About Me

Name: JBDavis
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

More from Fred.

Fred writing on the treatment of Muslim women:


Sometimes, you read or hear something, and an image forms in your mind that just won’t go away. For me, one of those images comes from the 2002 news stories about religious police in Mecca, Saudi Arabia, who beat young girls trying to escape a burning school. Because they weren’t wearing headscarves and black robes, 15 innocent girls were locked in a blazing building to burn while firemen watched helplessly.

Not all Saudis support this sort of extremism, but many Muslim radicals reject the premise that women should have even the most basic rights. These include the right to vote, to work, to drive, to choose one’s own husband, to charge a man with abuse or simply to move about without male escort.

One of the worst examples of this gender oppression was Afghanistan during the Taliban days. Women were not allowed to go to school, to work outside the home or even go out in public without a male family member. A woman with a medical emergency, but no male relatives to take her to a doctor, was expected simply to suffer or die. An aged woman with no one to bring her food was expected to starve. Too many did.

Life for women under the Taliban and similar governments ought to inspire anger and indignation in everybody, especially human rights advocates. I’m constantly surprised, however, by the apparent apathy among many who say they care about the rights of women and other minorities.

I doubt, for example, that our television networks have spent as much time exposing the horrors of life for millions of women in pre-liberation Iraq and Afghanistan as they’ve spent covering Abu Ghraib. For some reason, everyday atrocities such as the endemic beatings, honor killings and forced marriages of women just don’t seem to be newsworthy.

The other side of that coin is that we also rarely hear about dramatic improvements in the lives of women when they come about due to American actions. So let me take a little of your time to give you some good news that might have slipped through the journalistic cracks.

A new study from Johns Hopkins University indicates that, since the Taliban was ousted five years ago, Afghan infant-mortality rates have improved dramatically. Every year, more than 40,000 babies live that would have died under Islamofascist tyranny — and the statistics are still improving. The main reason, according to the study, is improved women’s access to medical care.

Some people, including World Bank health specialists, say infant-mortality rates have improved far more than the Johns Hopkins study shows — because the data used is several years old. We know, for example, that the number of Afghan children who are getting vaccinations has doubled and redoubled in just the last few years. Similarly, the number of pregnant women receiving pre-natal care went up six-fold between 2003 and 2006.

In Iraq, the health-care and educational statistics are even better. There are, of course, still many areas of life that need to improve in both countries, but we’re moving in the right direction.

The next time I’m reminded of the suffering women endure in too many radicalized Muslim cultures, or apathy toward their plight back here at home, I’m going to conjure up the image of 40 or 50 thousand Muslim mothers smiling into the faces of healthy babies. You might try the same — and remember, while you’re doing it, that these babies would not be alive today if it were not for the U.S. and Coalition soldiers
.


He's good.

Run, Fred, Run!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Fred Thompson on health care in Cuba

This man really knows how to get his point across. This is what makes him the first choice for me. Here he is discussing Micheal Moores stunt of taking ground zero workers to Cuba to get health care:

 

You might have read the stories about filmmaker Michael Moore taking ailing workers from Ground Zero in Manhattan to Cuba for free medical treatments. According to reports, he filmed the trip for a new movie that bashes America for not having government-provided health care.

Now, I have no expectation that Moore is going to tell the truth about Cuba or health care. I defend his right to do what he does, but Moore's talent for clever falsehoods has been too well documented. Simply calling his movies documentaries rather than works of fiction, I think, may be the biggest fiction of all.


While this PR stunt has obviously been successful -- here I am talking about it -- Moore's a piker compared to Fidel Castro and his regime. Moore just parrots the story they created -- one of the most successful public relations coups in history. This is the story of free, high quality Cuban health care.

The truth is that Cuban medical care has never recovered from Castro's takeover -- when the country’s health care ranked among the world's best. He won the support of the Cuban people by promising to replace Batista’s dictatorship with free elections, and to end corruption. Once in power, though, he made himself dictator and instituted Soviet-style Communism. Cubans not only failed to regain their democratic rights, their economy plunged into centrally planned poverty.

