Politically Incorrect Citizen

The Greeks Had a Clue.  Foto  © gringoworks, 2007, at new Greco-Roman galleries, Metropolitan Museum of Art, Manhattan.

[Below POLITICALLY INCORRECT CITIZEN see  Gringommentary, Nov. 06, 2007 update "What's Wrong With Fred?" List includes:

1. "Republican Stalemate 2008?"

2. "Why Bush Failed"

3."FRED'S SA WEAPON."

4."TILLMAN DIED, RUMSFELD LIED."

5.'THAT FRED TRAIN'

6. BUSH-CLINTON BORDER BUSTERS"

7."Willing to be Ruthless?"

8. 'The Fall of Baghdad?"

9. Happy Birthday 'Military Corruption'!

10. "Jihad Doctor"

11. "Get Me a Muslim Doctor?"

12. "The (sic) Fairness Doctrine"

13."Circumcise This"

14. "Paris Hilton of the Air Force"

15."Globalista White House."

16."Bye, Johnny (McCain)" ]

POLITICALLY INCORRECT CITIZEN

He was standing there with clipboard, watching for passers-by. His tee-shirt was plain, nothing about  "bigots" or  "fascists" who wouldn't let  let him marry his boy friend.   Would I sign  for "Gay Rights"?  He got a reply in about one second.

 

    "No," I said.

 

Sometimes, even on an outrageously beautiful Spring day in the city, you can't avoid  little minefields of Politically Correct. No time for 5000 years of human history. My two-letter reply must have disappointed him. He seemed surprised that a non-troglodyte ( presumably me)  would refuse to sign what any decent politically correct citizen would  sign (now obviously not me)

I hadn't even passed the organic supermarket at the college residence,  yet felt  mentally indited already as a 'homophobe,' by someone  who looked like a younger, smaller version of Mr. Clean. Funny how you had to be for them or against them, the militants always pushing.  When the problematic President at war used that  very same logic, the  for- us- or- against -us notion, he was twitted without mercy as an imperious dunce.

The sun-drenched air was clear as an un-cracked Liberty Bell. Crowds skipped along like extras in a 1950's Broadway number, 'With a smile on my face for the whole human race.'  Was it really 'almost like falling in love' back then, or were the Richard Rodgerses, the Cole Porters, Frank Loessers et al just hokey, melodious old white men who could not or would not  rap?

After  business at a financial firm I hit a corner around banks, pizza and student housing. And there was another young guy, waiting,  pen and clipboard, with me in his sights.  Was it my dark glasses?  I wasn't wearing my fake U.S. Army- issue camouflage pants today (the real ones from the old Saigon black market long gone.) He was much taller, bigger than the previous solicitor. Something genetic seemed to keep him from  girly-mannish.  He too wanted  my signature.   "It's for the ACLU," he said.   Funny, both my hands flew up immediately and held  the sides of my head, as if I were mumbling  "Oh, my God,"   To his credit, he didn't frown or look shocked. He had the grace to smile.  Good for him. I was not going to rant about the 'Anti-Christ Liberties Union' and its service to NAMBLA, the North American Man-Boy Love Association, or its desire to "open up" the Boy Scouts of America, that abode of  patriarchal heterosexual authoritarians which even used the word "God" in its credo while getting assistance from Government-employed military men.  

I crossed on the green light and there was another pen and clipboard. They were out today. Young guy,  probably  the meekest of the three. He seemed wary of me, for some reason.   "Want to help the ACLU?" he said, sort of mouse-like.  This time I over-reacted. "No, I grew up."   My answer probably was abusive. Border-line over-kill, according to his eyes .  But he didn't respond like those  keyboard potty-mouths would on the Internet. Silently he  swallowed it. Nice boy. Good boy. His progressive mother could be proud, and relieved that the Army or the "warmongers"  would never get her good boy and turn him into something else.

Far from the university area, a group of five black boys  were  on their way from school back to the projects. They paid me no mind.  They were busy rapping.    I couldn't make out the  lyrics, except for the  N-word. Was this  hip-hop? Gangsta rap? A public school assignment for Black Studies?  It sounded something like:

       ",,,,Yo buck-a nuck-a nigga muck-pack!  
        Yo buck-a nuck-a nigga muck pack!,,,,"

