 |
What They've Thought
|
|||||||
|
|
|||||||
What They Thought September 26, 2004 R.A.
Hawkins Click here for columnist bios |
||||||||
R.A.
Hawkins ABC’S COKIE ROBERTS: "Senator Kerry, that was something you voted against ... was that the Persian Gulf War." SEN. JOHN KERRY: "I voted against the timing of it, Cokie. I said very clearly in my statement on the Senate floor that I was committed to getting Saddam Hussein out of Kuwait ... and that I was prepared to go to war if it took that..." (ABC’s "Nightline," 11/27/95) I guess Kerry’s problem actually was the timing of the war. He would have preferred it happening just a little later under Clinton’s stupendous military command. He apparently didn’t like a Bush getting the job done then either. KERRY: "So clearly the allies may not like it, and I think that’s our great concern - where’s the backbone of Russia, where’s the backbone of France, where are they in expressing their condemnation of such clearly illegal activity? But in a sense, they’re now climbing into a box and they will have enormous difficulty not following up on this if there is not compliance by Iraq." (CNN’s "Crossfire," 11/12/97) Strangely enough Kerry decided to hop into the same box as the Russians and the French. One would think that Kerry would have figured out by now that since the military equipment we keep finding over there is French and Russian, that might be the reason they are all playing in the sandbox together. KERRY: "I think there is a disconnect between the depth of the threat that Saddam Hussein presents to the world and what we are at the moment talking about doing. ... Then we have to be prepared to go the full distance, which is to do everything possible to disrupt his regime and to encourage the forces of democracy." ABC’S COKIE ROBERTS: "And does that mean ground troops in Iraq?" KERRY: "I am personally prepared, if that’s what it meant." KERRY: "He can rebuild both chemical and biological. And every indication is, because of his deception and duplicity in the past, he will seek to do that. So we will not eliminate the problem for ourselves or for the rest of the world with a bombing attack." KERRY: "I believe he is the kind of threat that has been described. I believe that in the post-Cold War period this issue of proliferation, particularly in the hands of Saddam Hussein, is critical. It has implications for a Qaddafi, for a Sudan, for other countries in the world in the future." GEORGE WILL: "Senator Kerry, you’re way ahead of the commander in chief in this regard." KERRY: "I am way ahead of the commander in chief, and I’m probably way ahead of my colleagues and certainly of much of the country. But I believe this. I believe that he has used these weapons before. He has invaded another country. He views himself as a modern-day Nebuchadnezzar. He wants to continue to play the uniting critical role in that part of the world. And I think we have to stand up to that." (ABC’s "This Week," 2/22/98) It is interesting to see that he apparently understood at one time, but has managed to completely forget what he claimed to have known. He has clearly climbed into the same sandbox as the Russians and the French and is merrily playing away, forgetting that all of the cats in the neighborhood have also been playing in that self-same sand box. He railed against the French and Russian position and then joined them. That one simple fact should tell anyone what they need to know about John F Kerry. His words and the
words of the other leftists are currently costing the lives of our soldiers
in Iraq. If Kerry gets into office, you can be sure that the exemplary
cowardice and indecision of Kerry will continue to energize the terrorists
in the region. Iraq will become a real quagmire and Moveon.org will
be right for the very first time in its existence. It will be a self-fulfilling
prophecy. America is at a
crossroads right now and a people always ends up with the government
it deserves. At the moment the terrorists are being kept very busy across
the great pond. Make no mistake they will try to do something here too.
