry lost
his chance at a hat trick to a better man.
-- GMS
Media, Penn
To the north, to the south, to the east, to the west: Hail John
Kerry:
Standard bearer of the party of litigators, lay-abouts, and
lotharios
-- John C. Driscoll
Bend, Oregon
SEEING IS BELIEVING
Re: James Bowman's review of The Passion of the Christ:
Words fail me as I read Bowman's review of this powerful movie. I cannot believe his smugness in suggesting that Mel Gibson basically "overdid" the violence in his presentation of the sufferings of Christ, somehow exaggerating the bloodiness and horror of the experience. Having read through the years some of the forensic analyses of the events described in the Gospel narratives, as well as analyses of other ancient Roman documentation of how scourgings and crucifixions were performed, I believe that Bowman suffers from an extreme case of naiveté. (See here, for starters.) I, for one, believe Mel Gibson has stated in interviews (adhering to the accepted teachings of Scripture) that our salvation was purchased through the sacrificial shedding of blood, the righteous for the unrighteous. The significance of "the blood" can never be understated in Christian thought and teachings, and we are truly shown here that it was not merely a pin prick!
As for the garden of Gethsemane scene and the depiction of
Jesus' agony in the hours immediately leading up to his arrest, the
Scriptures themselves depict the fact that he actually sweated
blood, a rare but not unheard of symptom of extreme stress. Our
Lord knew full well what lay before Him and yet fully complied with
the demands of God's righteous justice on our behalf even to death
on the cross. I for one will always remember the powerful emotions
and drama of what my Lord went through on my behalf in a way I
never could have appreciated before seeing it openly displayed
before my eyes on film.
-- Patrick A. Henry
Lawrenceville, Georgia
FREEDOM FOLLIES
OK, I've had it with your French words, quotes, whatever you call
them. I'm just a simple IT person with a BS degree, but back in the
sixties we didn't have to take a lot of liberal arts subjects if we
were tech people. I have no idea what folie de grandeur,
epater les bourgeois, or epater les mean. Nor
should I have to. Why can't you people just get down to the common
level of we grass roots conservatives and say what you mean without
the French nonsense?
I know you're smart and intellectual or you wouldn't be writing
for the Spectator. You don't have to prove it with your
cute little foreign language references.
-- Robert Croft
topics:
Taxes, Health Care, Television, Religion, Abortion, Hollywood, Constitution, Law, Supreme Court, Immigration
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
The speech our President should make.
A noted economist fires back.
How political can you get?
You might have missed it, but it was boomed in January.
By George Will
Farcical feminism is a decades-old phenomenon, as George Will's essay from 1970 reminds us.
Home |About |Contributors |Advertise |Donate |Privacy Policy |Contact
The American Spectator Foundation is the 501(c)(3) organization responsible for publishing The American Spectator magazine and training aspiring journalists who espouse traditional American values. Your contributions are tax deductible to the extent permitted by law. Each donor receives a year-end summary of their giving for tax purposes.
Copyright 2012, The American Spectator. All rights reserved.