As many as half of Cuba's doctors fled almost immediately -- and defections continue to this day. Castro won't allow observers in to monitor his nation's true state, but defectors tell us that many Cubans live with permanent malnutrition and long waits for even basic medical services. Many treatments we take for granted aren't available at all -- except to the Communist elite or foreigners with dollars.

For them, Castro keeps "show" clinics equipped with the best medicines and technologies available. It was almost certainly one of these that Moore went to, if the stories in the NY Post and The Daily News are true.

Nothing about this story inspires doubt, though. Elements in Hollywood have been infatuated with the Cuban commander for years. It always leaves me shaking my head when I read about some big-time actor or director going to Cuba and gushing all over Castro. And, regular as rain, they bring up the health care myth when they come home.

What is it that leads people to value theoretically "free" health care, even when it's lousy or nonexistent, over a free society that actually delivers health care? You might have to deal with creditors after you go to the emergency ward in America, but no one is denied medical care here. I guarantee even the poorest Americans are getting far better medical services than many Cubans.


Run, Fred, Run!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

What - Iran is supplying Iraqi terrorist cells with weapons and explosively formed penetrators? Who new?

The answer, of course, is anybody capable of rational thought. This is a news release from Central Command:



The individuals targeted during the raid are suspected members of a secret cell terrorist network known for facilitating the transport of weapons and explosively formed penetrators, or EFPs, from Iran to Iraq, as well as bringing militants from Iraq to Iran for terrorist training.



If this comes as a surprise to you. Where have you been?

Not only do I think we should be in Iraq, but we should be in Iran, too. I think this is one of the most overlooked thing about the whole War. I feel we would have secured Iraq long ago, if they were not getting weapons, training, and replacements from Iran and Syria. That is our main problem in securing Iraq. How long do you think World War II would have went on if we were just fighting Japan. They are,after all the only ones to attack America itself. Just fighting Japan, while they were getting weapons, training and replacements from Germany and Italy.

Just a thought.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Criminals Beware, of little girls with guns.

Especially when they are three time skeet shooting champions:


Two illegal aliens, Ralphel Resindez 23 and Enrico Garza 26, probably believed they would easily overpower a home alone 11 year old Patricia Harrington after her father had left their two story home.

It seems the two crooks never learned two things, they were in Montana and Patricia had been a clay shooting champion since she was nine. Patricia was in her upstairs room when the two men broke through the front door of the house. She quickly ran to her father's room and grabbed his 12 gauge Mossberg 500 shotgun.

Resindez was the first to get up to the second floor only to be the first to catch a near point blank blast of buck shot from the 11 year olds knee crouch aim. He suffered fatal wounds to his abdomen and genitals. When Garza ran to the foot of the stairs, he took a blast to the left shoulder and staggered out into the street where he bled to death before medical help could arrive.

It was found out later that Resindez was armed with a stolen 45 caliber handgun he took from another home invasion robbery. The victim, 50 year old David Burien, was not so lucky as he died from stab wounds to the chest.


Seems like a fitting ending to the story, don't you think.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (3) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Charlie Daniels - on the Iraq War.

He not only plays fiddle and sings. He has it figured out about Iraq, too:


Defeatist Party

I have for sometime felt that the Democratic leadership in the Congress and Senate simply don’t understand the danger and dedication of our Islamic blood enemy. Not because they’re Democrats but because they’re flower children and naive
idealists wearing the blinders of political correctness and united in their hatred of George W. Bush.

As long as they were just ranting and raving it was just an annoyance, but now that they are in power the silly games they’re playing not only endanger the lives of dedicated men and women fighting in the war on terror, it threatens the very future of the United States of America and by extension free nations everywhere.

Why do I say this? Well let’s just suppose they have their way and force the withdrawal of troops from Iraq in October. The casualties we would take from such a withdrawal would be catastrophic, very likely more than we’ve had during the entire campaign in Iraq.

It would make it so easy for the enemy, no longer having to be on the defensive at all but dedicating their entire efforts to killing retreating troops with roadside bombs, ground to air missiles and suicide attacks on convoys of troops leaving the
country in mass. It would be slaughter on a horrible scale.

It seems that the Democrats, and some Republicans too, seem intent on giving Al Qaida their own country and base of operations, because that’s exactly what will happen if we pull out of Iraq prematurely.

