Re: Jed Babbin’s Baghdad Barbarella:
Professor Babbin’s excellent takedown of Hanoi Jane highlights an historical nexus that ought to be explored more: that of the Cold War and the renewed jihad that followed its end.
Islam preceded the Soviet Union by 12-13 centuries in implementing a totalitarian organization of human life. The Nazis, and their temporarily victorious competitors in the Soviet Union, stirred modern industrial method into the soup, with dreadful effect.
The latest phase of global jihad has now picked up this line of satanic R&D, using the West’s technology and Soviet-style methods of subversion (e.g., the case of the EU) against it.
It is a potent brew indeed, and its heady aroma, wafting across the planet, seems to have lured hibernating Useful Idiots like Baghdad Barbarella out of their moldy caves.
And she is a serious Manchurian for President of these United States!
The Bill, as it were, has come due.
— Paul Kotik
Tel Aviv, Israel
Been playing my tunes from the ’60s lately, now we got Hanoi Jane going on a bus tour to add to the nostalgia. Deja-Vu. Like Jed Babbin said, though this time it’s different. We saw what happened when we pulled out of ‘Nam. Iraq isn’t some backwater nation in S.E. Asia, either, and Saddam wasn’t some bearded skinny commie, and the Iraqi people seem to be a little more able to handle themselves (with some help from friends).We don’t have POW’s languishing in a prison cell so Jane can have a photo session. Maybe she will have some “vets” with her. I’m sure there’s some disgruntled ones out there, always is. Wonder if they’ll be like the ones she had in the 70’s. And yes, there will be a few of us with picket signs telling her our thoughts. Maybe Howie will join her. He can bring up his memories of ‘Nam as he saw it from the slopes in Aspen to compare it with Iraq (as he saw it from the hills of Vermont and the cornfields of the Midwest). The only problem I see with all of this though is figuring what phone number to put on my bumper sticker alongside the Jane, Call Home, 1-800-Hanoi. Looks like I’ll have to get another slogan.
— Pete Chagnon
What a great article concerning “Hanoi Jane”! At the time of Fonda’s treason, I was a Navy wife, only concerned with bringing my husband home. The news only reported the anti-war demonstrations here at home, LBJ’s reluctance to call it what it was, a “War” — it was called a “CONFLICT.” Kent State, and nonessential trivia. If I had then what is HERE now: Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, and the sophisticated recording devices that show the GOOD that we are doing in Afghanistan and Iraq, I would have felt much better about having my husband away, being a hero! Thanks for showing the REAL side of Vietnam and THE WAR ON TERRORISM! Hopefully, the Dems will decide that fighting the war on terrorism where the terrorists live is better than fighting them here!
So Jane is going to Iraq. I wonder if Hitler and Goebbels would have posed her on an anti -aircraft gun during WW2 — the U.S. soldiers who were killed and maimed in Vietnam, and the innocents who were later murdered in that country and Laos and Cambodia suffered as much as those killed and maimed in WW2. If she had done it during WW2 she would have been tried for treason! Perhaps executed. Free speech is one thing, but when your acts cause the deaths of American fighting men and women, that is treason! If she is permitted to do this I would like to see her walk through a hospital filled with maimed and wounded veterans whose wounds were caused by her and others of her ilk giving aid and comfort to the enemy. The Viet Cong prayed for the American Public to aid in ending the war. They had shot their wad with the Tet Offensive were they lost tremendous amounts of men and equipment, but the press convinced the American Public we had lost the battle.
Hitler prayed for a division of the Allies. His V-1and V-2 were to make the British public think they should get out of the war. Can you imagine Jane and Adolf sitting on a V2 and saying if you bomb German cities and kill innocent people we will destroy you. We don’t want to harm you; we are saving you from Bolshevism. Stop the war! Sounds silly, but that is what she did, and wants to do again! Is this country nuts?
How did her hippie brother get out of going to the Army — hiding behind a skirt, or hiding in college as so many of our politicians? Did Dick and Teddy and many of our other politicians do military service? No wonder they won’t do anything about her, and others like her. If she writes a book the proceeds should go to the families of killed and wounded veterans.
— Frank Dollinger
This shameless creep would not be at it again if we had done our duty as loyal Americans. Hanoi Jane should have been tried, convicted and executed for treason years ago. This might have given pause to Willie the Raper who sold our military secrets to the Chinese People’s Army. Traitor Kerry might have declined to betray America, our Vietnamese allies, our POW’s and Nicaragua. He might even have voted for some of the military hardware which performed so well in Iraq. Even Turban Durbin might have hesitated to curry favor with the terrorists by betraying our warriors in Al Jazeera and throughout the Muslim world. Scorn is too good for the traitor scum. Okay, I’m dreaming. Anyway, good on yuh, Jed.
— Dick Lambert
Eagle Rock, Virginia
I love Jed Babbin, but he makes the same mistake about Jane Fonda that countless others have made, to wit, she never apologized for her Vietnam activities, she merely expressed “regret.” E.g.: I may regret that Fonda is an [redacted], but that doesn’t mean I apologize for it.
— D. Dvorak
Lucky USA! Jed Babbin is the gift that keeps on giving. No one says it better.
— Cara Lyons Lege
Re: George Neumayr’s J’Recuse:
We note with amusement the proposition of Professor Turley to the effect that Justice Roberts’s “Catholicism” somehow disqualifies him as being capable of interpreting the Constitution. (“It was the first unscripted answer in the most carefully scripted nomination in history,” writes Turley. “It was also the wrong answer. In taking office, a justice takes an oath to uphold the Constitution and the laws of the United States.”)
With such as the basic predicate, would not the same “affliction,” likewise and with equal force, disqualify Senators Durbin, Biden, Leahy and Kennedy from serving in the Congress? Were the Professor’s observations — observations proffered about a subject wherein his education, knowledge and understanding is obviously deficient — not such a pathetic display of abject ignorance, they might even be humorous.
When one reads such unvarnished tripe, one can only recall the words of the Immortal Bard who, through the personage of Macbeth, suggested (undoubtedly with the Turleys of the universe in mind) that such utterances are nothing short of “A tale told by an idiot…full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.”
— Seamus Muldoon
I think Sen. Durbin’s office now says that Judge Roberts did not say he would recuse himself in cases that conflict with Catholic teachings.
— James F. Green
San Marcos, Texas
Concerning the mention of Turley’s op-ed: Fred Barnes said on “Special Report” Monday night that Durbin’s office is denying that the question was asked and answered concerning any offer to recuse due to religion. I don’t know how reliable this information is, but it should be looked into before another possible media distortion becomes “common knowledge.”
— Michael K. Wright
Thank you for George Neumayr’s excellent article exposing the anti-Catholic bigotry surrounding John Roberts’ nomination to the Supreme Court.
It is somewhat delicious to now watch the Democrats redefine what it means to be a good Catholic. Last year their idea of a good Catholic was Senator John Kerry. Now it is John Roberts.
Apparently Roberts is such a good Catholic that, unlike John Kerry, his private beliefs will prevent him from being able to do his job properly. What is it that Jonathan Turley and Dick Durbin want us to learn from this? That perhaps there are laws on our books that are immoral?
— Mrs. John B. Jackson, III
PROTESTING THE PROTESTANTS
Re: Mark Tooley’s Exploiting the Right:
Thanks so much for this article. I am a Methodist and am very frustrated with the leadership of the National Council of Churches. Bob Edgar has taken this group in an even worse direction than before. I cut my pledge to my church by half a few years ago because I knew a percentage of my church donations went to this organization. I hated to do that but it was the only way I could effectively protest my displeasure.
— Louise Williams
Re: Herman Cain’s We Want Your Money:
Great article by Mr. Cain!
I’ll never forget the grace, dignity and class showed by Mr. Cain on C-Span during a Senate sub-committee hearing years ago when he was sandbagged by the “Murderous Swimmer” Ted Kennedy. Mr. Cain was subjected to the Judge Clarence Thomas treatment while the MSM ignored it. Mr. Cain, like Judge Thomas, vastly outclassed the “Murderous Swimmer” with his prose and wit.
— Joe Weldon
Juno Beach, FL
The Live Aids, the concerts for the downtrodden, and all of the folderol of the “artistic left” are nothing more than the final triumph of “style over substance.” They illustrate quite accurately the Leftists subscription to feeling over reason. They don’t amount to a whisper in a canyon as far as helping the peoples who are suffering. The vacillating Left continue to slide back and forth on an axis between don’t let these governments tyrannize their people, and these are legitimate governments with whom we have no right to interfere. If they were left to their own devices, the Left would be holding concerts and love ins for the downtrodden of Iraq, while Saddam Hussein and his sons continued to grind the families of the women they had raped into hamburger.
It is ironic that those who scream loudest about the war in Iraq are the ones who are the most ardent supporters of the idea that we are responsible for the poverty of other nations. They are textbook examples of the moral and philosophical ambivalence of the modern Left.
— Joseph Baum
Newton Falls, Ohio
Re: Jed Babbin’s Subway Security SGO:
Allow me to add one more idea to Jed Babbin’s suggestions for defending against terrorism. Ever since 9/11 I have been waiting for the Department of Homeland Security to recognize that there are more targets for terrorists than our police can possibly watch. For example, I live two miles from a massive electric generating plant. Gaining entrance to that plant may be difficult (although I am not so sure), but a terrorist could eliminate electrical power over a vast range simply by dynamiting any of the numerous local connected structures that hold the power transporting wires.
During World War II, when we took our enemies seriously, we had Air Raid Wardens. I would like to see something akin to that again. Local men and women, many semi-retired perhaps, like myself, could be assigned to monitor likely terrorist targets. I am not suggesting a para-military group. After a little training, just send them on patrol, armed with cell phones to contact police in the event of suspicious activity.
— Kenneth A. Cory
We Americans, and sadly, the Brits as well, are getting all the security our politicians have determined we need, or that it has been possible to implement since 9/11. We now see that N.Y. subway riders are being forced to experience random bag searches, or be denied entrance to the system. This will, no doubt, save us from a terror attack on the mass transit system.
We dare not remove, or lock up, those in our midst who preach hatred and violence against our government, citizens, or way of life. Such an action would be prudent, and would certainly save lives, but what of the rights of those who preach violence?
We dare not engage in profiling when we search passengers or baggage incident to their boarding any mode of transportation, lest we be guilty of the crime of political incorrectness.
The methodology behind the searches is patently ridiculous. When a searcher tells a Medal of Honor winner he can’t take the Medal on an aircraft, one has to realize the entire system is ludicrous. Dress codes for air marshals, which serves to identify them to potential hijackers, is another stupid blunder.
Our borders are not defended, out of our politician’s fear that to do so might cost them votes in the next election, or the fear that one of their business oriented contributors might see his profits diminished by having to pay more for labor.
Our immigration laws are not enforced. Cities declare themselves independent of enforcing federal laws regarding illegal aliens, arguing that illegal immigrants will not report crimes or cooperate with authorities. Hello, since when did anyone who has knowingly broken the laws of the country cooperate with authorities?
When citizens volunteer to help watch the borders, our president compares them with vigilantes, and their efforts are denigrated by politicians.
We have the government we have voted into office, at the national, state, and local levels. Until something happens to wake up the voters enough that they demand our politicians act in the best interests of the citizenry, we will continue to be at risk.
Sadly, I see that awakening as being delayed until another horrific act of terrorism occurs within our borders. It has been almost four years since 9/11, and we are still extremely vulnerable. We would not be if we had the will to mobilize to fight the war we are in. Until we do so, we are giving the enemy another free shot at killing many more of us.
Had those responsible for fighting World War II reacted the same way our politicians do today, we might not have won that war. If America doesn’t wake up, we may not win this one, not because we don’t have the means, but because we don’t have the will.
— R. Goodson
Vero Beach, Florida
I wonder. If the bombing and attempted bombings in London have brought home to the American public that we are still a prime target, then the Bush haters would surely realize that we face a most dedicated and cruel enemy unwilling to be appeased by even the most “kissy face” diplomacy….
— Bill Rouchell
River Ridge, Louisiana
NOW HEAR THIS
Re: Michael Tobias’s letter in Reader Mail’s Misunderestimation Station in response to J. Peter Freire’s The Burden of Free Markets:
Mr. Tobias is spot on about Red China. But things are more serious than many have admitted.
The ChiComs’ sudden increased consumption of oil this year had a twofold purpose. The first was to put pressure on the U.S. economy through decreased supply and higher pricing. The second purpose was to build a stockpile for the People’s Liberation Army. In support of this assertion, please note that China’s high consumption just dropped dramatically within the past week.
The Reds are ready for war and they will be attacking soon. In keeping with Mr. Tobias’ analogy to World War II Japan, I urge this country to get ready for conflict by the end of the year and disperse the Pacific Fleet before we face a new Pearl Harbor.
— Ken Lizotte
Re: Jack Faraday in Reader Mail’s Misunderestimation Station in response to George Neumayr’s Anti-Religious Tests:
“To counter the suggestion that the Democrats are anti-Catholic bigots, John Kerry could point out that he is a Catholic. Was he not the Presidential candidate?”
Divorced and remarried, pro-abortion, pro-homosexual John Kerry is about as Catholic as my West Highland Terrier. Sorry, Millie.
“The suggestion that the Democratic Party is somehow anti-religious (name a couple of high-placed atheists…), or simply anti-Catholic, is just patent ridiculousnessâ€¦”
No, what is patently ridiculous is the idea that one may dissent from (and in the case of the Democratic Party, actively oppose) every principle of Catholic morality and yet somehow not be “anti-Catholic.” You might as well suggest that the Democrats are not “anti-Republican.”
— Hunter Yerger
I think there is one thing that our side should keep in mind. In the past four Supreme Court approvals, the Dems controlled the Senate. Consequently, what they thought, what they wanted, the direction they were going to take things in the hearings were all important because they controlled the process.
What about having one round of questions in Committee and then a vote? We all know how everybody is going to vote anyway, so why string it out? Yes, there will still be the vote on the floor, but the Dems are not in charge, so why act like they are?
HUGHES AND KERRY
Re: The Washington Prowler’s Fringe Democrats:
Well, hey, if George Voinovich was at the hearing, then the Dems really had someone there.
— Elaine Kyle
Cut & Shoot, Texas
REVENGE OF THE CONS
Re: Wlady Pleszczynski’s It’s the End of the World:
From a 47 year old, who has been hearing the slants and dictates of the media since the age of eight, with 30 years of a conservative editorial from my father, I would like to say, “well said.”
— Daniel Wesley
Greer, South Carolina
Re: Christopher Orlet’s See No Evil:
My patriotism and hatred of the enemies of the United States would probably get me fired from most jobs. That is part of the reason I have not drawn a paycheck since 1975. PC kills.
— Walter E. Wallis