Right now they aren’t looking too good because the war came to
them. They will try to bring it back to us again. Since the United Nations
oil for food program is now shut down, Osama isn’t quite as flush
with cash. The FOX News report last week on the United Nations Oil for
Food program showed quite clearly that a lot of the money was going
to places unknown, through businessmen with terrorist ties. Osama was
almost broke and suddenly he had money again. R.A. Hawkins Web Site Contact Back to Top |
||||||||
When you sign up today with the PJ Club (pajama club), you'll get full rights to espouse your ideals, opinions and investigations via the World Wide Web. The PJ Club is open to all that love the free flow of information and value what our founding fathers valued, and that is freedom of speech. The PJ Club isn't pretentious. We don't require silk pajamas; cotton ones are just fine. Your PJ's don’t have to have your initials embroidered on them, unless of course you can't remember your name…then by all means. We don't require a Harvard Law Degree or a journalistic pedigree. You don’t have to have a full head of hair, wear a suit, or have a tie squeezing ever so slightly at your throat to give your eyes a strained, studious bug eyed look. You know what? You don’t even have to wear pajamas to belong. That’s right. If you desire to sit butt naked and type your dissertation of exposés on your home computer, that is okay with us. We just ask that you leave your video camera in the off position. It would seem bloggers, ezine journalists, and editorialists via the 'net are causing a wave of elitist fit throwers to spin their large craniums into a bit of a quagmire: How dare anyone else have an opinion who hasn’t attended the school of stuck-up journalism? The pajama writers are becoming known to be a troublesome bunch. Is it possible that they are all from a "far-right wing" group? These pajama wearing people who like to think of themselves as journalists are probably nothing more than white Anglo-Saxon protestants who have several loaded shotguns in their homes and in their Chevy 4x4's. They are all probably card-carrying members of the NRA, too. They certainly didn't receive an education beyond the sixth grade, and are so bassackwards in anything cultural, social or political that they are the next big danger to this country and her freedoms since the end of the Cold War. Why I bet these PJ wearers probably even type their investigations and editorials on a computer from the early 1980's, and it still has the Atari version of Centipede downloaded on it. Now personally, I as a card-carrying member of the PJ Club—and most others like me—subscribe to several newspapers worldwide. I have become a political, social and cultural junkie. Most of the time, the news leans so far to one side and is so convoluted with worthless fodder that this is what it becomes in my household…I have several birds, hence I need cage bottom covers. I do believe Jefferson prophetically saw the use of the newspapers and their biases long before the revolution of the PJ Club came into existence. Thomas Jefferson stated, "Newspapers...serve as chimnies to carry off noxious vapors and smoke." Can anything be said more succinctly? The pomposity of news anchors on TV (Dan Rather, Walter Cronkite, Katie Couric, and for a brief moment of hallucinating grandeur, Bill O'Reilly) has really begun to crumble over what these demagogues think of themselves as they love to look down upon the little people. How dare we as the common people rise up and let our voices be heard! Funny thing is, when this elitist group became so wrapped in themselves they forgot what Laura Ingraham termed, "They forgot who brought them to the dance." Truer words have not been spoken quite so symphonically. When you forget who brought you to where you are now and you decide you've outgrown your "dance partner," more often than not your date with destiny will leave you alone, all by yourself, because you got too big for your journalistic britches. Ask these pompous journalists how it feels to be all by yourself in your own little world of "perfect me." These elitist still have their club, most are connected with the Hollywood elites, but what happens when a group of snobs gets together? Think back to your high school days. Remember the upper class snobs? They'd all be buddy, buddy when you were in their world, but the moment you stepped out and went to go grab a Coke you became the conversation of gossip. Back stabbers is what spins the world of elitist snobs and their world is blood letting itself quicker than imagined. Those who belong to the PJ Club don’t pretend to have all the answers. We can't, and we never will. So who is it that makes up the PJ Club? Well, many of us have master's degrees in a wide range of subjects. Most of us hold down regular jobs and drive a compact car. Many of us have families and are happily married. Some of us don't even own a gun. There are those of us who are Christian, agnostic, atheist, Muslim, Buddhist and a gamut of other followings too numerous to name. We are an open minded group of people, though, who love the exchange of ideas, the free flow of opinions and the ability to cut through the murky waters of media biases that plague the information highways. There will be times those of us in the PJ Club will be wrong, but when we are wrong it will not crush us and cause us to run, hide and lie our way out. When a member of the PJ Club places themselves above the common man and becomes a legend in their own mind, then they have withdrawn their own membership and have created their own little world of elitist snobbery. Yes, perhaps the elites of the journalistic world should be worried that their little world of "our club only" is disintegrating around them quickly. The PJ Club is here to stay, our cause is larger than we are, and you cannot muzzle a human from speaking and writing what they believe to be true. The union of elitist journalism is dead, the PJ Club is here to break the bonds of tyranny the elitist journalist have tried to ink blot this world into believing. Our pens, typewriters, and computer keyboards have become the tools needed to expose the biased skewed print of the media. Sign on today. The P J Club is open to all who love free speech and the freedom to exchange ideas, investigate, and espouse truths. Kerry L. Marsala Web Site Contact Back to Top |
||||||||