This could well be the war to end all wars because if we allow
Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and the rest of the cut and run bunch to lead us to defeat, it’s hard for me to imagine that any ally we have would ever trust us again.

The U.S.A. will always be known as the nation without the guts to finish what they started, a nation without commitment, who left the Iraqi people, who trusted us to bring them a better life, to a force just as evil as the one we delivered them from, to be slaughtered and tortured and deprived of any semblance of a decent life.

We would embolden our enemies to the point that they would think they can do whatever they want to and America won’t have the will to even defend themselves.

Do you think I’m wrong? Well let’s both hope so, but what if I’m right?

Can you even imagine what would happen to the Iraqi people? They’d be left to the cruel whims of maniacs who hack off heads and destroy women and children with no pangs of conscience at all, people who believe that women are no more than breeding units and servants of men who have no rights and can be beaten like cattle with impunity.

Suppose we pull out of Iraq and the crazies in Iran join with Al Qaida and take over the oil production and distribution in the Persian Gulf.

When gas is six dollars a gallon, Al Qaida comes to America
and begins to slaughter our citizens, what will you do Ms. Pelosi and Mr. Reid when you won’t have your tired old mantra about it being President Bush’s fault?

Because you see, you and the defeatist party will own this war, lock stock and barrel. And when that happens God help us all.

Pray for our troops.

What do you think?

God Bless America

Charlie Daniels
April 30, 2007
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Ann Coulter's take on the Democratic debate.

It's definitely worth the time:



NO WONDER THEY'RE AFRAID OF BRIT HUME
May 2, 2007

I just woke up from watching the Democrats' debate last Thursday, and I am rested and ready to report!

Someone needs to tell the Democrats to stop talking about their families. I know they're trying to demonstrate their "family values," but using actual, live human beings to illustrate the freakish ideas of the Democratic base just makes normal people uncomfortable.

When Chris Dodd was asked about gay marriage, he said he always thinks of his little daughters — aged 2 and 5 — and imagines them turning out to be lesbians, saying he would want them treated equally.

To prove his bona fides to the environmentalist nuts, Obama said: "We've also been working to install lightbulbs that last longer and save energy. And that's something that I'm trying to teach my daughters, 8-year-old Malia and 5-year-old Sasha."

So we finally have an answer to the question: What do Democrats teach their daughters? Is it:

(a) integrity
(b) character
(c) the importance of always telling the truth

No! The answer is: (d) They teach their daughters to use low-energy lightbulbs. This is so important that it apparently bears mentioning during a debate under high-intensity TV studio lights.

(How many kids does it take to screw in a lightbulb? In the Barack household, evidently, it takes two.)

"Best in Show" for cringe-inducing mentions of family members went to John Edwards. In the single most appalling moment of the debate, John Edwards reminisced about the time his father, who was sitting in the audience, totally humiliated him as a child.

"I can remember vividly my dad after church once Sunday, when I was about 10 years old, taking us — it's our whole family — into a restaurant. I was dressed up. I was very proud to be there, and we sat, got our menus, looked at the menus, and the waitress came over and my father said, 'I'm sorry. We have to leave.' I didn't understand. 'Why? Why do we have to leave?' And I was embarrassed. I found out when we got outside the reason we had to leave is he couldn't pay the prices that were on the menu."

Thanks for the memories, Pop!

The not-visibly-insane Democrats all claim they'll get rough with the terrorists, but they can't even face Brit Hume.

In case you missed this profile in Democrat machismo, the Democratic presidential candidates are refusing to participate in a debate hosted by Fox News Channel because the hosts are "biased." But they'll face down Mahmoud Ahmadinejad!

At this, even Hillary Clinton was thinking, "Come on, guys — let's grow a pair."

Obama was asked to name "America's three most important allies around the world" — a question rejected as "too easy" on Fox's new game show "Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader?" Any politically savvy 11-year-old could have named Britain, Australia and Israel.

B. Hussein Obama answered: "the European Union." Which is (a) not a country, and (b) not an ally.

What was his next guess? Epcot Center?

In addition to not being a country, the "European Union" happens to be composed of people who hate our guts. It is the continent where Moveon.org-style lunatics are the friendly, pro-American types and the rest are crazy Muslims.

