9.29.06 @ 12:01AM
Re: Jeffrey Lords’ Acts of Submission:
Mr. Lord — Great article. We must remember all these facts when
voting in November. Our lives and the future of America depend on
it and the lives of many in the Middle East. If we don’t take
voting seriously there will be another Cambodia/Korean-type
slaughter because of the Dems cut & run (appeasement)! Thank
you for this timely article.
An excellent analysis of post World War II Democratic foreign
policy. I suggest the author could submit a supplemental piece
addressing modern Democratic politics post Desert Storm. The modern
Democrats have reached new highs in terms of foreign policy
— Doug Santo
And, as if right on cue, we can add this bullet point: *2006 - 09/27, it was reported today on Fox News, that Charlie “you don’t call MY President the Devil in MY district” Rangel, would be only too happy, if the Democrats win the House, to use his position, then, as Chairman of Ways and Means, to de-fund the war in Iraq.
Let’s see, Charlie, would that be before or after, you impeach
— Mike Showalter
In his excellent explanation of the Democratic Party’s decline,
Jeffrey Lord passes over former President Carter a little too
quickly. This idiot — Carter, that is — did a good deal more than
savage the defense establishment; he brought in his Naval Academy
classmate, Stansfield Turner, as CIA director. Turner proceeded to
eliminate some 900 covert agents around the world, explaining that
we need not rely on such unsavory elements for the intelligence we
needed, that we would henceforth depend for all we had to know on
our national technical means of intelligence gathering, i.e.,
satellites; he did not explain how satellites were going to
infiltrate governments and groups around the world who wished us
ill, and of course we were not able to do so. Turner certainly did
not do this without, I feel sure, the concurrence of his feckless
commander in chief. To this day, this stupidity continues to cause
the United States and, indeed, the rest of the world, a misery it
does not deserve.
— John G. Hubbell
Great article. Too bad most Americans will never read it. I’ve been a Democrat turned Republican for the past 46 years. Yes, I voted for John F. Kennedy, but by the time Lyndon Johnson ran for President, I had achieved enough maturity to look at both the man and what he stood for.
Democrats are not only a disaster on national security; they
condone the actions of the many traitors in their leadership.
— R. Goodson
Vero Beach, Florida
Jeffrey Lord offers an excellent long-view summary of the
party-of-defeat’s pattern of submission. Interestingly, the word
“Islam” does not mean “peace”; it means “submission.”
“Acts of Submission” by Jeffrey Lord was one of the finest articles
I’ve read in a while.
Re: Philip Klein’s Republican Disease:
I have been longing to read a column like this for several
years. Now if only the Republicans would read it and take heed. I
voted for President Bush twice, not only for his strong stand on
fighting terrorism, but also for his policies on partial
privatization of Social Security, school vouchers, tort reform,
judicial appointments, his position on stem cell research and his
pro-life advocacy. I did NOT vote for him so that he could sign
onto the free-speech-limiting McCain-Feingold bill or the huge
entitlement programs for education and prescription drugs. For some
reason, the Republican Party leaders think we all voted for
President Bush based primarily on national security, but it simply
isn’t true. From what I have heard, read and observed, it is a huge
disappointment to millions of Republicans that the President has
not maintained a more conservative agenda and that the Republican
Senators have not supported him in what we all voted for him to
implement. At least the House of Representatives has it right, for
the most part.
— Sue Gray
Mr. Klein has certainly put his finger on a large part of the GOP’s problem, or more properly, conservatives’ problem with the GOP. There seems no chance that the GOP will ever understand that liberals hate them because they totally disrespect them, and no amount of “making nice” is going to change that fact. There is as much chance of the liberal elite changing its mind about Republicans as there is that the Shia Imams will start preaching about how wonderful the Jews and Israel are, or that the leaders of the Sunni Wahhabist madrassas will start teaching their young charges to rat out their brother jihadists to the American military. When conservative activists stop criticizing members of the liberal establishments during the day and then partying with them at night and exclaiming how wonderful they are and how nice they are, then maybe a step will have been taken in the right direction.
One critique, however, of Mr. Klein’s otherwise cogent article.
Mr. Pence has forfeited any right to be identified with smaller
government by his total cave in to the liberal elite within and
without the GOP on the immigration and border issue. His proposal
would give the open borders crowd and El Presidente Boosh virtually
everything that they want. Pence simply uses different words in his
proposal. I guess that is why a good thesaurus is an indispensable
thing for a politician.
— Ken Shreve
As Mike Pence put it: “We will never win by being them, we will only win by being us.” Even Mike doesn’t get it entirely. He, too, is part of the Washington system. Witness his stand on illegal immigration.
