9.13.06 @ 12:01AM
SHOOT THE MESSENGER
Re: David Hogberg’s Losing Senate Races:
Your article stated:
“Although Democratic State Treasurer Bob Casey has led in all the polls since February, in recent weeks Senator Rick Santorum has narrowed his lead to single digits. That combined with a devastating performance in his debate with Casey on Meet The Press, and everything seemed to be going Santorum’s way. So what to make of the new USAToday/Gallup poll showing Casey with an 18 point lead? I’m inclined to dismiss it as a fluke…”
What you’re missing from your analysis is the fact that the link
to the USA Today/Gallup poll you provided is dated August 31st,
three days before the MTP debate aired. Certainly, the
poll was conducted before the results were published on the
Mr. Hogberg surely must either be Jewish or Catholic. He exhibits an excellently honed sense of “everything is going to turn out wrong.” My guess is that he also has a finely honed sense of guilt to go along with his pessimism.
He is obviously correct regarding the “safe” seats in the Senate. They are so obvious that it would be hard to miss on them. He then takes almost every race where the polls show the Democrat in the lead and awards that race the “leans Dem” category. He then takes every race where the Republican has a narrow lead and finds a reason why the polls are wrong and the state really leans Dem. He takes the one race where the Dem challenger to the incumbent Republican may actually be the more conservative candidate (Who could possibly be more liberal that Lincoln Chafee?) and awards this “who the heck cares” race to the Dems. He breaks his singular predictive trend with the Allen race in Virginia, where the whole trumped up “macaca” fiasco is Dem and media driven with the help of the GOP’s girly man brigade.
David, I am afraid that just sheer dumb luck will mean that some
of the GOP candidates that now lead the polls will stumble into
office this November. Pure chance means that not ALL of the
unpleasant surprises will discomfit the Republican in the race. Now
I dislike the GOP pinup girl, Rosie Scenario, as much as I dislike
the purveyors of constant doom and gloom, but could I suggest you
change whatever it is that you are drinking and smoking? In the
meantime, please arrange for someone to be in charge of keeping all
sharp objects out of your reach.
— Ken Shreve
I can’t tell you much about the other U.S. Senate races but as long
as Bob Casey is former Governor Bob Casey’s son, Rick Santorum has
a good chance of beating him. Young Casey is the same insufferable
stuffed shirt his father was. He’s not about to get out to meet the
grubby voters and tell them why they should vote for him. His
campaign slogan will be the same (unspoken) one that his father ran
on which got him about 2 victories in 5 or 6 attempts at public
office and that is: “Vote for me because I’m Bob Casey and I know
what’s best for you.” And he won’t even get that message across as
well as his father did because he thinks he is entitled to the
office by the Law of Primogeniture.
— Bob Keiser
Wilkes Barre, Pennsylvania
As the Gipper would say…”Here you go again.” Once more we are assailed with predictions of the GOP’s demise and Bush’s swan song as President. While some races probably are obvious, others are pure conjecture. While the Republican Congress has acted more liberal than conservative, don’t write the Republicans off yet. As usual the polls bring hope for a Democrat takeover, but the last two elections proved them dead wrong. Even with a hostile media, which has become a bigger enemy than the terrorists to our freedoms, spewing forth their poison, the American public has seen through all that. The point is, do we really think the Democrats can do any better than the Republicans? Do we really want another Vietnam type defeat and can we really afford such? Are the cut and runners going to set our national policy (remember Somalia)? That will be on the minds of a lot of people.
The enemy knows America’s resolve will waver after a period of time, that it will look like we are in a stalemate, that the media and the liberals are their best allies, but has everyone read the mood of this nation right? Sure we’re tired of this conflict, as does happen with war, but are we willing to give the enemy a victory by default? Are we going to let the likes of Hillary Clinton speak for us, promise a utopia where there isn’t one? I really don’t think so.
No, I think when people go to the polls, they are going to remember Sept. 11th, our borders, and many other things. Then they’re going to realize that for all his faults, Bush is much more preferable than what the Democrats are offering and to put in a Democrat majority will bring about a disaster in this nation along the lines of 9-11. It will give victory to an enemy whose sole purpose for existence is pure hatred of the West, with the U.S. as the head Satan.
Now, I live in Vermont and that prediction about Sanders is
probably right (who really knows?). However, he will be as useless
as a senator as he was in the House because this person is so far
out of the mainstream — he will merely be replacing Jeffords as
the Senate fool. Like Howard Dean, he’s all smoke and mirrors. For
let’s face it, the truth is the Republicans will have lost their
power through stupidity rather than the Democrats gaining it
through having a better plan.
— Pete Chagnon
I wonder why the GOP would spend money in Rhode Island trying for a
Lincoln Chafee win, so what if a Dem wins. I don’t see where you
would be able to tell the difference. Chafee is a Republican in
name only and he needs to go. In fact all of the RINO’s that vote
most of the time with the Dems need to go.
— Elaine Kyle
Re: William Tucker’s Overprivileged Children:
William Tucker’s review of The Looming Tower by Lawrence Wright was very well done, and I look forward to reading the book. However, Tucker makes a comment near the end of his review that calls for a response.