Obama did eventually mention Japan as an ally — along with China and Afghanistan — which would have been a better answer to the question: "Who are America's four or five most important allies?" But at least he named a country that could conceivably be called "an ally."

Of course, it took Obama less time to remember an American ally than it took John Edwards to remember Jesus. Edwards was asked who his "moral leader" was — and he was stuck for an answer.

I had time to shout "Jesus" at the TV 20 times, exhaust myself, and have a sandwich before Edwards finally coughed up "mah lowrd." Even then it appeared that Edwards was not actually naming the Savior but exclaiming, "Mah lowrd, that's a tough question!"

Edwards then put "mah lowrd" (assuming that was his answer) on a par with other moral leaders such as his father — who had embarrassed him so as a child — and his wife. (When he mentioned his spouse as a "moral leader," Hillary visibly tensed for fear that she might be asked the same question.)

In fairness to Edwards, asking a trial lawyer to name his favorite moral leader is like asking the president of Iran to name his favorite Jew. (Answer: George Soros.)

If you're keeping score, that's two major religions the Democrats lack a working knowledge of — Christianity and Islam.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

That is truly a special "veto pen".

Michelle Malkin has found the story behind the veto pen President Bush used to let the Democrats know he is not a Quitter.


Bush signed the veto with a pen given to him by Robert Derga, the father of Marine Corps Reserve Cpl. Dustin Derga, who was killed in Iraq on May 8, 2005. The elder Derga spoke with Bush two weeks ago at a meeting the president had with military families at the White House.

Derga asked Bush to promise to use the pen in his veto. On Tuesday, Derga contacted the White House to remind Bush to use the pen, and so he did. The 24-year-old Dustin Derga served with Lima Company, 3rd Battalion 25th Marines from Columbus, Ohio. The five-year Marine reservist and fire team leader was killed by an armor-piercing round in Anbar Province.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Video: Murtha slams Petraeus.

Murtha claims Gen. Petraeus is a political hack. He also claims that we are not fighting an Al Qaeda front in Iraq. He says "based on the intelligence we have", which is where I see a major problem. The Democrats have not been attending meetings with Petraeus. We know this for sure. I would guess they are not over adamant about keeping up with intelligence either. In their minds the war is lost, and the only thing we can do is run.

Watch the video here.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Video: Hannity interviews Fred Thompson.

 From Hot air:

Part 1:

Part 2:




Run, Fred, Run!

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Video: O'Reilly, Malkin, and Powers discuss Immigration.

I wish a Republican would bring the open border crowd to task like Bill, an Independent, has been doing.

I also wish President Bush did not side with the Dems on this issue.

We need to secure our border.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Vetoed- Quit playing games and fund the troops.

Well he vetoed the " We give up" bill:


WASHINGTON  —  In a move that is no surprise to anyone, President Bush on Tuesday issued the second veto of his administration, setting up a new battle with congressional Democrats over a war spending bill to fund troops in Iraq that also sets a timetable for withdrawal.




Can the Democrats accept this and get to work on a more sane bill? I doubt it,too. I hope they are satisfied, they made their point. The are ready to quit. I would be too, if the Terrorist were. But, they have stated time and again they are not.

I think the Democrats know this too. I have stated before that this is all a ploy to regain the White House. I caught a little bit of Rush's show this morning.He agrees:



I said, "If it's Mrs. Clinton that's the next president or if it is the Breck Girl or if it's Obama, my guess is, they will not pull us out of Iraq.  They're not going to do that.  They're going to still engineer defeat. (Don't suggest that I've changed my mind about the Democrats owning defeat.)  You don't have to be in the White House to secure defeat.  They're doing everything they can to mobilize the enemy.  They're doing everything they can to motivate the enemy.  They're doing everything to de-motivate and demoralize US troops, but primarily you have to understand everything they do is through the political prism.  This is all about reacquiring the White House in this massive surge for power that they're trying to get."  What I'm saying is... You've heard Carl Levin say it, who, by the way, got protested in Michigan.  He got protested at University of Michigan at Ann Arbor because he said, "We're never going to de-fund the troops. We've never done that. We're not going to do it now," and a couple of other Democrats have said this, too.  So what's going on now is pure show; it's pure theatrics.  