It was right around 7:30 last Friday morning when I crossed over the Delaware River Bridge on my way to work. About a minute after merging onto the New Jersey Turnpike, I noticed a large white truck two lanes over and four cars ahead—an F-350 Dually, I believe. It was going maybe 70 miles an hour, and a solid half mile of road was opening up in front of it as drivers in all three lanes tried not to pass it by. Curious, I switched into the middle lane and moved up a bit, trying to get a better look. That’s when I realized the word “POLICE” written in big blue letters across its backside. “Police?” I said. Maybe the Geese Police, I thought. It sure didn’t look like an actual cop car—at least not like any I’ve ever seen. So I began to move closer, determined to find out: (a) what this truck was; and (b) why folks were too scared to pass it. I soon found myself riding right up beside it, and before long I committed to giving it the old New Jersey get-in-front-and-slam-your-brakes routine. I’m not sure why I did this. It just seemed like a good idea at the time. In the process, however, I saw that it was, in fact, an actual cop car—it belonged to the Washington, D.C., Metropolitan Police. And so I politely switched into the middle lane again, joining the rest of the pack. I’m not sure why I did this, either; I’m relatively certain these guys couldn’t’ve given me a ticket. But anyway, that’s what I did. And that’s when the cop riding shotgun shot me a dirty look as their vehicle passed by on my left. Now, I have several questions about this incident. First, what the hell were the D.C. police doing all the way up in New Jersey? I mean, it’s not like these guys were feds or anything; it’s not like they were up in NJ on assignment. So I can only guess they were headed for a seminar of some sort. That’s the most logical explanation. It makes the most sense. But you mean to tell me they couldn’t take one of their own cars to get there? They had to take this monstrosity instead? Which brings me to my second question: Namely, why must a couple of D.C. cops—nay, any cops—ride in a Ford F-350… ever? Is this absolutely necessary? These trucks are pretty big, you know, with six wheels and everything. They might as well have been driving a tractor trailer. Or hell, for that matter, they might as well have been driving Robosaurus, the World’s First Car-Nivorous Monster. But anyway, let me tell you, it was their license plate that intrigued me most of all. Now, I don’t know if you’ve seen any D.C. plates before, but I’ve seen quite a few of them on both the PA and NJ Turnpikes. They’re not the worst looking license plates ever. Certainly not as fruity as Georgia’s peach plates. But it’s the words at the top and bottom that get me. They read: “Washington, D.C.,” “Taxation Without Representation.” All without irony. Well, after last Friday’s commute, I finally decided to look them up. It turns out America’s capitol city has been issuing “Taxation Without Representation” plates since the year 2000. They’re not mandatory; just an option. According to a group called D.C. Vote, the idea is to let drivers express their disgust with the “disenfranchisement of the people of the District of Columbia." You see, for a few hundred years now, the federal government has tinkered with Washington’s local government, dangling self-determination over residents’ heads like a carrot on a great big evil stick. And residents are said to be sick of it. In their minds, they’re fighting the same tides of tax-happy tyranny kicked off our shores by our forefathers centuries ago. Their strange fortune, however, is that they must do so from within the very heart of the beast. So the “Taxation Without Representation” plates are therefore a battle cry—a throwback to colonial times, when throwing tea into harbors wasn’t called environmental destruction. Unfortunately, though, D.C. seems to believe full congressional representation is one way to win their war. I’m not so sure I agree. I mean, we all face taxation without representation—all of us, nationwide, from sea to shining sea. You think congressmen represent America? I don’t. I think congressmen represent themselves. Think about it. Who do you know outside Congress that can vote to give themselves raises? That can pull pensions out of thin air like apples off a tree? That can gerrymander their way into permanent job security? Who do you know outside Congress that can silence their critics by passing laws? Anyone? No one? Me neither. That’s because no such humans outside Congress exist. It’s amazing anyone actually wants these folks on their side. With the exception of Ron Paul, our modern Congress is far worse than King George III ever was. Now, look: I understand what D.C. is trying to do here. I get it. I even support it. They ought to control their own destiny—no question in my mind. But they shouldn’t be putting all their eggs in a congressional basket. They shouldn’t be counting their chickens before Orrin Hatch. After all, when you complain about taxation without representation, you’re really only saying taxation with representation is a-ok. But it isn’t. Taxation is how politicians exploit our hard work and labor in the first place. Without taxation, they wouldn’t be able to hand out homeland security jobs in return for sexual favors, or prosecute millionaire homemakers for kangaroo crimes in kangaroo courts. They wouldn’t be able to fund the U.N., or keep U.S. troops in over a hundred countries, or leave a brainwashed child behind. And they probably wouldn’t be able to drive around in flashy F-350’s, either. So as nice as “No Taxation Without Representation” sounds, I say it’s time for an altogether different battle cry. How about this one: “No Taxation. Period.” It’s quick, incisive, and more to the point. Jonathan David Morris Web Site Contact Back to Top |
||||||||
Propaganda has become the normal diet for what passes as today’s popular political discourse. Facts now have pliable reality, as language is twisted to fit the circumstance. Linguistic analysis is practiced with a purity of the social relativist. Timeless standards, once unassailable and founded in inimitable certainty, are routinely discarded for the flavor of the day truth, as the situation demands. The hijacking and insidious appropriation of the monogram - CONSERVATIVE - its authentic philosophy, tradition and meaning, is systemically betrayed. At the core of the phony falsifiers is the conduct to deceive, with the motive to control and rule. Those who hail and embrace the term neoconservatism, and adopt their dishonesty, are Counterfeit Conservatives. If you regard this assessment as harsh, consider the tortured spin and distortion from a card carrying member of the Socialist Kennedy clan. An intellectual and political movement in favor of political, economic, and social conservatism that arose in opposition to the perceived liberalism of the 1960s: “The neo-conservatism of the 1980s is a replay of the New Conservatism of the 1950s, which was itself a replay of the New Era philosophy of the 1920s” (Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr.). Is this pseudo academic anti-intellectual or just a fool? Evidently, he is both! Compare that interpretation with the record and its origin.