Politicians, by their very nature, will always try to buy our
votes with our own money, extracted by the threat of personal ruin
by the government.
— R. Goodson
Vero Beach, Florida
SPEAKING FOR KEN
Re: Hal Colebatch’s Imam Livingstone, I Presume?:
I read Mr. Colebatch’s article on the mosque in Newham with interest. With interest, but also with disappointment, as I’m afraid the article in badly informed in most respects.
As yet, there is no planning application for a mosque at the West Ham site. Developers are apparently working up a scheme that may, or may not, be granted planning permission by the planning authority, the Thames Gateway Urban Development Corporation (UDC). Until a proposal is even aired, it’s pure speculation as to how large a building they propose.
Ken Livingstone has not, to my knowledge, said a word about the scheme. The quotes you attribute to him were originally attributed to a bureaucrat by the scheme’s planners in the London Development Agency, Ken Livingstone’s Agency for business and jobs, in a badly sourced and inaccurate article in London’s Evening Standard newspaper.
There is no planning application for a mosque pending. Ken
Livingstone hasn’t said a word about the scheme. If a proposal is
forthcoming it may, or may not, receive planning permission. If a
planning application is agreed, then the size of the scheme may be
subject of planning restrictions. And it may or not then be built.
But then that’s not really as interesting is it?
— Cllr. James Butler
Labour Group Press Officer
Re: R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr.’s Slur Politics:
Here’s how George Allen can put an immediate end to the racial-slur imbroglio in which he is quagmired.
Media inquisitioner: “Mr. Allen, people who knew you in your past say you have used the n-word. Have you?”
Allen: “So, to rephrase your question, you’re asking ‘Am I now or have I ever been an utterer of the word nigger?’ And my answer is this: ‘At long last, sir, have you no shame?’”
Most reporters will immediately recognize that Allen is casting
them as McCarthyites and portraying himself as the new Joseph
Welch, heroic and lionized defender against Tail Gunner Joe’s
accusations of Communist party affiliation. It will be
breath-taking how fast they drop their Allen-as-racist story line
in order to avoid the McCarthy taint.
— Rich Smith
Yucca Valley, California
Re: Paul Chesser’s Wall Costs Worth It:
I very much enjoyed your article on The American Spectator online and really have no sympathy for business people whose success has depended upon illegal labor. I own farmland in Illinois, by the way, and am inclined to be sympathetic to those who earn their living from the land and provide wonderful food products. However, I am a military daughter and wife (Dad and husband now retired) and I’ve lived in England and Germany. Our food is so cheap it’s ridiculous. And so plentiful.
When I voice my objections to being overrun by illegal aliens
and people sneeringly ask if I’m willing to pay more for my fruit
and vegetables I tell ‘em “you bet I am.” And I most certainly am.
For all the bellyaching by the farmers whose crops are rotting in
the fields and orchards, did they never stop to think of the tax
burden they were placing on their fellow Americans? Did they really
think people would put up with it forever and ever? I’d bet dollars
to doughnuts that even now somewhere some enterprising soul is
designing a machine or machines that can harvest all or virtually
all of the crops said to be rotting on the ground or on the vine.
Maybe a drastic (I hope) reduction in cheap labor will spur
production and development of said machines and keep the produce
Until then, yes, I’ll be happy to pay the price.
Thanks very much for your article.
— Pamela Burke
Sure the price of lettuce will go up. Pears and apples too. But those higher costs pale in comparison to the amount taxpayers save by not having to fund
1. health care for illegal aliens
2. foodstamps for illegal aliens
3. rent subsidies for illegal aliens
4. education costs for illegal alien kids
Other tangible benefits include reduced need (hopefully, elimination) of ESL classes and bi-lingual voting materials.
The bottom line is we pay more for some goods, but it is more
than offset by the reduced burden on taxpayers.
While Mr. Chesser does mention some of the costs to our society of illegal immigration, he significantly leaves out huge costs to our social compact.
Item; how much does it cost government at all levels to provide bilingual services at police stations, and hospitals, and schools, and court houses, and government office buildings, and voting stations, and etc.?
Item; how much has it cost in dollars and human suffering to look the other way as the extremely violent gang, MS-13 has expanded exponentially in both membership and activities?
Item; how much has it cost our society to fund obstetrics services to illegals who then give birth to a child on our soil that immediately becomes an American citizen with all current rights and privileges, including the right to guarantee his/her parents can stay here and become citizens?
Item; how much has it cost our society in serenity and civility when we go in an American business and can not successfully transact business because we, the customer, can not speak Spanish, or some other foreign language?
Item; what are the current costs in providing jail space for illegals committing criminal acts, and what are the additional costs of this crime increase on the judicial system of America each year?