Whatever it was, they were enjoying the hell out of themselves, maybe practicing for tourists and  white boys from the suburbs.   But  I heard nothing in this genre  that  could  challenge the bygone, like the  musical personas  of Louis Armstrong, Nat King Cole, Ray Charles or even John Lee Hooker with his  six-string pawnshop acoustic guitar.  Yet Great Society ghetto it was, making fortunes for some, pouring nasty 'hood into American pop culture, and you could hear the influence in foreign countries now too.  I've heard an Asian rap in Asia, and a Mexican  in Mexico.   White fans  in the U.S. seemed to have what the French called  nostalgie pour la boue, the secret attraction to, or nostalgia for, the  mud of eons ago, if not  toddlers' mud pies. Mud was in.  Even the wealthy were  known to get treatments, usually at toney spas, with organic mud, mineral-rich)  

Rap Rights. Yet another minefield?   But rights were not always right, according to the electorate. True, Politically Correct was all-pervasive, intimidating, widely enforced, widely obeyed, yet deeply resented and occasionally defied. ACLU, Purple Caucus etc notwithstanding, most Americans still balked at Sally's "right" to "marry" Samantha. Most blacks resented comparing their civil rights with "Gay Rights."  They would not rate the  legalizing of same-sex "matrimony" with Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation.

Everything started to get very simple or, if you preferred, very complicated.   Those white boys with pen and clipboard would say 'gay,' not 'homosexual.'   Those black boys (no clipboards) would not say 'gay' or 'homosexual.'  They would say 'faggot.' They had not been to White Liberal re-education camp.

Those white boys supported  multi-cultural,  omni-sexual, God-less government, no Christian crosses for war veterans in state-funded cemeteries (otherwise how to keep 'separation of church and state' got it?) etc.etc.

Those black boys supported Rap Rights, sweeping the nation with a new ghetto gospel of mamma-fyin', sistah-fyin', signifyin' and niggafyin' too for all  those "ho's n' bitches" out there.

  Minefields again? It looked like the white boys were politically correct and the black boys were not. The black boys were politically incorrect, and not asking anyone's permission.

  "....Yo buck-a whassup nuck-a-whassup nigga muck-pack...."

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 

Gringommentary November 06, 2007, "What's Wrong With Fred?"   

This gringommentary (now somewhat redacted) was first posted at the Fred File, part of the site where Fred Thompson himself posts. It was the first comment for their new post today, 'VETERANS FOR FRED WEBSITE LAUNCHED' (in S. Carolina),,,,,,,,,,,,,

 

 

With so many conservatives liking Fred, why, you may ask, is there a degree of concern? Here is something I located from Newsmax interview with someone who is widely considered one of the most important and principled conservative voices, Paul Weyrich, founding President of the Heritage Foundation.

In this interview he makes very clear that he is strongly opposed to Giuliani (while holding open the possibility of 'negotiating' with him if  Republicans prove desperate enough to nominate him.) He’s also learned from sources that folksy Mike  Huckabee, as Governor, left Arkansas conservatism in shambles and is very soft on what gringoVision terms 'Illegalismo.'  So what choices are left for Republicans, Americanists, or Clintophobes? Here’s the money quote I found:

Newsmax: Who would you consider of all these candidates in the Republican primary race to be the best?

Weyrich: If you mean by that who’s the best campaigner, I think Romney is if you look at his lead in the early states as a result of arduous campaigning. I’d be more comfortable if Fred Thompson were, but he’s a poor campaigner.

http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/weyrich_giuliani_stop/2007/11/05/46921.html?s=al&promo_code=3C78-1

 

Conservatism: An Elegy?' (Coming soon. No kidding this time.)

 

 

 

 

 

August 24, 2007: REPUBLICAN STALEMATE 2008? [pre-on-the-road edition ]

Republican race for 2008 Presidential nomination: still less predictable than the Democratic. The Dems' wealthy trial lawyer with fabulous haircuts, the "cute" John Edwards, who offers to save the corpulent poor from the trimmed-down rich, finds shockingly few takers. (Even his strong, cancer-stricken wife, unable to catch up with the Clinton/Obama RAGUV (Race and Gender Utility Vehicle), laments that "We can't make John black" and, less convincingly, "We can't make him into a woman."

Nouveau Google-rich Al Gore may not even bother, despite his powerful self-promotion as Warmologist to Planet Earth. Al has been let down by the weather. There may still be senior citizens whose Bush prescription drug benefits fail to save from heat death in Bush's Global Warming. There certainly may be George Bush hurricanes,( like Katrina in New Orleans. ) But will there be enough flooded homes, drownings and underprivileged lootings to get Al the nomination and the White House he says was stolen from him in 2000? Possibly not.

So what's left if you forget (like everyone else does) Connecticut's Senator Dodd, Delaware's Senator Joe Biden (more colorful than his State) and, Governor of New Mexico, the pallid Clintonista Bill Richardson?