They still haven't figured out that they are the majority in Congress.  You know, they can propose anything they want.  They can do whatever they want. They're still, though, acting like the minority.  They're just saying no to everything.  They're just running around complaining and doing all sorts of screaming like spoiled little brats.  But if they get to the White House, if they ever do, you have to think that they know what the real result would be of a massive pullout.  What they're trying to do is get Bush to either, A, do it -- and they know he's not going to pull out, either.  This is primary campaign mode, and this is keep their kook base happy time right now.  I think there's a 60-40 chance they would not pull the troops out of Iraq.  I mean this.  I don't think they would.  They know full-well what's going to happen to that region if we pull out of there.  Snerdley is shouting in the IFB at me, "What makes you think they care?"  This is a gut instinct of mine, and I admit I'm being charitable and generous with these people.  They think anybody would have to know what happened -- if we declare defeat and pull out of there, they would love for it to happen when Bush is president, but not when they're running the show. 

Do you think they want defeat saddled around their necks?  No.  They don't think that defeat will be saddled around their necks if they secure it before Bush leaves office.  That's what all this legislation is about.  This legislation is set up so that "Bush won't fund the troops; Bush is vetoing our funding bill."

 "Well, yeah, your funding bill requires a pullout in less than a year." 

"Well, that doesn't matter!  He says the troops need the money and then he's vetoing it."

They're trying to transfer total authority of the war -- again, in a PR sense, or political sense -- to the president.  They're trying to eliminate from anybody's memory that they all voted for it or 80% of them did. They're trying to eliminate from anybody's memory that they all saw the intelligence and they all knew what was going on in Iraq with Saddam and weapons of mass destruction.  They're trying to get rid of any of that from as many memories as possible and transfer this whole thing to Bush.  It's his war.  Even though they've been saying it's Bush's war for years, they want to try to effect this in a political sense as best they can.



The fact is, the money has to get there. We have to get the funding to the troops, now.

Support the troops!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Ton Tancredo on the possibility of the Democrats passing a major gun law.

He doubts they will pass anything major with this Congress:


When news of the murders hit the airwaves, it did not take long for anti-gun forces to demand stronger gun control. But Tancredo, who represents the Colorado congressional district that encompasses Columbine High School -- site of a 1999 school shooting -- says he thinks the Democrats are going to remember what happened the last time they passed a major gun-restriction law.

"In 1994, Republicans took over control of this place (Congress)," the conservative congressman notes, "and one of the reasons they did is because of what happened in 1993 when the Democrats passed the Brady Bill and some other pieces of anti-gun legislation."

Tancredo believes the Democrats know they would be risking a similar scenario by enacting such anti-gun legislation now. "They are well aware of it," he says, "and they have a slim majority in both houses. I don't think they want to risk that again."



He makes a good point about this Congress. Right now the Dems will not do anything that would harm their chances at the White House. I feel sure, if they do take the White House, we are in for some major stuff. I just hope it does not come to that.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Fred Thompson's new article.

I like the way he talks:


Sticks and Stones

It bothers Americans when we're told how unpopular we are with the rest of the world. For some of us, at least, it gets our back up -- and our natural tendency is to tell the French, for example, that we'd rather not hear from them until the day when they need us to bail them out again.

But we cool off. We're big boys and girls, after all, and we don't really bruise that easily. We're also hopeful that, eventually, our ostrich-headed allies will realize there's a World War going on out there and they need to pick a side -- the choice being between the forces of civilization and the forces of anarchy. Considering the fact that the latter team is growing stronger and bolder daily, while most of our European Union friends continue to dismantle their defenses, that day may not be too long in coming.

In the meantime, let's be realistic about the world we live in. Mexican leaders apparently have an economic policy based on exporting their own citizens, while complaining about US immigration policies that are far less exclusionary than their own. The French jail perfectly nice people for politically incorrect comments, but scold us for holding terrorists at Guantanamo.

Russia, though, takes the cake. Here is a government apparently run by ex-KGB agents who have no problem blackmailing whole countries by turning the crank on their oil pipelines. They're not doing anything shady, they say. They can’t help it if  their opponents are so notoriously accident-prone. Criticize these guys and you might accidentally drink a cup of tea laced with a few million dollars worth of deadly, and extremely rare, radioactive poison. Oppose the Russian leadership, and you could trip and fall off a tall building or stumble into the path of a bullet.

