Showing posts with label Bush. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bush. Show all posts

Sunday, April 26, 2009

How Would a Patriot Act?

I am thinking of writing a book about how a patriot could respond to the Obama administration. Think of it as Tea Partier's Guidebook to defending American liberty from a rapacious President and his leftist minions. In fact this title - "How Would a Patriot Act? Defending American Values from a President Run Amok" - would be a great title. It's a pity a leftist already used it in the Bush era.

But it got me thinking. There were so many anti-Bush books written whose titles could be renewed as critiques of the new administration... it could make it really easy to get those titles worked out. Here's are some of those Bush-era book titles and updated themes:

The Cheating Culture - a book about ACORN and how Democrats steal elections.
Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them - A book about new Senator and foul-mouthed dirtbag Al Franken
Tempting Faith - A book about how a President lies to religious voters would be well worth writing on Obama's "We are not a Christian nation" watch. He spent 20 years in Rev Wright's church, called him a mentor, and now in DC hasn't had much hankering for Sunday sermons. Hmmm.
Had Enough? - 100 days, yep, I've had enough, Mr Carville.
The Truth With Jokes - This was an unfunny Al Franken book, maybe we could do better with Dennis Miller writing it.
Big Lies - Liberals call conservatives liars for the crime of not agreeing with the liberal's opinions; we could do better. Just a book about Obama's campaign lies and broken promises so far, combined with the lynig media covering his tracks would fill a book.
Thieves In High Places - original was by Jim Hightower, surely a great title for the great TARP and Porkulus Robbery of 2008-2009
Is That a Politician in Your Pocket - Soros, Obama, Rezko, Blago, Spitzer, etc. The possibilities are endless.
The Great Unraveling - A critique of the arrogance of an administration that is destroying the Constitution and our economy. Let the iconoclastic Peter Schiff, an anti-Krugman-type realist who has railed against bailouts and Govt debt spending, pen it.
The Conservative Soul - Andrew Sullivan caught BDS in 2004 due to his gay marriage desires overwhelming his senses, and he created an anti-Bush screed in 2006 with an unlikely title; if he's true to fiscal conservative claims, his weak excuse for clinging to the conservative banner, he'd update it for the disaster that is the Obama administration. I'm not holding my breath.

Oh, and so many slogans too: "Obama lied. Jobs died." (Lied about the impact of the Stimulus bill. The Stimulus bill was supposed to keep unemployment under 8%. It failed.)

Sunday, August 3, 2008

Bush v Batman

Blog PI does a Bush and Batman comparison, and links to a very funny "Bush v Batman" video: "Leno-esque person-on-the-street interviews by Philadelphia sketch comedy troupe Secret Pants. The interviewer has a set of quotes that were spoken either by President Bush from 1600 Pennsylvania or Adam West from the 1960s TV show. Passersby are asked to guess which."

Friday, August 1, 2008

An Extraordinary Occasion

After Democrats abandoned the Congressional ship at the Capitol today in Washington, D.C., Texas Congressman Mike Conaway, representing not only the 11th Congressional District of Texas but all American's who want lower gas and energy prices as soon as possible (a very high percentage), wrote President Bush asking him to call a special session of Congress to continue the people's business they were elected to conduct.

Invoking Article II, Section 3 of the US Constitution, Conaway wrote, "I urge you to immediately bring Congress back into session to do it's job and give the bipartisan, pro-drilling majority a vote."

Amen to that!

Click below to read the letter.
So what is the Constitutional basis of Congressman Conaway's appeal to President Bush?
U.S. Constitution: Article II

Section 3.

[The President] shall from time to time give to the Congress Information on the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper...

I'd say the Congressman has a strong case but I'm afraid that these days President Bush has his sights set on gold, Chinese Olympic gold that is, not "black gold", not "Texas tea". Would not want to mess up his plans to hobnob in Beijing with the Chinese Communists who bankroll so much of our National Debt. That "wouldn't be prudent", now would it?

