Stern Discourse - The American Spectator | USA News and Politics
Stern Discourse

Re: Colby Cosh’s Stern in Space:

Colby Cosh describes the Stern phenomenon perfectly. As a fan of the show, I would have to cringe or change the station when he would ignorantly spout the NYC liberal bashing of our efforts in Iraq. On the other hand, I always chafe when people of all political persuasions rip Stern without ever listening to the show.

Without the FCC breathing down his neck, I assume the liberal rhetoric will tone down. With the hurdles in place that take satellite out of the definition of “broadcasting,” the decency nannies will take their fight elsewhere. Either way, it’s a win-win situation for all involved. I just wonder where the heck the value of Sirius’ stock (SIRI- Nasdaq) should be.
William H. Stewart
Boston, Massachusetts

I have never listened to Howard Stern but will subscribe to Satellite Radio for my own reasons: The death of the “culture” music on commercial broadcast radio and in the recording studio.

Just perusing the menus of music available on XM or Sirius’ websites shows more than enough variety to easily span the last 20 to 30 years of typical FM programming in Detroit where commercial radio is in a squalid state.

Commercial POP has also done away with the “regional” characteristics of an artist’s style. Style in music these days is to be avoided at all cost. It’s much easier to sign train wrecks like Ashley Simpson and Courtney Love than scout for talent that takes time, risk, and media money to promote. The Courtney Love/Ashley Simpson types generate media attention by their own foibles. A savings that “Big Media” appreciates. I often joke that radio stations play “music” because; “…that’s the airtime left over that the station failed to sell advertising for”.

Local radio station consolidation is only the last gasp of commercial broadcasting. The “quality” or regional style of POP music and local radio was done away with along time ago in each station’s attempt to go National, rather than appeal to a local and (at least in the past) loyal audience.
P. Aaron Jones
Huntington Woods, Michigan

There is a very important difference between Howard Stern and Rush Limbaugh. Those that listen to the mindless crap that Stern puts out didn’t help to put a group of evil, unprincipled people in charge of our once great country.
Bob Crosswhite

Re: R. Emmett Tyrrell’s Moderating Dean:

Prince Metternich is six feet under and in the final stages of ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Much like the state the Democratic Party will be in when the Clinton’s have finally exhausted their political machinations.

As you noted, Howard Dean has been and will continue to be a very useful idiot for the Clintons. Much like the way Jim Guy Tucker, Webb Hubbell and Jim McDougal all were. The burning question I have is will Howard Dean serve a prison term for the Clintons or will he be smarter than his predecessors?
Mrs. John B. Jackson III (Janet)

Re: George Neumayr’s Torturing Alberto:

Greatly enjoyed your well-done article on the hypocrisy of the democratic inquisitors of the Hon. Mr. Gonzales.

It turns my stomach to watch the pompous ass Teddy “Happy-Hour” Kennedy patronizingly scold this highly-qualified candidate when he himself plunged a woman to a cold, watery death with his reckless drunken philandering, only to get clean away with it!

Only one correction: May I suggest that you replace “near infanticide” (RE partial birth abortions) with “infanticide”?

Keep bringing it on!
Bob Lovell
Cookeville, Tennessee

Excellent article. It should be required reading for every member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, even if only the Republicans would be able to comprehend it. But perhaps, using simple words, they could explain it to Kennedy and Leahy. Hope springs eternal. Thank you.
W. R. Schmidt, M. D.
Walnut Creek, California

In an otherwise excellent article we have this —

“Suspending habeas corpus for Al Qaeda doesn’t threaten the Constitution; it protects it. We wouldn’t have a Constitution to defend unless American leaders possessed constitutional powers to win wars. It makes sense to suspend habeas corpus to save the Constitution from its enemies; it makes no sense to lose the Constitution in a war so as to save the habeas corpus rights of Al Qaeda. “

I find it beyond belief that we fought WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam and Gulf War I with no calls for the suspension of habeas corpus. Nor the need. I find little discernible difference between al Qaeda or the Viet Cong that would require the suspension of habeas corpus. And now we shake in our minds that we should suspend protections of individuals out of fear? As Americans we have more courage than that, Mr. Neumayr. History shows we can get the job done very nicely without judicial manipulations.

What we should be up in arms about is the lack of trust our leaders have in us. Why do I say that? If America was in danger from within where is the Civil Defense mobilization commiserate with WWII efforts? Where are the calls for Red Cross volunteers? Essentially where is the mobilization of the citizenry to come to the aid of the country short of picking up a firearm? We did that in WWII on a massive scale. The level of money and donations that are coming to the aid of the tidal wave victims by private citizens indicates we as a people have the drive. I can only therefore conclude that our leaders are either lacking in imagination or do not trust us to defend ourselves as they deem fit.
John McGinnis
Arlington, Texas

Actually, the platform of the Democrat Party is built on crimes against humanity, if the U.N. Charter and Universal Declaration of Human Rights are applied, as well as human rights abuse.

That the Dems continue to pose as champions of human rights is only because their publicity wing, the mainstream media, refuses to touch that duplicity and absurdity. Too, Republicans and conservatives, especially people of faith who are pro-life, have failed to make more and continuous clamor about such horrific behavior.

As for Democrats and liberals caring more about the rights of terrorists than they do about the unborn or even the born in America, or our soldiers overseas — or caring more about anyone or anything else than our country and its defense and future: Is anyone really surprised or shocked?

After all, when the party and the MSM make mountains out of the molehills of Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld using an auto-signature or Abu Ghraib, don’t they demonstrate their indecent plot, as well as hypocrisy and worthlessness?
C. Kenna Amos Jr.
Princeton, West Virginia

Re: The Washington Prowler’s Certifiably Boxer:

Do the Dems have any idea how petty and stupid this makes them look? Around an 119,000 majority does not make a close race.

And have you noticed it is “always” the black want-a-be who causes the trouble. Let Jesse Jackson go back to his mistress! Maybe that can keep him busy.

If an election result should be looked into it should be the Governor’s race in Washington state — three recounts before getting the result they wanted?

And now, after “finding” the necessary votes, all of a sudden, the vote is over? Give me a break! They are getting as trustworthy as the UN — and just as dumb looking.
Betty Wiggins

Re: William Tucker’s Tort Reform’s Ground Zero:

I live in Madison County, Illinois, and I’m presently looking for our fourth doctor in less than two years because all the doctors are leaving due to malpractice lawyers.
Jim Thompson
Godfrey, Illinois

Mr. William Tucker is a wonderful reporter and writer, and we count on public writers like him to protect the English language. In our on-going efforts to protect the Mother Tongue, we ask Mr. Tucker to refrain from using the word “epicenter” when he means “center.” It is incorrect to refer to Edwardsville, Illinois, as “the epicenter of America’s tort crisis.”

“Epicenter” is a precise term whose proper use will largely be limited to the subject of earthquakes. Since one cannot identify the center of an earthquake, one must be satisfied with the point above the center, which is what the word “epicenter” means.

Mr. Tucker appears to be slipping into the regrettable tendency of some writers to enhance and strengthen words that do not easily require such modification. Either one is at the center of something or he is not at the center, just as something is either unique or it is not and a woman is pregnant or she is not.

Please ask Mr. Tucker to stand for beauty and precision in his wordsmithing. May he forgo the temptation to use an inaccurate larger word instead of an accurate smaller word.

With great respect for The American Spectator and Mr. Tucker, I am
Noah Skuce

William Tucker replies:
It seems to me “epicenter” describes exactly Madison County’s position as the point on the earth’s surface directly above the social earthquake of tort reform.

Re: Jackie Mason and Raoul Felder’s No Good Deed Goes Unpunished:

Jackie and Raoul have got it right! I, as a non-Jew, but fellow American am tired of the rest of the world only wanting our help, but wish us and Israel ill will otherwise!

AMEN! AMEN! and AMEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
S. Johnson
Gainesville, Florida

Jackie Mason and Raoul Felder have it totally backwards. Here’s why:

Israel’s offer of assistance to the earthquake and tsunami victims is not simply commendable, but literally breathtaking. For a small country to offer that kind of assistance, and that level of assistance, borders on being “American” — whatever it takes and whatever we have we will give you, no strings attached. For India, Sri Lanka and Indonesia to refuse it borders on the idiotic. But retinitis pigmentosa is not easily diagnosed on the fly.

It certainly hasn’t escaped my notice, or the authors, that the wealthiest Muslim countries have given but a pittance. It has escaped the mention by the media, but that is a separate issue. Perhaps they have a separate objective. That shouldn’t affect ours — the spread of freedom to all the people on earth.

The suggestion that “there should be a precondition that before these nations receive any aid, they should clearly denounce terrorism and, at the very least, discontinue the state-sponsored anti-American drivel heard in that part of the world” is at best, a straw man, which totally negates the magnanimity and humanity of both Israel and the United States. Demanding a quid pro quo, in advance, completely destroys the humanitarian nature of the offer of aid and makes it into a political ploy. I, for one American, do not want to go there. As Americans, we are above that.

This point is completely misdirected as a way of advancing America’s objectives. It is, of course, a fair test for ordinary delivery of humanitarian, economic, development and military assistance. We should not contribute one dime to any country that even occasionally votes against the United States in the United Nations, any subsidiaries thereof, or any other international organization of which we are a member. We should announce such a policy and adhere to it 100% of the time. However, the people whose lives are devastated by the earthquake and tsunami have more immediate concerns and needs, which we can help ameliorate at little cost to ourselves. We should pick our battles carefully, using a rifle rather than the shotgun that Mason and Felder advocate. If nothing else, WE will feel better about it. And there isn’t a damn thing wrong with that.

Moreover, their arguments are specious. There are no “virtual” countries, so we either contribute more than any other country or we do not. This is an objectively verifiable fact which needs no qualifications. The private sector of America does contribute more than any other nation. Period. There is no need to hedge on that.

To insinuate that “money that Jewish Americans” could do anything better with this money is just about as racial and un-American as possible, implying that Jewish Americans are some privileged class and entitled to affirmative action quotas. That, in a word, is “tommyrot.” They ought to be embarrassed to even hint at such a thing.

Their final suggestion — that we can’t know whether the aid will reach the intended victims and survivors based on widespread United Nations misadministration of other humanitarian efforts — defies logic and ignores the facts as we now know them. American aid is not being funneled through the U.N. — it is being directed, at the order of the President of the United States, through his personal contribution even — through private organizations or directly from the U. S. government. What the U.N. does is absolutely NO reason to withhold our assistance. It’s a very good reason to completely bypass the U.N. — no matter how much Clare Short howls on CNN or the BBC. And, as far as we know, that is being done. And Hallelujah!
C. R. Melton
Arlington, Virginia

Messrs. Mason and Felder are correct in saying the world’s media, including the mainstream of America, have a vested interest in casting Israel as a Palestinian-murdering villain.

Why? Could it be they would have no pots to stir, no ratings to achieve, if they didn’t generate endless non- or biased news about the Middle East? Could it be these left-leaning, liberal, Democrat-friendly, so-called news organizations are populated with too many narrow-minded and intellectually bigoted people? Or could it be because the darlings of the MSM and Democrats — the Europeans, especially the French and all those purported victims worldwide, including those of the “religion of peace,” Islam — hate Israel and the Jews? Or could it be that they hate Israel simply because Christian America doesn’t?

Mason and Felder raise another correct point, that we should hold up monies — taxpayers’ monies which none of us were asked about giving freely, as I recall — because we don’t know if the money and supplies will get to the people who need it. And not just because of the Oil-for-Food scandal, about which the MSM continues to be asleep, but also things like Somalia, Nicaragua and other places where our support was squandered.

But, of course, if it makes the liberals and leftists feel good, but is void of common sense and responsibility — and will “restore” our relationship to the world’s dictators and others who populate the U.N. — then certainly it must be a worthwhile endeavor to be done immediately, right?
C. Kenna Amos Jr.
Princeton, West Virginia

Re: George Neumayr’s The Great Flood:

Yes, the globalists who believe that man can create a utopia on earth without any need for God, when they can force their fellow human beings into compliance, do have “reality checks.” The Asian tidal wave is a reminder to the world of how puny and fragile man really is. Geopolitical stratagems of the rich and powerful elite notwithstanding, the atheistic, hedonistic, man-centered social order they envision will never be realized. It is a mirage crafted by the Evil One to exhaust the energies of those who fruitlessly pursue it, and distract them and as many other human beings as possible from the pursuit of the only social order that really matters — the Social Kingship of Jesus Christ. Mr. Neumayr is gifted with remarkable powers of insight and perception, and the ability to convey through the written word the conclusions he draws. Thanks to The American Spectator, he has the opportunity and the forum for sharing all that with the rest of us. Viva, Christo Rey!

This crazed Methodist John Wesley preached that earthquakes were caused by SINS and the way to cure or stop them was to believe onto the lord Jesus Christ. When science was a child the church tried to strangle it in its cradle! When this wonderful journal brings up anything that can be linked to revealed religion, the armchair philosophers of incredulity flock to their keyboards. We aren’t going to find answers for tsunami’s, etc. from the fall of man, the garden of Eden, the flood and the atonement. the church can put into the mouth of the Santissimo Salvatore, that, “if any man have ears to hear, let him hear.” some man, or men who like to keep in obscurity might say, “he that hath brains to think, let him think.” To the editors of my favorite journal of opinion, please commission one of your young byliners to write a piece on the irremissibility of post-baptismal sin! Or, why does an infinite and wise god treat all alike here and in another world make an infinite difference?

You forgot to mention that the victims of the Tsunami were not Roman Catholic, therefore it hardly matters what happens to them anyway.

It is all very well to drag out Noah and lament about our sinful and fallen world, but easy rationalizations (of either the natural or supernatural variety) that “explain away” human suffering and misery, and allow one to dismiss the victims of natural disaster as ‘a collection of corpses’, are inaccurate, inhuman, and insane.

You have a warped mind, sir.
Gene Schmidt
Brooklyn, New York

Re: The Washington Prowler’s Clintonista Climbers:

Richard Holbrooke’s support of Kofi Annan is a disgusting and embarrassing attempt by the Clintonistas to promote Global Secularism.

The U.N. may have a role as a forum and focus for rallying support to address natural disasters and other tragedies. However, Kofi Annan’s performance has demonstrated that he does not have acumen to manage or the skills to lead this organization.
Robert W. Martin
Coral Springs, Florida

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, 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!