Yes, labor costs will have to go up to attract American citizens to jobs in agriculture and construction and some other areas. But how much can be saved in taxes for the items that I have listed above? Oh, and since there will now be additional jobs for American workers, we can advise welfare clients that it is time for them to become productive members of society. Yes, the liberals will scream that the welfare class can’t get to the jobs, or would need childcare, or something. Well the illegals seem to have overcome these hurdles, so can perfectly able American citizens currently living on the dole.
One more thing. How many government employees can be laid off
because of all these changes and how much of our tax money can be
saved in that manner? Oh, wait, that would shrink the size of
government. We certainly can’t have that.
— Ken Shreve
If you think a few cents more for lettuce is expensive…how about calculating the cost of the E coli illness spread throughout the country. If you think Illegals living in squalor with different customs than Americans has no effect then I suggest you keep eating your spinach!
Not to mention augmenting the costs we citizens throw in to help corporate big wigs keep more of their ill gotten gains, like $ for health care, schooling, housing etc. No, don’t count on the wall being built as the media has an equally egregious agenda much like the mercenary Republicans and the voting agenda of do nothing Democrats.
Alas all three groups, have elected to abandon the principles of
this country and the rule of law. By the time they ever actually
build that wall I for one will hope to be on the outside of it as
the country falls to chaos, mass overcrowding, crime and economic
— Mary E. Burke
I must take issue with Judy Beumler’s statement in her letter regarding Quin Hillyer’s “Saints Alive!” stating: “The (NFL team) owners are wealthy men who should pay for their own stadiums.” Not that I don’t agree 100 percent with this assertion, but unfortunately what should happen and what does happen are often two very different things.
Dare to ask an NFL owner to pay even a small fraction of the cost of a new stadium these days and he’ll simply find another city that’s willing to do it all for free — even one that didn’t support their last team. In at least one case they will also use that taxpayer money to bail out the owner’s failing businesses. The rest of the NFL owners will overwhelmingly approve the move and the new city’s sports columnists and NFL spin machine will make darn sure the history books say the team was moved because the former city “would not build them a stadium” or some such nonsense.
If the old city is lucky enough to get another team it will be after it is agreed that the cost of the new stadium is placed firmly on the backs of the taxpayers. Only then is the original city granted a putrid expansion team with no hope of on-field success for many years to come.
Ms. Beumler should be glad she’s not paying her hard-earned tax dollars in Baltimore, Cleveland, Houston, Nashville, etc.
Other NFL cities beware. The Saints seem to be secure for now,
but for how much longer? The Superdome is downright ancient when
measured in stadium-years, and the NFL doesn’t bother to hide the
fact that they desperately want a team in Los Angeles…
— Todd Stoffer
Pro-CHOICE is pro-ABORTION. There is NO difference. The pro-choice position is the woman has the absolute and sole decision making authority to kill her unborn baby. And NO it isn’t her body. The unborn baby has its own UNIQUE DNA code and is an UNIQUE human being. I am one of “those sanctimonious keepers of “morality”” that is very concerned about the killing of millions of human beings by pro-CHOICE women. Furthermore, it is society’s decision which type of sexual acts it will recognize and what types of marriage will be recognized. Also, sexual acts are NOT under the control of a person’s DNA code. There is NO DNA sequence that makes a person engage in any type of sexual act (heterosexual, homosexual, pedophilia, bestiality, etc.).
If you make the argument that human’s sexual acts are controlled
by their DNA codes than ALL sexual acts are normal and should he
encouraged. Look at the previous list and decide if that is what
you want. This argument is the central tenet of the pro-homosexual
marriage position. But unless you are willing to allow ALL types of
marriages, by using the pro-homosexual marriage talking points you
reveal yourself to be a bigot. You are a bigot because you are
excluding all other type of marriages except for heterosexual and
homosexual marriages. Oh, and by the way, a morally bankrupt person
that is strong on national defense might not have our nation’s best
interest as the touchstone of his actions. I agree I really hope I
do get what I wish, a strong moral person whose central position is
how best to protect the USA from its many enemies.
— Wade Smith
Re: Diane Smith’s letter (under “Still Smiling”) in Reader Mail’s Shakespeare Rehabilitation:
Diane, my hat is off to any Texan who can survive South San
Francisco, especially one carrying a “jug of high octane brandy”!
I’d be honored to hold the door for you!
— Mike Showalter
Re: Christopher Orlet’s Blame it on Baghdad:
I liked the Lucy Charlie Brown story. Like Charlie Brown who
gets a stomachache when Lucy speaks, I get a stomachache when
George Bush speaks.
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?
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.