Then again, maybe it would be prudent to "do whatever it takes" to defend rank and file Americans against the do nothing, loony socialist, 5th column leftists in this country who would rather loose wars than win them, be dependent rather than independent, and pay more for gas and tax "big oil" than drill responsibly for the oil God blessed us with.

Nancy Pelosi and company, you disgust me! Go to Beijing and learn how to really get rid of reporters when it suits your agenda. The Chinese have had decades of practice!

Wednesday, April 30, 2008

Carter Peace More Deadly than Bush War

No, this is not a criticism of President Carter's foreign policy, either as President or loose-cannon ex-President - even though he deserves it. (Yes, he was and is a danger to our national security, then and now.) Rather, I found this statistic on
WND, and found it so surprising, I had to share it:

In 2005, a total of 1,942 U.S. military personnel were killed in all causes, including accidents, hostile action, homicides, illnesses, suicides, etc. That compares to 2,392 in 1980, the last year of President Jimmy Carter's administration. In fact, twice as many U.S. military personnel were killed in accidents in that one year than were killed in hostile actions in any year of the Bush administration.

They show that "Despite suffering 4,000 deaths in Iraq, annual U.S. military casualties overall during the first six years of the Bush administration are well below the average for the 26-year period beginning in 1980."

Tuesday, October 9, 2007

The Shrinking Deficit

Unless you subscribe to the Texas Insider (or the Wall Street Journal), you might never know.
Where is the Austin American-Statesman on this?
========================
The Shrinking Deficit
Published: 10-09-07 by Texas Insider
See: http://www.texasinsider.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1454

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has released its preliminary estimates for Fiscal Year 2007 that ended September 30, and the federal budget deficit fell again, this time by 35 percent to $161 billion, says the Wall Street Journal.:

• Since 2004, deficit spending has tumbled by $251 billion, which is one of the most rapid three-year declines in U.S. history.
• The deficit as a share of the economy is down to 1.2 percent or about half the average of the last 50 years.
• This improvement is especially remarkable given the $150 to $200 billion a year of post-9/11 expenses for homeland security and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Moreover:
• Americans coughed up a record $2.568 trillion in taxes to the IRS in 2007, or 6.7 percent more than in 2006.
• This means federal receipts have climbed by $785 billion since the 2003 investment tax cuts, the largest four-year revenue increase in U.S. history.
• Income, dividend and capital gains tax rates were all cut in 2003, but individual income tax receipts have soared by 46.3 percent in four years, with payments by the wealthy accounting for most of the windfall. • Last year's increase in individual income payments was 11.3 percent, or more than double the rate of growth in nominal GDP.
The overriding lesson here is that the best antidote for deficits is faster growth, not tax increases. The budget deficit has declined more rapidly this decade in the wake of the Bush tax cuts than it did in the 1990s in the wake of the Clinton tax increases. CBO is still forecasting a balanced budget in 2010, but if Congress gets its way on spending and taxes, all of this progress will be short-lived, says the Journal.

Source: Editorial, "The Shrinking Deficit," Wall Street Journal, October 9, 2007.

Wednesday, July 4, 2007

LIBBY COMMUTATION

LIBBY COMMUTATION EXPOSES LIBERAL HYPOCRISY
By Bob Ward

Congressional liberals and media heavyweights – who yawned at President Clinton’s pardon of Marc Rich, indicted for evading $42 million taxes and illegally buying oil from Iran while they held our hostages – are pitching fits because President Bush commute3d the sentence of “Scooter” Libby.

And, predictably, some of them are lying about it. U.S. Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich) said, “Until now, it appeared the President merely turned a blind eye to a high-ranking administration official leaking classified information. The President’s action today makes it clear that he condones such activity.”

In fact, Libby was not even accused, much less convicted, of leaking classified information, in this case, the name of an allegedly covert CIA operative Valerie Plame. (Wife of Bush critic Joseph Wilson) to columnist Robert Novak He was convicted of lying to investigators who were supposedly trying to learn who did leak her name.