Tucker boldly states that “our conflict with Islam is not a war against a whole civilization. The jihadists are despised as much in their own countries as they are in the West.” I ask, where is the evidence to support this view? As Robert Spencer, Andrew Bostom, David Yerushalmi and others have persuasively argued, the ideology of jihad is rooted in Islamic theology, law, and culture. Unlike Communism, which Tucker analogizes to, “radical” Islam is not a purely intellectual construct but an organic outgrowth of Islam itself. Hence, whereas there was always a deep tension between communism and the pre-existing social and religious fabric of the countries that made up the Soviet Union, no similar tension exists between “radical” Islam and the Islamic countries where it thrives. Contrary to Tucker’s argument, “radical” Islam is not some alien ideology that is being foisted on the Muslim masses.
Speaking of these masses, the available evidence shows that they are quite sympathetic to the jihadists, and cheer each new act of anti-western terror. The notion that the average Muslim “despises” the jihadist is nothing more than wishful thinking on Tucker’s part.
As desperately as Tucker might try, there can be no denying the
“clash of civilizations” between Islam and the West.
— Steven M. Warshawsky
New York, New York
Thanks to Mr. Tucker for this enlightening review of what looks to be a very informative book on the 9/11 hijackers and how we got to this place in time. After watching the two-night debut of ABC’s The Path to 9-11, his book will fill in more of the blanks that allowed the 9/11 perfect storm to form.
I hope the author Lawrence Wright is correct that we are at war
with “a Muslim intellegentsia” rather than an entire civilization.
Whatever the truth of our current situation, I plan to buy the
Wright book. We need more trusted writers to dig out what’s really
going on so that we can defeat this terrible, bloodthirsty
— Deborah Durkee
Re: Jagadeesh Gokhale’s Bankrupt Thinking on U.S. Bankruptcy:
Please. You don’t need “several carefully calibrated computer analyses” to show “how the promise to provide many trillions of dollars to today’s citizens — of which $67 trillion are unfunded — would spell disaster in years to come.” The mental arithmetic the good nuns of the Sisters of Charity taught me many years ago in 7th grade would suffice.
And yes, the “disaster to come” is call bankruptcy. And because
the odds are good that 1) the political resolve to void this fate
is not there and 2) we will arrive at this bankrupt state by first
gong through inflation and/or currency devaluation(s), prudent
people will devote a certain percentage of their portfolio to
— Peter Skurkiss
How could America be going bankrupt? Every time I max out a credit
card, I simply get another one.
— David Govett
LET ME RESPOND
Re: Reader Mail’s Remembering All Too Well:
Pete Chagnon’s rebuttal to my defense of the pre-WWII isolationist movement consisted mainly of “Oh Yeah” and “Sez Who” but no facts. Emotionalism aside, my point was that the isolationists feared that military necessity wouldn’t be the only reason their sons would die if America went to war. Regarding the Philippine campaign, in 1944 Roosevelt was running for re-election to a fourth term. General MacArthur was a favorite of the political right wing back home, perceived as a strong leader type. They charged that Roosevelt was holding MacArthur back, denying him supplies and support in his valiant attempt to defeat the Japanese.
MacArthur convinced Roosevelt that America had a sacred duty to liberate the Philippines. Starting in October 1944, MacArthur returned to the Philippines but wasn’t content with the capture of Leyte and Luzon, he decided that all Japanese in the Philippine archipelago must go. When General Yamashita retreated into the mountains of Luzon, MacArthur wouldn’t settle for just bottling him up. Until the end of the war in August 1945, over 40 amphibious landings were made throughout the island chain to root out the Japanese from every foot of Philippine soil. Yet, thousands of Japanese soldiers in the Philippines were still fighting almost a year later and didn’t surrender until after Japan accepted the Potsdam Declaration.
Was all this a military necessity? Were the Philippines the key strategic point in the drive to invade Japan? If so, what was the point of the invasions of Okinawa and Iwo Jima in 1945? In the battle of Leyte Gulf, the American Navy effectively destroyed the Japanese Navy thus isolating Japanese forces in the Philippines from further support of the Japanese war effort. And this occurred 10 months before Japan surrendered. In the Luzon campaign, 100,000 Filipinos in Manila died, victims of Japanese atrocities and American bombing and artillery. Did thousands of Americans and Filipinos die to keep MacArthur occupied and out of Roosevelt’s political hair?
Regarding Pearl Harbor, Roosevelt was determined to throw
American support behind the Dutch and British defense of their Far
East colonies. He and the Joint Chiefs anticipated the Japanese
attack in the East Indies and Roosevelt was in a quandary as to how
he could justify American military intervention to the public. The
surprise attack on Pearl Harbor solved that political problem.
Regarding Chagnon’s charge that the Japanese were imperialists,
check the history books and find out how America originally
acquired the Philippines as a territory.
