Re: Jackie Mason & Raoul Felder’s A Nation of Hypocrites:
At the end of the day it can be said that those who sit still for everything will never stand for anything.
— Dick Melville
Ozone Park, NY
Nixon vs. McGovern is a poor choice of examples. If we didn’t vote for Tricky Dick we get George McGovern. A corrupt politician may cost you some money but electing a pinhead liberal to the presidency might have cost us our lives. Can you imagine what kind of shape this country would be in if George McGovern were President from 1973 to 1980. Your overall point is well taken, but it’s the major parties that keep putting up the same lousy candidates one election cycle after another.
— Ed Callahan
La Habra, CA
Re: The Washington Prowler’s Moranic Behavior:
Jim Moran is an eminent and overdue candidate for EOW. He is a liberal putz on so many issues, and the preponderance of his constituents just love him.
My deepest thanks go to The Prowler for addressing Virginia’s 8th District carpetbagger’s characteristic stupidity. To live in Arlington as a conservative, one can appreciate how John the Baptist subsisted on locusts and wild honey — it is a lonely, Spartan existence!
For years, I have had to apologize to pro-life friends for my allegedly Catholic representative’s stance on abortion. Now, I have an entire, new Jewish demographic to offer apologies to on behalf of our obnoxious congressman.
To the Dem staff who termed Pelosi’s wrist-slap of Moran as “smart politics”: it’s only a matter of time before Moran really embarrasses your party!
— Mark Stoffel
(The People’s Republic of) Arlington, VA
Re: Michael Craig’s What’s the Big Idea?
Wow, are you ever confused. In my humble opinion, your screed is about half as long as it should be, because you forgot to add a sentence after each one that did get posted — in my superior opinion. That’s okay, I guess, because we’re all supposed to be grown-ups, here — those who read The American Prowler surely understand this.
Beyond this background assumption, the body of your piece screams to me that you are a liberal and voted for Gore, or maybe even the lawyer Nader. Am I right? Or, are you just being provocative, and pretending to be on the left-wing side — lawyers (like you?) are, of course, trained to be able to take either side of an issue. What are your core principles? I bet they are freedom to say anything you want.
As for your opinion with respect to Bush and promises — the first point is that promises are spit, when it comes to politicians, no matter their stripe. Pols do and say whatever they can to get elected, within the limits of their own personal core convictions, so even a Bush had to choose how to dance through the initiatiry rite, called getting elected, using the good advice of Karl Rove, and others. But I don’t remember too many specific promises, and what I do see that Bush has accomplished — the tax bill — and the war in Afghanistan and the push against Iraq sure look good to me, as accomplishments. And that the ball is certainly rolling down the right hill, meaning that over the next two years, we should see a lot of market-friendly real results, and big changes in the foreign arena, of a positive nature.
Maybe the problem with the market is that the uncertainty is growing, daily, due to the procrastination caused by the wobblers-in-chief, like Powell, who’ve caused the removal of Saddam to be delayed so long — far too long. One of the great strategies in the market is to cut your losses and let your profits run. It seems to me that Bush is doing the precise opposite, to a certain extent, with respect to Iraq. The correct way to understand the over-playing-out of the Iraqi soap opera is to realize that every day’s delay means an extra 1,000 dead men, say, or more. Imagine a tote board, like the one that used to flash in bright lights the increase in the national debt, that knew the future, and then recorded this real future, daily. Take every word that escapes the French cry-baby bureaucrats that puts off the day of reckoning for Saddam, as equivalent to another 10,000 dead humans, maybe even you.
The other aspect of a Bush promise, the actual proposed legislation before Congress — remember, the President proposes and the Congress disposes. And the real foot-draggers are the extreme left-wing Democrats, epitomized by Pelosi and Daschle. The Senate is the real problem, so even though the GOP is the majority, de facto, due to those putative Republicans from the Northeast, like a Lincoln Chafee and Olympia Snowe — all Jeffords wannabes? — and since you need 60 votes for cloture, a realist would have to acknowledge that Bush faces tough opposition.
Promises made and promises kept, with respect to Bush? I think you’d be better served to join the real world and count your lucky stars that GWB is currently in office. IMHO, you ain’t seen nothing yet from his presidency, and naysayers like you will be consigned to the ash can, in the field of analysis of his presidency. Keep it up, though. We all love court jesters with the courage to make fools of themselves. Got to find humor where you can, these dark days.
— James F. Crystal
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.