The hundreds of demonstrators the Kremlin has had beaten and arrested in the last few weeks alone, we are told, were not pro-democracy activists but common criminals -- like world chess champion Garry Kasparov. Demonstrating without a permit is a serious crime and, luckily for the Kremlin, it turns out that pro-government youth groups seem always to have permits for rallies at the exact times and places that anti-government protesters gather.

Another group that seems to be having trouble with permits is the media. Newspapers and television stations that aren't smart enough to know that America is the enemy and that things are great in Russia can't seem to get their paperwork in order. It’s some sort of IQ test, I guess.

President Vladimir Putin, though, shows no sign that he feels defensive about his remarkable string of luck. He knows who's really to blame for "meddling" in Russian "internal affairs." It's the United States.

He's lambasting us for yielding too much power. One example of this excessive power is the missile defense radar system we want to install in Poland and the Czech Republic -- to give the free world early warning of a missile attack by terrorists or a rogue nation like Iran. Perhaps it’s just a coincidence that the Russians have been supplying Iran with both nuclear and missile technology while using their UN veto to block sanctions that would force Tehran to back down. Regardless, we're clearly at fault, he says, for putting a defense system close to Mother Russia.

So I wouldn't worry too much about the criticisms we receive. We make mistakes and at times the "carping" may even be on target, but it seems to me that we ought to look at a lot of the complaints as a badge of honor.



Run, Fred, Run!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Another great letter from a member of the Army.

Lieutenant Colonel Joe Repya writes:


Two weeks ago, as I was starting my sixth month of duty in Iraq, I was forced to return to the USA for surgery for an injury I sustained prior to my deployment. With luck, I'll return to Iraq to finish my tour.

I left Baghdad and a war that has every indication that we are winning, t o return to a demoralized country much like the one I returned to in 1971 after my tour in Vietnam. Maybe it's because I'll turn 60 years old in just four months, but I'm tired:

I'm tired of spineless politicians, both Democrat and Republican who lack the courage, fortitude, and character to see these difficult tasks through.

I'm tired of the hypocrisy of politicians who want to rewrite history when the going gets tough.

I'm tired of the disingenuous clamor from those that claim they 'Support the Troops' by wanting them to 'Cut and Run' before victory is achieved.

I'm tired of a mainstream media that can only focus on car bombs and casualty reports because they are too afraid to leave the safety of their hotels to report on the courage and success our brave men and women are having on the battlefield.

I'm tired that so many Americans think you can rebuild a dictatorship into a democracy over night.

I'm tired that so many ignore the bravery of the Iraqi people to go to the voting booth and freely elect a Const itution and soon a permanent Parliament.

I'm tired of the so called 'Elite Left' that prolongs this war by giving aid and comfort to our enemy, just as they did during the Vietnam War.

I'm tired of antiwar protesters showing up at the funerals of our fallen soldiers. A family who's loved ones gave their life in a just and noble cause, only to be cruelly tormented on the funeral day by cowardly protesters is beyond shameful.

I'm tired that my generation, the Baby Boom -- Vietnam generation, who have such a weak backbone that they can't stomach seeing the difficult tasks through to victory.

I'm tired that some are more concerned about the treatment of captives than they are the slaughter and beheading of our citizens and allies.

I'm tired that when we find mass graves it is seldom reported by the press, but mistreat a prisoner and it is front page news.

Mostly, I'm tired that the people of this great nation didn't learn from history that there is no substitute for Victory.

Sincerely,
Joe Repya,
Lieutenant Colonel, U. S. Army
101st Airborne Division




Thank you Sir, for your dedication to this Country.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Hey Fred, When?

A question for Mr. Thompson. When are you going to enter. Mark Levin is calling for Fred to run now. He makes a good point, too:


Some have defended John McCain and Rudy Guiliani by asking us to ignore or downplay aspects of their records.  Some have said that conservatives ought not seek perfection in a candidate.  Should we apply the same "standards" to Thompson's record?  No, in his case, they ignore nothing and demand perfection.  And the truth is, he holds up quite well. Thompson needs to get into this race.



Run, Fred, Run.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive