Everyone's a Critic - The American Spectator | USA News and Politics
Everyone’s a Critic

Re: R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr.’s Book ‘im, Leno:

The very best of success, Dr. Tyrrell, on your new addition to the “Crack-Up” series. That nasty, verbose demagogue McAuliffe is as slimy and oleaginous as they come. Published on my birthday, March 20th, the first day of spring, I hope it makes you enough money so that you can purchase some carbon credit offsets, especially if you use incandescent light bulbs for your offices and homestead!!!!
Edward Del Colle

Your new book about our beloved Bill Clinton is just another bunch of crap — your time would be better spent taking a good look at the neocon agenda that you apparently support. I guess that’s not sexy enough for you. Maybe if you think of it in terms of the American people getting screwed, it might wet your appetite for some new literary venture by telling the truth about the real obscenities affecting us today — all at the hands of a bunch of liars and thieves.

Go Swiftboat yourself!

Warm regards,
Audrey Johns
Charlotte, North Carolina

Re: Philip Klein’s Newt Morning:

Newt Gingrich is indeed an intellectual giant and a mesmerizing articulate visionary. Furthermore, he recognizes that our political system is broken because the American Left is hell bent on a nihilistic pogrom of time honored American principles and institutions. He can only elevate what has become a pitiful excuse for political discourse in this country. Whether he can win is another matter.
A. DiPentima

As much as I admire Gingrich’s intellect and his ability to engage in rational policy discourse, he is morally unsuitable to be President. He is our Bill Clinton. It is a clear case of hypocrisy for Republicans to support him for President while we criticize the moral sewer that was the Clinton White House.
Jerrold Goldblatt
Arlington, Virginia

While I wouldn’t vote for Gingrich in a primary — IMO, he showed a decided lack of administrative ability while he was Speaker and we can no more afford incompetence in management than we can incompetence in message — I’d welcome him getting into the race.

Giuliani’s message to conservatives is, “I’ll prosecute the war effectively and I won’t offend you gratuitously.”

McCain’s message to conservatives is, “I’ll prosecute the war and I’ll go after spending (at least, that’s what I’m telling you) …. other than that, screw you.”

Romney’s message to conservatives is, “Really, guys, I am one of you … no, seriously, I mean it …. Hello??? Is this thing on???”.

As for the rest of the so-called candidates … well, they’re still looking for the microphone.

Gingrich’s greatest contribution would be to increase the focus on conservative ideas and policy. Even if he’s unsuccessful, he’d draw Giuliani, McCain and Romney out, and (most likely) move them right.
Brad Bettin
Melbourne, Florida

Bravo, Newt! It’s good to hear that at least one public figure has the guts to say, “…it’s clear that our political system is utterly and totally incapable of serious conversation” about some of the most important issues facing us, especially radical Islam.

Thanks, too, for nailing the Demo-liberal-Left that’s so focused on hating Mr. Bush that they’ve caused a dangerous security threat to America.

Maybe he’s exactly what the Republican Party and our country need. For sure, it’s not what’s coming from across the proverbial aisle and the Left.
C. Kenna Amos
Princeton, West Virginia

It is indeed hard to fault Mr. Klein’s good article regarding Newt and his utility to the GOP. Newt is indeed brilliant when it comes to ideas regarding governance of a nation, not so brilliant when it comes to ideas regarding governance of one’s own personal affairs. Unfortunately, there are too many conservatives that refuse to understand that Newt cannot win a nationwide general election, because of his negatives with ALL the voters. A Newt vs. Hillary race would only serve to bring back sympathy for Hillary because Newt was mean to her and her husband.

I, personally, am reluctant to assign Newt a true blue conservative label. He goes along seeming conservative, and then, all of a sudden, he comes forward with some all out liberal proposal that stops you dead in your tracks. You find yourself asking, where did that come from? Or he signs on to some cause that brings him to stand side by side with Hillary before the TV cameras, and each one fawning on the other.

I have said before, and will reiterate, there needs to be a cabinet post called Secretary of Ideas and Plans (SIP), and Newt needs to be that secretary. I love Newt to death. He was a great supreme commander in the battle that won the GOP control of the U.S. House. He was then not a good Speaker of the House. Newt is great at managing the war when he is in the minority. He is not the best of all worlds when he is the top dog in the pack.

But Phil, can we talk? You wrap up with a comment on Hugh Hewitt. Am I supposed to believe that Hewitt is some wise counsel to conservative voters? This is the same Hugh Hewitt that absolutely disgraced himself for all time with his blind cheerleading for Harriet Miers for Supreme Court Justice. He went out of his way to pick nasty fights with anti-Harriet conservatives. He became name caller and accuser in chief for George Bush against the Bush voter base. There has been no more reflexive, sycophantic, Bush rump swab for the entire time that Bush has been in office. I truly believe that Hewitt would gladly vote for a Constitutional Amendment to award the American Presidency to the Bush clan in perpetuity. Please, Mr. Klein, try to find a credible political sage to point to instead of a Court Jester like Hugh Hewitt.
Ken Shreve

He has a following but it is far from enough to be elected. He should not even attempt to run.

Re: Christopher Orlet’s Racial Discord:

Chris Orlet makes a good case that the sound of music in America has increasingly little to do with the ears and more to do with the eyes, particularly when the eyes see a racial “problem.”

But it isn’t just race. The Vienna Philharmonic was/is arguably the finest philharmonic orchestra in the world, but the fact that the eyes did not behold any female musicians made the presence of the Vienna Philharmonic in New York City unacceptable. My wife and I attended one of their performances at Carnegie Hall and could hear sidewalk protesters banging on the metal fire doors, effectively ruining the performance. The City of New York, warned well in advance of the protesters’ plans, of course did nothing.

And it isn’t just sex. It’s even the music. Check the performance schedule at Carnegie Hall, and, regardless of the national origin of the orchestra, you will find remarkably few performances of Mozart or Beethoven or any of the “old guys.” The reason, as explained to me by a Julliard graduate, is that such music is officially declared “too simplistic” by whoever is in charge today of deciding that such music is “too simplistic.” Hence we have the utter garbage that passes today as “complex” or “sophisticated” music.

Thank God (and Wolfgang and Ludwig) for CDs and high quality sound systems. I am thereby allowed, for now, to let my ears make the decisions, period, end of discussion.
Frank Natoli
Newton, New Jersey

Besides immediately thinking of “disharmony,” I thought of that saw: “When all you’ve got is a hammer, then everything looks like a nail.”

Perhaps if Mr. Dworkin stops hammering long enough, he can listen to what Ebonee Thomas told Newsday. That newspaper describes this black woman as a “27-year-old flutist from a mostly white suburb of Dallas who is now a third-year fellow in the high-powered Miami-based training orchestra, New World Symphony.” The young lady said, “One thing that drew me to classical music was that most of the time, people really just want to know how you play.”

Why doesn’t or won’t Mr. Dworkin doesn’t grasp that?
C. Kenna Amos
Princeton, West Viginia

Excellent article. Plaudits to the author.
Jerry Doyle

Re: George H. Wittman’s Sitting on a Tinderbox:

In your article, you mention General Ahsan Hayat and Mohammad Soomro as the two who would replace Musharraf. You do not speculate on how this might come about.

Based on what is currently going on in the tribal areas between different sects of Taliban, this might not be bloodless, nor a slam-dunk.
R. Goodson
Vero Beach, Florida

Re: G. Tracy Mehan, III’s No Way Out:

If there is one thing even goofier than Al Gore talking about Global Warming its neocons talking about the Iraq war. The Cakewalk Crowd (think Eddie Haskell) bamboozled poor George Bush (think the Beaver) into this demented misadventure by convincing him that a third world artificial country of about 25 million with a GDP the size of Puerto Rico posed a bigger threat to the U.S. than Nazi Germany. Now these same pin heads want us to believe there is no extracting Uncle Sam from this tar baby and our troops will be stuck there for decades (think South Korea).

Supposedly the reason we cannot simply bring the boys home is that “defeat” in Iraq “is too awful to contemplate” because terrorists “will look elsewhere for mischief making.” This argument may be persuasive to some (think Sean Hannity and purchasers of the “Belly Fat Pill”), but it leaves normal Americans living on the other side of the Beltway looking glass wrinkling there brows.

What everyone understands (but the neocons are desperate to obscure) is that if Israel would end its occupation and pillaging of Palestinian territory and return to its borders as they existed prior to Israel’s 1967 pre-emptive war (hmmmm, that sounds familiar) on its Arab neighbors, Arab terrorism would diminish into irrelevance as far as U.S. interests are concerned.

Moreover, according to the National Safety Council, the average American’s risk of death from an accidental fall is four times more likely than the risk of death from terrorism. Real conservatives understand that this level of threat does not justify strip searching granny’s at the airport much less leaving our troops in the Middle East for decades to come.

While the Iraq War bleeds America of its finest young men and mountains of treasure to no purpose, real threats are left to fester unattended. The Mexican invasion continues unopposed (at least by the federal government) while Red China and Russia (Bushie really had Putin pegged didn’t he?) practice war by other means against American interests at home and around the world. Even worse, the return of the Clintons to the White House looks increasingly possible.

Now THERE is something REALLY too terrible to contemplate! (Thanks a lot, neocons.)
Mark Bender

Re: Lisa Fabrizio’s response (under “Thompson Time”) in Reader Mail’s The Hunt for Fred October:

Lisa, your reply on the Spectator reader mail section was expected. To be fair, I need to acknowledge that you are correct in basing your column on the overall ABI grade. Also to be fair, Sen. Thompson did not make his “upgraded” remarks until just recently.

However, when the “history” button on the ABI page is further investigated, his grade in the 107th was A- / A- for border control and interior enforcement. His grade on amnesty in the most recent Congress (106th) dealing with the issue was A+.

Although he voted for the Mack Amendment (amnesty for Cubans/Nicaraguans) in ’97 (105th), it was part of a poison pill strategy to kill S1156. That vote alone contributed to his “F” grade during the session.

I’m not too worried about his very low grade for “foreign workers” because those votes predominately revolved around H-1B (high-tech) visa issues. I highly doubt high-tech foreign workers are the type we want to keep out of the country because:

— They already hold visa documentation.
— They are not the type to “jump the fence” to get into the country.
— They do not sponge off of the welfare capacity this country provides (as do low-skilled foreign workers).
— The trickle-down effects of high-tech workers are very beneficial to the blue-collar American work force.
— There aren’t enough skilled/educated American citizens to qualify for those jobs (love those Government schools!).

Bottom line for me is to concentrate on his most recent votes for the big three issues (in priority order): border control, amnesty, and interior enforcement. On those three issues, Sen Thompson made the right choice, and thus, has my vote if he decides to run.
Owen H. Carneal, Jr.
Yorktown, Virginia

Re: William Tucker’s Midnight Raid:

Good Report.
Doug Santo
Pasadena, California

Sign up to receive our latest updates! Register

By submitting this form, you are consenting to receive marketing emails from: The American Spectator, 122 S Royal Street, Alexandria, VA, 22314, http://spectator.org. You can revoke your consent to receive emails at any time by using the SafeUnsubscribe® link, found at the bottom of every email. Emails are serviced by Constant Contact

Be a Free Market Loving Patriot. Subscribe Today!