THEN THERE'S HIS FRIEND?
Re: Quin Hillyer's The Worst Republican Senator:
Quin, I agree with everything that you accuse Lindsey Graham of in your column. I agree that it is all bad, from a Republican standpoint. I do not, however, see that any of it is at any variance in the least with the stands and actions of John McCain in the Senate. In fact, I believe that you would be hard pressed to show that Graham was doing anything other than following McCain's lead. Where are your proofs that Lindsey was leading and McCain following on any of those issues.
I would argue that McCain was much more of a mover and shaker in the Gang of 14 than was Graham. I would argue that McCain was much more the leader when it came to the proposed closing of Gitmo, and the forced changing of interrogation techniques for terror detainees, and termination of rendition, etc. John McCain has given and is scheduled to give (I understand) speeches to the same Hispanic immigrant activist groups, stressing the same agenda, and same digs against Conservatives, as has Graham. It was McCain that dropped the F-bomb on Sen. Cornyn for daring to speak against the McCain-Kennedy Immigrant Reform (Amnesty) proposal. McCain is leading and Graham following on the ridiculous Global Warming Socialist fiasco that his pal Al Gore is married to.
Quin, I would argue that Lindsey is doing nothing more than carrying McCain's water for him. As I see it, the one issue where Lindsey truly MAY have stepped out ahead of McCain was the battle to defeat Jim Haynes for a spot on the 4th Circuit. And what does all this get Graham? Why it gets him the Attorney General slot in a McCain administration, I would imagine. That and/or a Supreme Court nomination from Big John.
Just as an aside, how is Graham and/or McCain worse than Hagel, or Snowe, or a handful of others. I would opine that it is a mighty close race indeed, and at best it would require a photo to determine the order of finish.
Of course I realize that I am supposed to now go out and reward McCain (and all his buddies like Graham) by helping promote him to the White House. In a pig's rectum. May the fleas of a thousand camel infest all their...er, um, armpits.
-- Ken Shreve
Thanks to Quin Hillyer for the excellent article on Senator Graham. Is there any reason why we should believe that he will not be President McCain's Attorney General?
-- Jerry Magri
Senator Lindsey Graham's battering at the capable hands of Quin Hillyer is more than well deserved. I've often been amazed that a major news network like Fox, and particularly Sean Hannity, when pressed to bring out a "conservative" to discuss a major political news item, sought out Graham, who would stumble-bum his way through the discussion. Then the good Senator would turn around and do something mindless like participate in the "Gang of 14."
I do note, however, that Graham hasn't appeared on Fox in some time (as far as I've been able to deduce). Perhaps someone at the network came to realize what a total fraud this man is?
-- Jim Bjaloncik
If Lindsey Graham really thinks that Ted Kennedy is one of the most principled men he has ever met then it is a crying shame that he wasn't in the same car that Kennedy was driving in 1969. Who needs somebody so lacking in judgment. Bring on the Great GOP Defeat of '08 and send McCain, Graham and their fellow losers and turncoats packing once and for all.
-- Christopher Holland
Quin Hillyer's article on Sen. Lindsey Graham is the first good description I have seen about Graham's positions. I hope you will continue to expose him and his attitudes which are detrimental to sound conservative positions.
-- Tom Parvin
MORONS CONFINED TO QUARTERS
Re: R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr.'s Turning Voters into Morons:
Was R. Emmett Tyrrell trying to make conservatives feel better by saying John McCain "is only wrong on one" of the four issues that animate the moron vote?
25% moron is hardly inspiring.
-- Arnold Ahlert
Boca Raton, Florida
When it comes to the general intelligence of the electorate and the "moron vote," one is wise to recall the words of Nicolas M. Butler, "An expert is one who knows more and more about less and less." We the expert voters end up with an even more expert Congress.
-- Ira M. Kessel
Rochester, New York
MEANS TO AN END
Re: Iain Murray's Unbearable Legislation:
Radical environmentalism is a means, not an end. The end is the subjugation our country by socialist jackboots for whom freedom is something far too "messy" to be left to ordinary Americans. When gas reaches ten bucks a gallon, and people have to shiver through the winter because they can't afford to heat their homes, maybe they'll get it.
Or maybe they'll get by with coats made of polar bear fur.
-- Arnold Ahlert
Boca Raton, Florida
Re: George Neumayr's When Janey Goes Marching Off to War:
I don't want to seem overly picky, but hasn't this train already left the station? As the WaPo points out, we have now had one each female recipient of the Silver Star from Iraq and Afghanistan. And what of the women in the "support" units that are being blown up by IEDs and ambushed on the roads and subjected to mortar and rocket attacks? Are they not "in combat"? Will they be less dead or less maimed then someone that is "in a combat unit"? Are the female Apache Longbow pilots, or the F-16 pilots involved daily with close air support not in a combat unit? What about the uncounted multitudes of females serving on Naval warships? The only naval craft that they are currently prohibited from serving on are submarines and SEAL delivery vehicles and other insertion craft. What about the women in the Air Force that are serving on the C-130 gun ships, firing the various weapons that they bring to the conflict? What about the female MPs and SPs that are constantly in harms way in war zones. GI Jane is already in combat. For the Bush administration, and especially George Bush, to deny this reality, is the rankest form of hypocrisy. Women may not be allowed to have a "combat arms" MOS, but they are in combat worldwide with our military.
