A LITTLE PROPRIETY
Re: Herbert London’s Obama on D-Day:
There is only one word to add to Herbert London’s article: Amen.
— Garry Greenwood
Another question for Mr. Obama:
What was so important, so germane to your task while in Europe, that you could not find time to visit Normandy? I could very well be wrong, but didn’t the French offer to divert your trip long enough so you could see for yourself the price my father’s generation paid?
If, Mr. President, you were sending a signal to those Europeans whom we liberated, and who fought by our sides that a bust of Sir Winston Churchill was no longer good enough to stand in the White House, then your lack of respect for those brave soldiers is terribly obvious.
Unfortunately, your glib talk and senseless speechifying cannot paper over your absolute lack of understanding for the sacrifices made which allow you the ignorance you so genuinely own.
— Richard Roessler
In his excellent D-Day article, Mr. London wrote this: “Before President Obama stands supinely before the G-20 again and engages in a form of national self-flagellation, I would urge him to stand amid the crosses and stars in Normandy cemetery and recall the sacrifices made by those youngsters so that he could be president of the United States and breathe an unadorned version of freedom.”
— A. C. Santore
RALLY ROUND JINDAL
Re: Theodore Roosevelt Malloch’s Principles vs. Populism:
“I’m all for knowledge… But make no mistake, knowledge is not power. Truth is power.” — Gov. Bobby Jindal.
President Obama’s sole absolute truth would appear to be the Sanctity of the State; he is otherwise a radical relativist, and millions of imbecilic Americans are right there with him. For the rest of us, who would see to the restoration of this nation’s founding principles, the good governor from Louisiana would appear to offer our only hope. Jindal’s first fight will be against the Rockefeller country club wing of the GOP, whose flag will most likely be borne by Mitt Romney, Mr. Compromise himself; my vote will be for the guy with principles.
— Francis M. Hannon, Jr.
A HISTORY OF UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR
Re: Mark Tooley’s Evangelical Left Ethicist Defends Obama on Abortion:
Mark Tooley should be commended for bringing to the attention of TAS readers the unethical and disingenuousness nature of Glenn Stassen and the religious left. The only thing that makes them “evangelicals” is their blind devotion to spreading the despair that is the Democrat Party and its policy. Like the Roman Catholic priests of Nazi Germany who supported Hitler’s “not worthy of life” policy, the religious left will say anything to support their political masters. Stassen and his ilk in the religious left are nothing more than political apparatchiks.
Like the arguments of leftists in the 1980’s who hysterically declared Ronald Reagan was starving children and endangering the lives of the poor, the reality, just like under President Bush, was quite different. America’s social welfare system, as always, grew and the poor, who we have with us always, were taken care of. In fact, until Barack Obama poverty had been on the decline. Thanks to Ronald Reagan and Republicans, who rectified the economic horrors that were Jimmy Carter and Democrat’s statist policies, for the last 25 years America has only known economic prosperity and growth. That drastically changed with the election of Barack Obama. Now the neo-fascist policies of the 1970’s that did so much damage to America’s economy and national defense are back in style. And we’re seeing the economy in trouble and national security imperiled (illustrated by the massive cuts in defense and attacks on the nation’s intelligence community).
If Stassen were truly concerned with the poor he would be much more troubled by the policies of Barack Obama that are creating massive unemployment, homelessness and wage decline. When Obama was elected. unemployment was 6.3%. Since his election, inauguration and the passage of his vaunted stimulus plan, it has skyrocketed to 9% and will soon be in double digits with limited prospect of decline, under employment is at all time highs, home foreclosures are the highest in US history, homelessness a crisis that started with Jimmy Carter is out of control and more children go to bed hungry under Barack Obama than any president since Franklin Roosevelt.
Aside from economic concerns, if Stassen were anything more than a religious left political hack he’d also be concerned with the numerous ethical lapses of the Obama administration from the rampant tax fraud to Obama’s own inability to tell the truth in public forums. His most recent lie regarded his meeting on health care reform where he made several outlandish statements about how the conferees had agreed to reduce health care spending by 15% — untrue. The real agreement was to only ramp up spending by 1.5% over 10 years. Couple this with the dishonesty of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid and it should be apparent to a so-called ethicist that the current crowd controlling our Federal government are anything, but ethical.
Like the vast majority of the religious left, Stassen is a Pharisaical hypocrite whose intolerant political myopia masquerades as theology.
— Michael Tomlinson
Jacksonville, North Carolina
Re: J. Peter Freire’s Moderation Is No Virtue:
Lonegan can be applauded for not wanting to play dirty. (It is truly a singularly rare quality in a politician.) What he does not seem to understand is that while wrestling with a pig may get one dinner (and certainly dirty), it won’t make a man a swine.