Contrast the collectivism of the neoconservatism with the insights of the Six Canons of Conservative Thought from Russell Kirk.
Then review The Conservative Mind by Russell Kirk and the following:
Can any honest and truthful traditionalist espouse the policies that neoconservatives maintain and promote, and still retain a valid claim for calling themselves a Conservative? Only the prevaricator of deceit, as defined by Merriam Webster - a former liberal espousing political conservatism - would insist on a perpetual hoax that insults one’s intelligence. Clear Thinking has a code meaning of "Drink the Kool Aid". Newspeak has become the News Corp message, with brainwashing the objective. William Kristol’s Supreme Federal Conservatism is a revived LBJ "Great Society". The Charles Krauthammer’s vision of a global state-capitalism is actually elite tyranny sustained by a democratic mob. And Norman Podhoretz’s "World War IV" is nothing more than a mirror image of the "Likudniks" that lust for their own empire. These NeoCons are bogus frauds. Their values, goals and methods do not remotely resemble traditional conservative principles. Understand clearly and unequivocally, neoconservatism is the tormentor of Western Civilization. NeoCons are the enemy, and seek a barbarism equal to the most hardened FDR New Deal "collectivist". Individual Liberty is unpalatable to the counterfeit conservative. Their style of trickery is revolting, for it rests upon a repudiation of traditional values and morality. Just look at their heroes. An excellent example of their integrity and ethics is Pentagon adviser Richard Perle. He briefed an investment seminar on ways to profit from conflicts in Iraq and North Korea just weeks after he received a top-secret government briefing on the crisis in the two countries. Remember that Perle is a "Scoop Jackson" DemocRAT, and has more in common with Diane Feinstein and her profiteering hubby Richard Blum, then Barry Goldwater. The latest in a string of plum defense jobs snared by URS, the senator husband’s company was awarded an Army contract worth up to $600 million, to help with troop mobilization, weapons systems training and anti-terrorism. But we are assured that in order to be a "Clear Thinker", we need to dismiss any thoughts that the Perle prototype NeoCon, could possibly be a double-crosser. Oh, such pristine logic . . . the factor weaves and how pure one must become to live the lie of a neoconservative. How far these renegades have wandered from Edmund Burke. Bill O’Reilly is just a symbol of the symptom. His latest outburst, this time addressed directly at Neil Boortz: "VICIOUS SON OF A BITCH!", typifies the response of those aspirants to the Schlesinger class, at JFK Harvard school of tolerant government. Boortz exposed the "cloudy sophist" for the sham he represents: Boortz asks: "What part of freedom of association don’t you understand?" Mr O’Reilly . . . doesn’t have a clue, nor do the rest of the NeoCons. When Rupert Murdoch testifies before congress to secure News Corp’s latest acquisition - Direct TV - don’t be duped into thinking you will be availed with conservative content. If you think the Weekly Standard or the National Review is conservative, you are sipping that tainted drink and swallowing a fake line. Where are the Kirk Canons and Conservative Principles in any of the NeoCons positions? Limited government, Bill of Right protections, a Republic governance - are all absent from the neoconservatives. Comprehending the nature of the hoax requires an understanding of real conservatism. Surely, those ‘Clear Thinking Americans’ will follow their cue and parrot from the TelePrompTer. Will you be one of them?
|
||||||||
©2004 by their respective authors. Reprinted by permission. |
||||||||
|
news | constitution | bill of rights | our view | your view | their view awards to win | awards we've won | resources | goodie shoppe our mission | about us | contact us | privacy policy | site map | home This page last updated on Sunday, October 3, 2004 12:03 PM Optimized for Microsoft Internet Explorer |
||||||||
|
site content ©2002-2004 site design by |
||||||||