Besides, Obama is going to pull our troops out of combat situations all over the world and sit at the negotiating table with the succession of America hating individuals and governments worldwide. There will be no combat for the women to be involved it. I can think of a veritable plethora of reasons why Obama will be a horrible President, but this is not one of them.
This is all simply a red herring issue, a farce, a strawman thrown out and "debated" to give so-called experts and political activists something to talk about. I may prefer that women didn't serve shoulder to shoulder with our combat arms MOS troops, but they are, and they have been for a good while now. Denial of this actuality is stupid at best and a bald faced lie at worst.
-- Ken Shreve
The conservative approach to the issue of women in combat stands failed long ago. By agreeing with the left that it was a matter of rights and by refusing to say anything critical of the performance of military women, incremental concessions were continuously made so that, now, the remaining illogical contradictions in the policy are ready to be kicked over. Mr. Neumayr got that right.
Put simply, either women in the military are, collectively and individually fully capable of performing all combat, casualty evacuation or damage control tasks to the same standard as are men, and thus can be held to the same historic standards for fitness and training, or they are not. If the former, then the illogical policies currently in place (and the self-contradicting justifications for them) should be ended and all military personnel should be assigned, without restriction or prejudice. However, if women can't meet those standards (and there is ample, indeed overwhelming evidence that they can't), then their role in the military should be sharply reduced if not eliminated. It is either the one or the other. When anyone on the right is willing to actually take that position and look at the facts, the policies might change. If not, it makes no sense, either politically or operationally, to maintain the absurd rules now in effect.
All of this also applies to the less tangible but nevertheless real issues of morale, cohesion and fraternization. It is absurd to say that somehow, these issues are more critical for the members of an infantry squad than to the crew working on the flight deck of an aircraft carrier (which even in peacetime is one of the most dangerous places on earth). The latter, of course, is now coed. More generally, one cannot maintain that cohesion, morale, trust and fraternization have all been effectively dealt with in those areas of the military that are now fully coed, despite initial concerns, and then say that somehow they won't work out in the still segregated branches. Of course, if the seemingly never-ending parade of sexual misconduct incidents within the military and at the service academies demonstrates that these issues have not been dealt with, and if the sentiments of military men are not accurately captured by their official Party-line responses, then there's a case to be made for a change in policy. Again, it's either one or the other.
The sort of cowardly straddle that virtually all conservative politicians take on this issue is as self-defeating as it is stupid. That's because fighting ineffectively gives the appearance that the issue was openly debated and honestly settled. If one wants to fight this issue, late in the day though it is, one must challenge the actual performance of military women, the nature of the standards to which they are actually held, assert the scientific evidence that increasingly points to hard-wired differences between the sexes, and be willing to endure the reaction that will result from raising these points unapologetically. In other words, one must want to fight to win. If not, then let's concede the issue and stop writing these types of articles.
-- Anthony Mirvish
Re: Larry Thornberry's Green Gasbag:
As a retired Air Force Colonel and a lifelong Republican, I really want to vote for you, especially because Clinton or Obama would be a Presidential disaster. But you are making it so hard for Conservatives like me to vote for you. Your Campaign Finance Reform (McCain-Feingold) is a disaster for the Republican Party and created a monster (527's). Your Comprehensive Immigration was the stupidest thing I have ever seen. Your opposition to off-shore and ANWAR drilling for oil to make us less dependent on OPEC is unbelievably short sighted. Now you have reached the epitome of stupid with your stance on Global Climate Change. You have now shown how dangerous you would be in the White House. I want to vote for you, but you have made that impossible. I don't know who I will Vote for in November, but it sure as hell won't be you.
-- Peter Pomonis
It is my feeling that a Green Curtain is descending across the United States ensnarling individuals, organizations, cities and states in regulations that interfere with individual liberty.
Freedom to do with one's life and property what is in the best interest of that individual is the essence of liberty. While individual needs must be balanced with society's needs, it is not necessary and, indeed, dangerous to the individual to allow an unaccountable or impenetrable bureaucracy or government to solely decide what that balance shall be.
One remedy for America's environmental predicament might be to reassert States rights in the courts in order to make environmental decisions closer to home for the individuals affected. Another step would be for Congress to cull and revise current Federal Environmental laws. And individuals whom are impacted adversely by environmental law, excluding eminent domain, could pursue damage awards including punitive damages against the deciding agency.
-- Howard Lohmuller
Zounds, Mr. Thornberry. Now you've done it. Telling the enviro-whacks about ED. They'll be slapping a tax on Viagra and Cialis faster than a Marlboro. Steady on, man, before you singlehandedly bring about the Apocalypse.