— Ira M. Kessel
YOU AIN’T SEEN NOTHING YET
Re: Hal G.P. Colebatch’s Westminster Implodes:
Great Britain has preceded America in greatness, but American has an established history of following up with how to do things on a grand scale: Britain moved the world closer to democracy with the Magna Carta; the Founding Fathers wrote the world changing Constitution. Britain started The Industrial Revolution; we provided the machinery (and men) needed to win two world wars. Now Britain’s (liberal) Parliament is buried in corruption. This sad state of affairs will be a piker’s night out compared to what the Democratic-controlled U.S. Congress and the Obama administration have in store for America over the next three years.
— Ira M. Kessel
JUST AN INNOCENT LITTLE LADY
Re: Paul Chesser’s Governors Behind Bars:
What will be interesting to watch is whether or not prosecutors go after Mrs. Easley as well. Or, let me guess, was she blind to all of this corruption like so many of these women claim when they get caught?
— Carol Hellman
Ft. Wayne, Indiana
TOLERANT IS AS TOLERANT DOES
Re: Doug Bandow’s Interfaith Dialogue: The Great Unmentionable:
As long as the very same Islamic nations continue to persecute, imprison and allow torture of minority religions within their borders and prohibit the freedom of religion to anyone other than Islam, they have no right to make statements against Christians, Jews or Hindus.
The only right they recognize is the right to defame and torment those who are of different faith than their own. When I see a Christian church in Mecca, then I will say they ar tolerant of others.
— Paul in the Desert
Re: Jeffrey Lord’s The No-Choice President:
It goes without saying that results of polls can be skewed by the choice of words in the question.
When it’s a question between “pro-life” and “pro-choice,” the results will be different from any of the following choices:
– pro-life and pro-abortion.
– between pro-life and killing unborn children,
– between anti –abortion and pro-abortion,
– a woman’s right to choose and an unborn child’s Constitutional right to live.
It’s hard to be against “choice.” It is a minor wonder that the question has not been put as being between pro-choice and anti-choice. Slam dunk there!
It’s the same everywhere. Why, for example, is the issue of marriage between two homosexuals defined as a matter of “equal rights”? Everyone already has an equal right to marriage as defined over the course of history, not as redefined by a special interest group for their own benefit.
Why is “the fairness doctrine” fundamentally unfair?
Who chose the term “homophobia” when people who believe homosexuality is not acceptable do not “fear” homosexuality.
Why do the media always allow liberals to define key terms, when they always define them in language that favors their position?
George Carlin did a very funny comedy sketch about the language differences between baseball and football (things like baseball is played on a “park” while football is played on a “gridiron”), but there’s nothing the least bit funny about these language differences.
— A. C. Santore
EASIER TO ARGUE WHEN YOU’RE ALIVE
Re: G. Tracy Mehan, III’s Americans Opt for Life:
I agree that the ferociousness of the president’s beliefs on abortion probably forced some people to confront the reality of the issue, and declare for life. But I cannot believe that negative reinforcement, by itself, accounts for this huge change. I think we’re seeing the effect of Sarah Palin’s candidacy, where she showed the world by her own choices that an unwanted pregnancy is not a tragedy (or a “punishment”), and that every child is a gift, even when it entails some hardship. I also think that we’re beginning to see what the Wall Street Journal has called “the Roe Effect,” meaning that as people live out their beliefs on abortion, fewer and fewer of the children born in the US are born to abortion supporters, due to the macabre reality that a higher percentage of those children were themselves aborted. Thus, pro-“choice” parents have fewer citizens to whom they can pass on their values than do pro-life parents.
— Anne T. Stinneford
Re: David N. Bass’s Don’t Divorce the Marriage Issue:
You are correct in your assumptions about the GOP’s demise; its not traditional marriage. Maybe it has more to do with uncontrolled spending by Republicans, or starting a war in Iraq. Maybe it was enabling the mass exodus of jobs to China — where are the Reagan Democrats going to work now? I’ll bet the trillions of dollars lost in the stock market crash caused in part by inept regulators had an effect. Maybe some were offended by reluctance of Bush to control the borders. Heck, I’ll bet without much trouble I can find another dozen reasons. The bottom line is Bush will go down in history as The Worst President, even exceeding Jimmy Carter.
The worst part of this sad story is that I wrote many emails to the White House and my senators imploring them not to go down the road to Iraq and spelled out the consequences in some detail back in the fall of 2002.
— Dennis Homerick
NOT AN ANOMALY
Re: Quin Hillyer’s They Shoot Cats, Don’t They:
Great article. Over the years I wondered what kind of Speaker Bob Livingston would have been. This article shows him to be smart, incisive, determined and much more intelligent than his adversaries.
Too bad an indiscretion did him in…but then I guess that incident shows his arrogance.
— Judy Beumler
Notice to Readers: The American Spectator and Spectator World are marks used by independent publishing companies that are not affiliated in any way. If you are looking for The Spectator World please click on the following link: https://thespectator.com/world.