But the larger, and more serious lie, was the investigation itself. It would have been a perversion of justice for Libby to be locked up while Special Prosecutor Edward Fitzgerald who got him convicted walks free. As Washington Post reporter David Broder reported, Fitzgerald learned “soon after taking the job” of special prosecutor that Richard Armitage, a State Department official, and Bush aide Karl Rove were Novak’s sources.

Armitage, Broder noted, admitted his role “immediately,” but instead of indicting Armitage or Rove for the supposed crime of outing Plame, he continued the charade of pretending to look for the leaker. A case could be argued that he committed a fraud for collecting a fee to conduct a phoney investigation. In fact, it was doubtful that a crime had been committed since Plame’s convert status was effectively challenged by the person who wrote the law protecting covert agents.

Broder, who does not qualify as a “conservative,” accurately characterized the controversy as “a sideshow — engineered partly by the publicity‑seeking former Ambassador Joseph Wilson and his wife, and heightened by the hunger in parts of Washington to ‘get’ Rove for something or other.”

Broder also pointed out that Libby was convicted “on the testimony of reporters from NBC, The New York Times and Time magazine.” Broder recalled that this fact angered conservatives and added, ”I think they have a point.” He might well have added that Libby was hounded by liberals eager to implicate Vice Pres. Cheney, Libby’s boss, in something unsavory.

Bush’s action does not absolve Libby from all punishment. A hefty fine still must be paid and the conviction is still a matter of record. It is not a pardon such as Clinton gave to Marc Rich after Rich’s ex-wife donated and raised more than $1 million for the Democratic party. But it’s better than nothing and a break for conservatives who so often get nothing from this president.

Thursday, June 14, 2007

GOP Base Revolts on Immigration II

President Bush loses base over immigration falling from base support in the 80% plus range until recently and now plummeting to around 40%:

When asked about various areas of the illegal immigration issue, 97% of respondents said that it was “very important” to focus on “border security and reducing the number of people who enter the country illegally.” That number drops to 43% on the topic of “resolving the legal status of the illegal aliens already in the U.S.” Only 18% felt it was “very important” to set up a temporary worker program. ... When asked if they supported the “illegal immigration legislation that was being debated in the U.S. Senate,” 93% of respondents said “no.”

Saturday, June 9, 2007

Mr President, build up that wall!

The Vampire of Senate immigration amnesty is dead, but the ghouls of bipartisan mis-leadership are trying to revive it: Talk of Resurrecting Immigration Bill Begins as Autopsy Goes On. But this nutty sentence - "The White House -- which regards immigration reform as key to reviving public support for President Bush" - so at odds with the reality that popular opposition derailed the bill, has my mind so boggled it made me fire off a discontented missive to comments@whitehouse.gov.

Dear Mr President,

The Senate immigration bill dies because people rejected it and the Senate was unwilling to push it through in the
face of such clear and adamant public disapproval. The Washington Post tells us that:
"The White House -- which regards immigration reform as key to reviving public support for President Bush"

Who is the retard who thinks this would happen? This idiot needs to be fired. And if the President himself thinks this, God help us!

Don't you get it? I am more than twice a voter and volunteer for Bush, in 1994, 1998, 2000 and 2004.

I OPPOSE AMNESTY/LEGALIZATION FOR ILLEGAL ALIENS. I oppose vigorously and strongly the Senate immigration bill. So does practically all of the Republican base. I don't know of a single grassroots activist or Republican stalwart who likes this bill, but I personally know hundreds who are vehemently and in some cases angrily opposed to this sellout of Republican law and order and national-security (= border security) principles.

So do the American voters, by a 2 to 1 margin, oppose this Senate bill. (See the Rasmussen poll, which asked directly about the Senate bill; it has only 23% support and majority opposition). They oppose the offense of amnesty (and you fool nobody by denying that's what it is) married to phony 'triggers' that won't work (and are designed to fail). The calls to the Senators were running 98% against the bill. Just ask the Senate staffers. The phony 'comprehensive' approach failed in 1986 and the American people reject foisting this failure on us again.

The more Bush pushes for this travesty of a bill, the more he loses popular support. The more we American citizens learn about it, the more upset and opposed we become. Good Amendments, like the Cornyn Amendment to deny legalization path to all criminals, and Coleman amendment to require local law enforcement involvement, were turned down by the pro-legalization forces. Can Bush defend that travesty? Can he defend letting people who have absconded from the law become citizens? Or allowing continue breakdown in enforcement by having local law enforcement not even notify the Federal authorities of illegal aliens in their custody?

We oppose this bad bill and the bad idea of amnesty/legalization not because we are uninformed, but because we are very much informed. We are not going to be fooled, we are not going to stop opposing this travesty, and we are not going away. Any continued attempt to push this bad, unpopular bill will only result in the destruction of President Bush's remaining support and credibility, and the destruction of the Republican party. Yes, it is that serious. It could be worse than Watergate. 25% of pro-amnesty/legalization Republican incumbents lost their seats in the last election.

Mr President, here is how to fix the situation: COME OUT IN FAVOR OF ENFORCEMENT FIRST. Acknowledge that you cannot get the bill you want now, but that you will redouble efforts to secure the border and enforce immigration law in the workplace. Acknowledge that you have failed to do these things for 6 years and that you are turning over a new leaf by letting the issue rest for this year in Congress and focus on ENFORCEMENT.

Meet with Senators Sessions, Coburn, DeMint, Vitter, Inhofe and Cornyn; let Rep Sensenbrenner, Rep Steve King, Rep Duncan Hunter and Rep Lamar Smith join them; and instead of talking, do some listening. Ask what they would have you do next, and follow their advice. They are the ones who are standing for the real conservative and Republican approach to these issues.

One last thing, Mr President: Build up that Wall! Build the border fence the whole 800 miles and make it really work.

Only then can you dig out from the hole that you have dug for yourself.

Thursday, June 7, 2007

Letter to Editor on Editorial on Libby

Re: Editorial (6/6/07) on Libby.

Where is the evidence of an administration conspiracy to discredit Plame’s husband, Joe Wilson? He discredited himself before a Senate panel. His charge that CIA documents were falsified by the administration turned out to be lie. He offered the excuse that he may have been “confused” and may have "misspoken" to reporters.

Statements by Libby were also “memory lapses” and he should be punished for lying. However, the Libby trial should never have happened because there was no crime. The prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald, knew almost from the start that it was not Libby who revealed the name of the CIA “operative” Plame because Richard Armitage confessed to doing so.

Furthermore, this “outing” was not a crime because Plame was not protected by the Intelligence Identities Protection Act. Therefore, Armitage was not indicted but Fitzgerald continued wasting money on what became a perjury trap for Libby.

(150 words)

Sunday, May 20, 2007

Immigration Sellout, part II

The Senate immigration bill, this 'Grand Compromise' between Kennedy, McCain, Bush and a few others is Amnesty fraud according to Sowell and Worse than Amnesty according to David Limbaugh. I don't know of a single conservative who likes this deal - Mark Levin,
Hugh Hewitt (reviewing the fine print), and many (but not enough) Republican Senators, including Hutchison and Cornyn, are coming out against this bill, as did Mitt Romney and Duncan Hunter.

Some of the clunkers in it:

  • The cost is huge - "This direct cost of giving 20-30 million mostly unskilled people full rights is estimated at $2.5 trillion."
  • taxpayers pay legal bills for illegal aliens:
    Boehm said, "If passed, this bill will make taxpayers pay the legal bills for illegal aliens seeking amnesty. Tucked away on page 317 is a provision that would allow lawyers in the federally-funded legal services program to represent illegal aliens, which they are presently barred from doing."
  • The illegal aliens who get legalized dont even pay back taxes that they didn't pay when underground.
  • David Limbaugh notes: The bill's so-called "triggers" -- the events that must occur as a sop to enforcement types before the wrist-brushings and windfalls kick in -- are virtually defined out of existence in many cases by exceptions that swallow the rule.

It is a travesty to ram this through the Senate without full committee hearings and much more study. The Tsunami of social change wrecked by the most massive amnesty in world history and the 20-30 million in new immigrants with rights to social security, welfare, medicaid etc. is reason enough to take time to review it. But the 'fast track' is the only way to keep this bloated monstrosity alive; like a vampire, it wouldn't survive long in the light of day.

What is further maddening is the utter political blindness of the Bush White House and others, who foolishly think the following: "If they vote Democrat, it will be because they perceive the Republican Party as anti-immigrant." Thus, in one fell swoop, they buy into the lie that 'illegal immigrant' and 'immigrant' are the same thing (my legal immigrant wife gets incensed at the comparison, as do many other legal immigrants); they further buy the lie that only immigration policy is why Hispanics vote. How patronizing and clueless. The lower-class illegal immigrants that we are importing with this massive amnesty how low education levels and will have low income levels; they will be the clients for the liberal welfare state and will vote accordingly. These lower income voters will vote for the party that they think is looking out for them, and a social system based on more handouts is what they will vote for. The amount of money transferred to this group over time will amount to $2.5 trillion, and they will vote for the party of higher taxes and more spending to ensure they get it.

The only hope for the GOP is to fight for policies that defend the middle class and keep it as whole as possible. We WILL pay higher taxes if this passes, and the Republican party cannot compete with the Democrats on pandering to welfare state clients; when they do, our budgets get seriously busted; consequently, this is a sure prescription for a Democrat-majority country with a bigger welfare state We saw this happen in California, which went from a mostly-Republican state to a 'blue state' in 15 short years, due to the 1986 amnesty, which is a baby compared to this giant. Expect to see Arizona, Florida, Texas, and a few other states (Georgia?) to follow the trend. As a consequence, the political realignment that saw California become a blue state can and will be visited upon Texas within 20 years, should this pass.

Americans prefer 'enforcement first' by a 2-to-1 margin over the 'comprehensive amnesty' idea. Mark Krikorian explains why amnesty is a non-starter and what immigration hawks actually want:
..is steady, predictable, unapologetic enforcement of the laws, with an eye toward downsizing the illegal population through attrition, as more and more illegals give up and deport themselves. This would, of course, cause hardship for illegals and their employers, but it would be hardship with a purpose — to reassert control over the immigration system and establish legal status as a labor standard.

Duncan Hunter's statement states most of what needs to be said, so I am showing it in its entirety - HUNTER EXPRESSES “FIERCE DISAPPOINTMENT” OVER SENATE AMNESTY PROPOSAL:

I vow to oppose this legislation supported by Senators Edward Kennedy and John McCain. It provides a vast new immigration benefit to millions of illegal aliens who have broken our laws to live in the United States.I opposed the 1986 amnesty act because of this same reason. It proved to be the draw that we predicted it would be. I am deeply disappointed to see history repeating itself.

This package will confirm to the world that the U.S. does not really mean what it says when it comes to immigration enforcement. As a result of the citizenship benefit included in this legislation, despite the fine print, we will see a stampede across our borders.

This vast new amnesty and expansive guest worker program will surely be ridden with fraud and abuse, and ultimately lead to millions of public-assistance-dependent immigrants.

The Senate’s decision to blatantly ignore the Secure Fence Act signed into law last year and only require construction of 370 miles of fence, as opposed to the 854 miles mandated by the law, is a dramatic failure of this legislation.The San Diego border fence has proven that fencing works. The time has come to quickly implement the Secure Fence Act, not retreat from its mandates.

I believe that this package will result in lower wages for America’s already-struggling families by encouraging the importation of cheap foreign labor rather than investing, developing and growing a domestic workforce that will sustain our economy far into the future.

Amnesty is not the answer. Border enforcement must be first and it must be comprehensive. To do otherwise is to repeat the mistakes of the past. This Senate bill is bad for Americans, bad for our workers, bad for law enforcement and, most importantly, bad for national security. I will fight it. Please join with me.

Saturday, March 31, 2007

Tale of Two Houses

Energy Use Hypocrisy

LOOK OVER THE DESCRIPTIONS OF THE FOLLOWING TWO HOUSES AND SEE IF YOU CAN TELL WHICH BELONGS TO AN ENVIRONMENTALIST.


HOUSE # 1:
A 20-room mansion (not including 8 bathrooms) heated by natural gas. Add on a pool (and a pool house) and a separate guest house all heated by gas. In ONE MONTH ALONE this mansion consumes more energy than the average American household in an ENTIRE YEAR. The average bill for electricity and natural gas runs over $2,400.00 per month. In natural gas alone (which last time we checked was a fossil fuel), this property consumes more than 20 times the national average for an American home. This house is not in a northern or Midwestern "snow belt," either. It's in the South.


HOUSE # 2:
Designed by an architecture professor at a leading national university, this house incorporates every "green" feature current home construction can provide. The house contains only 4,000 square feet (4 bedrooms) and is nestled on arid high prairie in the American southwest. A central closet in the house holds geothermal heat pumps drawing ground water through pipes sunk 300 feet into the ground. The water (usually 67 degrees F.) heats the house in winter and cools it in summer. The system uses no fossil fuels such as oil or natural gas, and it consumes 25% of the electricity required for a conventional heating/cooling system. Rainwater from the roof is collected and funneled into a 25,000 gallon underground cistern. Wastewater from showers, sinks and toilets goes into underground purifying tanks and then into the cistern. The collected water then irrigates the land surrounding the house. Flowers and shrubs native to the area blend the property into the surrounding rural landscape.


HOUSE # 1 (20 room energy guzzling mansion) is outside of Nashville, Tennessee. It is the abode of that renowned environmentalist (and filmmaker) Al Gore.


HOUSE # 2 (model eco-friendly house) is on a ranch near Crawford, Texas. Also known as "the Texas White House," it is the private residence of the President of the United States, George W. Bush.

Saturday, March 3, 2007

LET'S BE SPECIFIC

Austin seems like just the place to hang this letter out for consumption.
-Tim Bradberry
****************************************************************

LET'S BE SPECIFIC

Due to the thunderous applause that I received from the far-left over the "I Am Tired" letter written by one of our troops in Iraq, I thought it prudent to follow up with one last attempt to be very specific about what I have observed and actually personally encountered during my 36 years of service to this Great Country. This will be a one time attempt to reach some of those who are confused by the far-left and their ilk's unethical rantings and give some insight through my personal experience as a professional military officer over the years. These examples are but a few. In real life there were many more which space and time will not allow.

As a young fighter pilot, flying F-4s in Vietnam, I was stopped in my tracks by the decisions made by Lyndon Johnson and Robert McNamara. I was young and naive, but even then I knew their daily interference was wrong and would not allow us to win this thing and go home. Decisions like not allowing us to strike enemy aircraft while still on the ground, keeping real targets off the target list, and allowing us to strike only rusted-out trucks made us basically a toothpick factory. However, the big one for me came the day I saw the President Lyndon Johnson on television, forcefully lying to the American people. I'll never forget the language, "I want to assure the American people that the United States of America has never, and will never, bomb or use force inside the borders of Cambodia". On and on he disavowed the reports that this was happening. I was amazed. Guess where I had put several F-4 loads of 750 pound general purpose bombs every day for the past five days. You guessed it, Cambodia!!! So much for Mr. Johnson. The only question in my mind was simply, "Was it just Johnson or was it the methodology of a particular political party?" I decided to delay answering that question until more experience was gained.

Years passed, and I ignored politics as much as possible, as a good military man should. Then came Jimmy Carter. Our young people don't remember 18% interest rates and 18% inflation, but I'll bet someone in your family does. That is one really bad thing Carter did for our country, but it is not the worst. During this period, I was an F-15 Squadron Commander, located at Langley AFB, VA. Jimmy Carter and his democratic party stopped spare parts procurement for almost every weapon system in our military, and diverted the funds to social programs. The F-15 was brand new at the time with leading edge technology designed to provide air superiority anywhere in the world on a moments notice. That was my job. I loved it, but guess what? In a two year period from 1979 to 1981, there was not one day when more that one-third of my assigned aircraft were flyable. It is amazing the lengths we went to in those days, cannibalizing parts, expending twice the time and energy to fix every little item, and still two-thirds of the birds were always broken because of no spare parts. Had this country faced a really serious military threat during that time frame, only Montana Hunters could have saved us. The military had some equipment, but it was all broken. Do you want to know the really bad part for me and the young fighter pilots working for me? Our flying sortie rate was so low that pilot proficiency dropped to dangerous levels. The accident rate tripled. That obviously was totally unacceptable, as we were losing expensive airplanes and highly trained young pilots at a rate comparable to losses seen in actual combat. All of a sudden, even a Texas Aggie like me began to see a trend.

Forward a few years to 1986. I am an F-16 Wing Commander at MacDill AFB, Florida, and Ronald Reagan is president. His change in attitude and policy toward the military had time to fix the spare parts problem. We were flying 26,000 flying sorties per year out of MacDill AFB, my aircraft fully mission capable rate (FMC) was above 90%, the aircraft accident rate was below 1.75 per hundred thousand flying hours, fighter pilots were flying and proficiency levels were at an all time high. The United States Air Force was ready to defend this Wonderful Country. Proof of the pudding is simple. Look what the USAF, and the military in general, accomplished in Iraq during Desert Storm. And, they did it in less than 100 hours. Yeah, at this point I was starting to realize there was a difference in mentality between Democrats and Republicans, or should I say, the Right and the Left.

Then, came everyone's favorite---Bill Clinton. If there ever was an individual 180 degrees out of sync with the ideals and the values of the US military, it was Clinton. He was a known draft dodger, military hating, self absorbed, unspeakingly shameless and immoral individual, who the Left managed to elect President of the United States of America. Clinton's antics in the White House would have brought court martial, conviction, and Dishonorable Discharge had he been a military member. We still suffer oral sex on school buses, because the President told the world it wasn't real sex, and some of our children believed him. It took a lot of years, but now I became certain. There is a big difference in the right and the left on all fronts, and for the first time I started feeling angry and shamed that the majority of the American people were actually willing to vote for such an individual.

Sometimes, an abstract such as the following tells the story in very simple terms: Jane Fonda, Tom Hayden, Lyndon Johnson, Robert McNamara, George Soros, Ted Kennedy, Howard Dean, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Michael Moore, Tim Robbins, Susan Sarandon, Sean Penn, Nancy Pelosi, Barbra Boxer, John Kerry, Benedict Arnold, and the list goes on. America, wake up. In my opinion, giving in to the likes of these people could allow Abraham Lincoln's prediction of destruction from within to come true. There is not a country in the world that can be considered a conventional military threat to the United States today. However, this country faces a new kind of threat---one that will not go away. It is a threat even more serious that WWII, because money, industry and technology will not defeat it. It is a threat of defeat from within. It is a threat of a faltering economy because of a lack of resources, or the even the simple threat of such a loss brought on by terrorism. It is a threat created by the American people trusting the inept. It is a threat created by the people wanting change, and perilously believing that the left can successfully deliver that change. Have you seen anything from the left that remotely resembles an answer to the Iraq situation? Have you seen anything more than continued Bush-Bashing? Is that an answer? If there was ever a need for a strong, well trained military, it is now. THE LEFT HAS HISTORICALLY DISMANTLED OUR MILITARY IN THE NAME OF REDISTRUBITION OF WEALTH FAVORING SOCIAL PROGRAMS. We just cannot afford to let that happen now. If we do, the entire country may be bowing to the east several times a day within the next 50 years, maybe sooner.

Now a final thought meant to upset as many as possible on the far-left. As you might guess, I don't believe in political correctness. So, let's look at the facts, not far-left rhetoric attempting to empower the democratic party. Initially, I was not a George Bush fan. I am not even a Republican. I normally vote Republican, because of my total despise of Communism, Socialism and the far-left in this country. I am a Conservative. However, during his watch, I feel President Bush just happened to stumble upon the leading edge of the greatest threat this country has ever faced. Mistakes have been made, because of the newness of the threat. Overall, the President has done a superb job dealing the threat, and at the same time held off the constant ranting, raving, deceitful and malicious escapades of the far-left attempting to regain political power. IF THERE WAS EVER A TIME THE COUNTRY NEEDS TO COME TOGETHER AND BACK OUR PRESIDENT, IT IS RIGHT NOW. WITHOUT CONCENSUS WE ARE EMPOWERING THE TERRORIST!!!! I feel the far-left is totally absorbed with a power struggle and regaining control of congress. They could care less about defeating the threat. It literally disgusts me to hear the constant disagreement with everything the President tries to do, all in the name of trying to make him look bad to the voters. Unfortunately, by the time the American people really appreciate how bad the far-left really is, it may too late.

What are the real facts? On the home front this country's economy is the strongest that it has been in my lifetime. Interest rates are as low as they were when I was in high school forty years ago. Inflation does not exist for all practical purposes. For you youngster's, please remember the Jimmy Carter comments? The Dow is approaching 13,000. Unemployment is nonexistent. Wages are at an all time high. Home ownership is at an all time high. Taxes have been lowered to an almost acceptable level. Because of the surging economy the deficient is under control and projected to go away far ahead of schedule. The far-left is rich beyond its wildest dreams, so Mr. President when are you going to "fix" all these domestic problems? Give me a break!!!!

On the war front this country has not been touched since 2001. I remember being part of a seminar at the USAF War College in 1983 discussing the terrorist threat. There were some good minds at that table and a lot of disagreement. However, one common thought was that the US would be hit within the next five years. Answers to the terrorist threat were just as hard to come by then as they are now. Well, it took a little longer than the projection, but the attack occurred. For an old military guy like me, the main point here is that it has not happened again. We have suckered the bad guys into entering the fight somewhere other than in our country. To hell with political correctness. The President can't say this, but I sure can. I smile every morning when I get up and realize that one of our great cities has not been blown away. And, there is zero doubt in my mind that if we pull out of Iraq prematurely, that will happen within a short period of time after our departure. I don't care what you might think of President Bush personally. He has done the best he can with what he has, and this country is not smoking because of it. So, the anti-American, Bush hating far-left should back off. They honestly don't have a clue about what they are talking about, and they are doing irreparable damage to our country.

I realize there are different points of view on war, and I do not believe the meek will inherit the earth, at least not in the next few hundred years. To those of the far-left, who will undoubtedly respond to this letter, let me say, "This is a strong country!!!" It has survived the uneducated thinking of the far-left before, and I'll just bet it will again. Regardless of who is President, the people will not tolerate mass explosions on a daily basis, as our good friends in Israel have been forced to do. To protect that position of power, even Hillary will be forced to become a true hawk. To guarantee a few more votes Ted Kennedy may be forced to begin supporting a strong military. One more attack on America might even wipe the giddy, 'I-am-finally-somebody' grin from Nancy Pelosi's face, and make her realize that is not about votes and personal power. IT IS ABOUT PROTECTING THIS GREAT COUNTRY FROM ALL ENEMIES, BOTH FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC.

Jimmy L. Cash, Brig. Gen., USAF, Ret.