— Patrick Skurka
San Ramon, California
In reference to Jim Bjaloncik’s letter in reference to mine, I couldn’t care less about Lou Dobbs. As for your comments about Paul Krugman, ditto ad infinitum. And I’ll admit that I’m not familiar with Dobbs’ allegedly “reprehensible” and “demagogic” comments concerning illegal immigrants, because I don’t watch him. He’s an idiot. I am willing to bet, however, that he didn’t call for a Hispanic genocide or ethnic cleansing. I suspect they were of the “let’s stop them at the border and send the one’s here back” variety, and I know of no other country in the world where that would be considered a radical opinion.
Border enforcement is, to the best of my knowledge, a universal value. It is the norm. Those who wish to depart from the norm are the ones with the case to make. They are the one’s, in a rational world, who risk the moral scrutiny and suspicion of motives.
Those who want our immigration laws to be ignored are no
different than those who want our drug laws, property laws, etc…
ignored. It breeds contempt for the law, and I, frankly, am
concerned about admitting millions of people into this country
whose first lesson is that our laws aren’t important. I’m willing
to pay a few cents more for a peach to avoid that. I guess that
makes me a xenophobe. What a world.
— Scott Stambaugh
Murphy, North Carolina
Wow. If you want to find out which of your regular correspondents
is eligible for Medicare, just write a letter bad-mouthing Franklin
Roosevelt (as Patrick Skurka did) and watch who rises to the bait
(as Pete Chagnon did).
— Glen Hoffing
Shamong, New Jersey
Perhaps one of the most important or the recent letters printed was
R. Goodson’s eloquent message yesterday. Damn, did he (she?) nail
it! Well said, and, unfortunately, too true. Worth re-reading.
— J. Frost
Numbers mean nothing in war except who is left, but for the record:
Casualties lost PER WEEK in WWII: 2,000. (Times 4 years, you do the math.)
Casualties lost in the first couple of HOURS at the start of the invasion of Normandy: 4,000. Several thousand were lost during a TRAINING exercise before the invasion. (Imagine what the French senator would do with that!!)
Casualties during the “Civil” War: 600,000; only 200,000 from enemy action, the rest disease.
Do we have the stomach to take such losses again? I doubt it and
the left will dance in the blood to defeat us. Apparently however
we have consented by default/consensus to accept such losses in the
next terror attack rather than do what is necessary to stop it by
taking the fight to the enemy and win. Several of my favorite
authors who write military Sci-Fi prost that in situations like
ours huge losses to the civilian population are as necessary as the
military itself to force the majority of the population to get on
board with survival. Wish like everything it was not true but in
the historic sense they are more than likely correct. I cringe at
the future we are creating for ourselves; it does however seem the
human condition, fantasy and denial winning over reality every
time. But then I am an old pessimistic trooper to whom the solution
to every problem looks like a hammer…
— Craig C. Sarver
Behind Enemy Lines
Mr. Babbin is, as usual, correct in his assessment of the state of the world five years after the assault on the United States that led to the immediate deaths of nearly three thousand people and the loss of several thousand more since. The actions of Osama Bin Laden and his organization should have been a wake up call, a call to arms. Obviously it was not.
What has changed? A bunch of vicious, oppressive theocrats were driven out of power in a third-world backwater, yet the object of our manhunt has not been caught. A brutal, vicious dictator, who should have been deposed after invading a neighboring country, was finally deposed. But, the country remains in turmoil and the pressure that 140,000 U.S. troops were supposed to bring to bear upon a potential much more dangerous foe, Iran, has had little effect. The Iranian nuclear program and that of North Korea are still progressing, unchecked. Our foes are busily consolidating an alliance in plain view of the entire world. Hostile nation states boldly make threats to annihilate the US and our allies. And we do little to mitigate these threats.
The situation in the world is akin to an out of control boiler.
Pressure has been building up for years. For the last twelve years,
we have dealt with minor steam leaks and suffered small burns. Now
we are faced with waiting for the boiler to blow, very possibly
destroying us, or opening the relief valve and suffering serious
burns. And it is becoming
increasingly evident that our leaders do not have the foresight, or the courage, to do that. So we will wait. And, eventually, the pressure of history will force action upon us. If we survive is still to be seen.
It will not matter who is in the White House or which party
holds the Congress, for war will come. It has been coming for
twenty-five years and the warning signs have largely been ignored.
It will prove impossible to ignore the earth-shattering KaBoom when
it finally arrives full blown. There is still time to avert the
explosion, but dynamic action is needed to open the relief valve.
Unfortunately, no one in a position of power, in this country,
seems willing to face the future head-on and take the actions
to stave off the explosion to come.
So we continue, waiting for something to jar us awake.
Unfortunately, it fails to rouse our leaders for more than a few
moments. Too few moments, unfortunately, to deal with the problem
before it becomes a catastrophe. Hopefully, we will be able to
revisit this discussion five years from now. I hope so, don’t
— Michael Tobias
Ft. Lauderdale, Florida
Re: Ralph R. Reiland’s Repression in the Age of Liberty:
The question is no longer whether Turkey will join Europe but,
rather, whether Europe will join Turkey.
— Danny Lemieux
Sign up for our weekly newsletter:
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
By John Corry
By Mark Steyn
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
By Mark Steyn
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
By Brit Hume
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
H/T to National Review Online
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 2013, The American Spectator. All rights reserved.