-- Mike Showalter
As a West Virginian, I must rise to the defense of my state. Sure, Mr. Homnick can find racists in West Virginia and many other places. But to suggest that it played a significant role in Barack Obama's loss seems dubious and uncharitable. If he is going to practically characterize an entire state as racist based on nonspecific references to exit polls, I want to see some numbers to back it up. I want to know the exact wording of the exit questions. For example, was the question (as Mr. Homnick implies), "Would you vote for any white person before any black person?" Or was the question, "Did race play any factor in your vote?" Given all the publicity about Jeremiah Wright, many people would answer "yes" to the latter question without being racists. I loved how Mr. Homnick worked "backwoods" into his article. What, no mention of inbreeding and Deliverance? Could it be that Mr. Homnick has a prejudice problem?
Personally, I think class explains the West Virginia results much better than race. In this election season, West Virginia is Pennsylvania without Philadelphia. And without a large black population to boost Obama's numbers. I prefer Karl Rove's explanation that West Virginians can see an elitist coming 100 miles away. And Mr. Homnick, you can put your "ontology" in your pipe and smoke it.
-- Fred King
Read Mr. Homnick's reply to critics of his 'white racism' in West Virginia article: what a joke. He's forgotten how to talk as a human and merely strikes sophisticated poses to impress a supposed numbskull audience.
Similar to Hillary, Obama and McCain.
This time around, the nation is smarter than its politicians and journalists whose combined intelligence seems no larger than that of Alec Baldwin.
-- Dr. Ted Sitea
I now better understand Homnick's difficulty. The clue is ensconced in the final paragraph of his reply to our criticisms of his West Virginia column: "Some readers argued that Obama is equally guilty because he is getting 90 percent of the black vote. I would be prepared to share that condemnation if I saw him using explicit appeals for votes on that basis."
If Homnick can't discern Obama's covert appeals to both black racism and white liberal guilt his truth detector needs significant upgrading. Let me give just one example: "I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community." Who was asking him to disown the black community or anything else beyond the bigoted and irrational Jeremiah Wright? But the reference to race comes into many of Obama's utterances.
(And there was more, of course, including an inapt criticism of his loving -- but bigoted! -- granny. In other words, throw granny out of the sleigh in order to retain the bigot. But that was mere frosting on the cake.)
Obama is just too subtle for Homnick, who apparently needs things to be very explicit.
-- Richard Donley
New Lyme, Ohio
How did the Republicans end up getting all the blame for what happened in the Democrat election? How many Republicans answered those exit polls?
I'm tired of everyone being called racist. I'm tired of having to hear everything everyone does labeled racist. Why can't we have some information about these candidates that will let us know what kind of people they are, and what their values are? Is that asking too much from the press? What have they done of value in their lives? What will they do to make this a better country in which to live and bring up our families? How many articles have you printed like that?
That's what is important to most people in this country who have any sense.
I don't want to view the candidates thru a glass lightly. I want to look at them thru a microscope so I'm not surprised to find we have elected a person who will lead this country down the road to ruin. It's the job of the press to find out these things for us. Do that job, and we will all be the better for it.
-- Jean Bright
Re: Philip Klein's Candidate Barr Puts McCain in His Crosshairs:
I'm a committed conservative native Georgian; have been all my life (76 years).The idea of Bob Barr running for a national office of ANY type is ludicrous and idiotic. I lived in the Fifth Congressional District in Georgia when Bob Barr held that office.
I once met him at a gas station in south Georgia and tried to have a polite, short conversation with him about some of the political topics of the day. His insulting response (if you could call it that) demonstrated that he was nothing more than an arrogant, pompous little twerp that had no business in the People's House, in any capacity!
I'm proud to say that I was one of the thousands who helped bring Bob back to Georgia as a private citizen. Watching him on television spouting his usual B.S .makes me realize just how bankrupt our "conservative" media types really are to give this proven "Gas Bag" any amount of face time in the media!
-- Bill Beebe
THROW AWAY THE KEYES
Re: Kevin Cozort's letter (under "No Disagreement") in Reader Mail's Tempers Run Hot:
I've read the letter from Kevin Cozort who wrote he will burn his voter's card rather than vote for John McCain or any of the Democrats running for president. I have good news for Mr. Cozort, he has three other options on Election Day rather than just staying at home. 1) Go in the voting booth, look for the name "ALAN KEYES" (who is running as an Independent in November) and pull the lever by his name. 2) If his name is not on the ballot, then take a pen and write-in the name "ALAN KEYES" in the write-in slot. 3) If these two options are not available to you, then go in the voting booth and vote only for the conservative, pro-life candidates who are running your state and local races. The result will be much better than turning your voter's card into ashes.
-- Michael Skaggs
Re: Tom Bethell's Playing the Racism Card:
This simplistic pap about Obama and his pastor represents the very worst in our long tradition of anti-intellectualism in this country. An expatriate Brit should know better, given the long, tortured history of racism in his native land!
-- S. Smith