Obviously nothing is left except two : (1) Hollywood and Oprah's Great Half-White Hope, Barack Hussein Obama, and (2) the Back-to-Billary machine, this time putting its estrogen foot forward with the tightly managed and widely disliked, even loathed, Hillary Rodham Clinton, the culmination of the U.S. progressive women's liberation movement.

Can Senator BH Obama's "charisma" and choir-pleasing voice camouflage a callow core: his Illinois legislature platitudes made  for a hip-hop constituency, geriatric hippies and mid-west corn farmers; his propulsion into the U.S. Senate, hence the national stage, due to a very qualified Chicago man being eliminated by a sex scandal; his new-found World Leader "skills" (or handlers with degrees in International Relations), including proposals for U.S. withdrawal from Iraq, combined with "proof" that he's not really just a 60's clone of half-digested Peace Now cliches, as when he announces a willingness to invade nuclear-armed ally Pakistan, (if he finds something "actionable" on the elusive Osama bin Laden.)

In brief, BH Obama helps to make Hillary Clinton look more than just wired-up and electronic. By comparison, he makes her look seasoned, rational and statesperson-like. This is a very important service for Democrats. While this progressive Yale woman owns the Dems' locked-in Neo-Plantation vote, also the angry white female vote, and even white guys facing life without Mommy, she remains less popular nationally than any American female since Typhoid Mary.

Talking Point Dems must convince Americans---or at least independents--- that Hillary is "just the victim of a great right-wing conspiracy." She must not be perceived as the Marxist Medusa. They must persuade the electorate that the sight of her will turn only Republicans to stone, while leaving everyone else, especially independents, still fleshed out, the blood still running in their veins. Not the easiest of tasks, but it can be managed among Democrats in primaries.

This would leave only two questions : (1) When will the billionaire-oiled Clinton Machine have Obama for lunch? (2) Will that terminate him, or will Bill tell Hill that they need to spit him out, kiss and make up and dress him up for VP duty? Bill will have to keep an expert eye on their entitlement base, especially after Oprah, TV's black billionairess, raised its Obaminated expectations so high. Will this base---its Soviet-like 90% fidelity crucial--- now feel dissed without a pigmented ticket? If so, what are progressive whities to do?

The Republic, more racialized than ever since the Civil Rights "We Shall Overcome" 60's, enters a new era: fat, prosperous, permissive, politically correct, logged in and not sure where it's surfing.

As for Republicans, it's a horse race of three stallions. The others, the pony entries, include California Congressman (and Vietnam vet) Duncan Hunter, surely not a Council of Foreign Relations favorite. Hunter is considered decent, honorable, excellent on borders, and going nowhere on Air Force One.

Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo has long warned about the undocumented millions swarming out of Mexico The Corrupt, seeking U.S. jobs, U.S. entitlement freebies and free U.S. maternity wards for their anchor babies-cum-U.S. citizens. But the North American Union DemoPubs will have none of Tancredo. The same goes for his suggestion on how to deter a major Muslim attack on America: warn that their Mecca, in retaliation, would disappear from Earth. (Good Dems and good Pubs, while offering no alternative deterrence, expressed shock and dismay that Tancredo would want to make muslims so angry, just because a major American city was taken out in the name of Allah.)

The Libertarian Ron Paul, while sharply analyzing the stupendous debt burden and great Ponzi scheme of U.S. fiscal insanity, is widely considered a provincial, too idealistic, even goofy, ignoring the need for U.S. global committments in the Middle East and everywhere else.

Senator Sam Brownback, Kansas friend of life? Unfortunately for his prospects, the unborn cannot vote.

Folksy and articulate Mike Huckabee, the Arkansas Pastor-Governor, ran second in the recent Iowa straw poll. It may keep him in the running, but not for President. Any man who can lose 100 pounds and keep it lost has earned a role in Government of the Bloated, although his Bible Belt demeanor may rankle the heathen. He could sermonize Washington, but whose earmarks would listen?

Is there anything more to say about fallen hero John McCain? [Gringommentary June 08, 'BYE, JOHNNY (McCAIN)]
Possibly the most celebrated POW in U.S. history (Vietnam War), McCain the maverick and media star was out-maneuvered (or shafted, some still think) by Karl Rove, winning the Republican nomination in 2000 for George Bush. But McCain, as he states, never gives up. He hung in there as Senator from Arizona, working the establishment, working the Beltway, becoming the odds-on favorite for 2008, despite age seventy looming. It looked so predictable. Two years ago McCain vs Hillary for 2008 seemed as certain as Republicans and caddies, or Democrats and taxes.
And then it all began to unravel.

Problems old and new compounded. Dems and some independents began to loathe him for stoutly defending the unpopular war in Iraq, despite the Bush mismanagement. Old sore points with Republicans got sorer. There was McCain-Feingold, seen as liberal suppressing of free speech and electioneering. As a politician he also--surprise--flip-flopped. His record showed him good on the unborn, but not good enough for some. He also (1) opposed same-sex marriage (2) opposed a Constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage (3) would not oppose a homosexual President (and of course didn't say whether this President should bring the significant same-sex other to the Inaugural Ball, could they hug with cameras present, could they raise children in a civil union etc? ) Independents gagged. Republicans groaned. Finally, the Beltway (sic) high life and the furor over the Illegal Invasion sealed his doom. It was called the Bush-Kennedy-McCain Amnesty-Don't-Say-It's -Amnesty bill, hundreds of incomprehensible pages that few even tried to read. It was like wading through jungles of IRS Tax Code. What was this once golden guy of the "Straight Talk Express" thinking?

The temperamental John McCain, Republican heir apparent for 2008, had slapped himself upside the head, then shot himself in the foot, and finally jumped off the bridge. Possibly the strangest case of Post-Vietnam Stress Syndrome on record.

That leaves the Big Three, Romney, Giuliani and the current stalking horse, Fred Thompson. The actor and former Senator from Tennessee, Thompson, is virtually certain to make his long-awaited official announcement in September.

And when he does enter stage center? There'll be cheers and applause, excitement from the faithful, euphoria, fantasies of Ronald Reagan, miles of media, acres of buzz, fear and lashing from the Left. Taller than Abraham Lincoln, with a Presidential manner and gravitas honed in Hollywood, the erstwhile lawyer and Washington lobbyist can still write and speak in plain homespun American. It's enough to drive opponents up the wall, yelping about Jeri, his attractive attorney "trophy wife," when he is more likely the trophy husband. In polls can the Fred Train pull ahead of its much better organized and funded (to date) rivals, the Mormon Wiz and the street fighter /New York Prosecutor? Sure, why not? But can it hold that lead?

With more than a year to go, the crystal gringoball does not see Thompson as a shoo-in for his party's nomination, despite reservations about Romney and Giuliani. Unlike the Democrats, who are joined at the hip to Clinton Redux, for better or worse, the Republicans are assessing three new faces, and finding all blemished. How far can any in this trio be trusted? No, they may not be Democrats in mufti. They're not yelling, "Bush's war in Iraq is unpopular so let's find a way to surrender to the evil, rag-tag killers, give it a nice name, and get out." But are any of them really closer to Ronald Reagan than to Presidente Jorge Bush, who called the Minutemen at the Mexican border 'vigilantes'?

True, the fate of John McCain has sobered them up. "America's Mayor," Rudy Giuliani, formerly a champion of "Sanctuary Cities" in New York, forbidding police or Government officials to disturb business by identifying illegal aliens, now offers new hi-tech plans to track all entries and exits of non-citizens, while still offering ways for millions of illegals to become legal. The recent execution of three college students in Newark, NJ by an illegal Peruvian will focus even a politician.

Mitt Romney, an excellent business manager, all clean-cut and clear-cut, now discovers reasons to oppose "Sanctuary Cities," suddenly sounding like Tancredo and Duncan Hunter did years earlier. Fred Thompson, at his state-of-the-art weblog, just posted cogently on "Sanctuary Cities." It's catching. You'd think an election was coming up.

As for a deeper look, they seem to avoid the border-busting North American Union question as if it were a red hot tamale. Or possibly they await "questions " that can be "answered" into oblivion, as in the typical lamestream format of major media.
For some, the blemishes are downright disfiguring. True, Giuliani's street fighter instincts can excite the Bush-fatigued who are still wary of Giuliani who was an old supporter of Democratic icon Robert Kennedy. Who can imagine Georgie "It's a religion of peace" Bush having Palestinian terrorist Yasser Arafat thrown out of Lincoln Center in New York? Despite liberal ex-Mayor Koch's book on him, "Nasty Man," Giuliani can rouse them. Nevertheless, few are roused by his tranvestite performances at NY political dinners and on "Saturday NIght Live." He would be America's first President foto-opped as a drag queen. He compounds his problem with readers of the Pentateuch by waffling on Roe vs. Wade, obfuscating on immigration, dodging the North American Union issue and, despite being a nominal Catholic, wondering what's so wrong with letting Sally marry Sara.

Whether Mitt Romney does better on these core issues, or does a smoother flip-flop, is for partisans to argue. As a one-woman man, with five sons who seem to like him, he clearly surpasses Giuliani---and even Thompson---in the Perfect Paterfamilias department. Even the Mormophobes, concerned with Mitt's faith which may include, after this life, becoming a god on another planet, must recognize family values here on earth. Unfortunately, though, for Romney's all-American image, during the Iowa straw poll campaign, someone asked if any of his five sons served in the military. Quick on his feet, The Mitt pointed out that his sons were busy all over Iowa for Romney. "That's how they're serving our country, by getting me elected." Unwittingly, did he demonstrate that a top manager (Romney) is not the same as an exceptional leader (Ronald Reagan)? Reagan knew little about management and everything about leadership. Romney knows everything about management. And leadership? The question is open, but maybe not as open among the military and their families, seeing their service in the Middle East's blistering sandbox ranked with knocking on doors in Iowa for a politician.
After a visit with Giuliani, the tough but conflicted cosmopolitan, and Romney, the very smooth, very eager efficiency expert, and a nostalgic farewell to John McCain in his sunbelt rocker, do all Republican roads lead back to Fred Thompson?

Fredheads think so. Fred is supposed to be the one "real" conservative in the running. Some conservatives are not so sure, including icon Richard Viguerie who calls Thompson a "marshmellow Republican," (Viguerie didn't think Ronald Reagan was conservative enough.) As for Thompson's recent moves, he shows no signs of severing ties with his 'Abraham Albatross.' Spencer Abraham, a one-term Senator from Michigan, Bush appointee as Energy Secretary, nominally Christian of Lebanese extraction, is a good buddy, He is also a well-documented lobbyist for Islamic and loose border causes. Fred Thompson, touted as possible heir apparent to the Reagan mantle, recently named Abraham his Campaign Chairman. Thompson's continuing relationship with someone reputed to be an Islamic toady, and soft on border control, is not likely to bolster a  "true Tennessean" image.

Of course, Newt Gingrich may have the most historical perspective, the sharpest insight and comprehension of the issues. But even if he were more hail-fellow and hadn't cheated on his sick wife, and even if, as some think, Fred Thompson flames out,giving Newt a go sign to run as the sole "conservative," Americans have not wanted a professor as Commander-in-Chief since Woodrow Wilson of Princeton University (1913-1921.)

Conclusion: As of August 2007, all roads for Republicans in November 2008 lead to the dreaded Hillary Rodham Clinton vs. the somewhat less dreaded... (?) And if the Dems are showered with manna from socialist heaven, like a stock market crash, vast job losses or financial emergency, will it even matter who the Republican choice is?

AUGUST 20, 2007 "WHY BUSH FAILED."   [Note: from The Fred File, with response from dan cameron rodill (gringoman.)] 

 

Comment by Dan Fekete (27) 

2007-08-20 13:43:44 

The entire mess associated with border security is the result of many decades of neglect and apathy. It is only when the threat of danger exists that the public and politicians see the need to do something. The problem is that leadership does not know what to do.

The lack of performance by heads of government agencies is a direct result of a “Management Theory”, created by business schools several decades ago. What was proposed is that “management” does not have to understand anything about what they are doing, since the working level folks will do the right thing.

If we extrapolate this theory and apply it to say the military, this would imply that the lowliest soldier would be creating military strategy. It should be obvious that no matter which agency of government we are considering for discussion, that leadership with insight and knowledge is a mandatory requirement.

What has become an accepted operating methodology is to fill cabinet and agency head jobs with political supporters. This is no longer an acceptable way to run government, the world has changed and we can’t tolerate a lack of leadership and expect that we can maintain security on the border or at our airports. Just look at some of the abuses imposed on air travelers by TSA, it makes my point perfectly.

If one were to prioritize reforms to government, then it should be obvious that internal national security is a mandatory first agenda item. You can not have anything less than CHAOS without security.

Why all administrations for decades have ignored security of our borders is up for much speculation, why is not important, but change that is meaningful is.

Comment [here redacted]by dan cameron rodill (35)

2007-08-20 17:04:55

Excellent point about the stupidity of Business School “leadership” i.e the veneer so bright and shiny and "authoritative," you don't  see the empty inner core. I've noted for years the effects of this in Iraq, where our leadership somehow failed to see the obvious,  that security was everything.  But now, you've  pinned down a very specific cause for this stupefying failure.  Thanks. It makes sense. As I've long seen it, Iraq deteriorated because Team Bush had no idea how to bring security to the people there after toppling Saddam. Your point suggests to me that they never even saw this as their problem. Security would take care of itself. Others would get it done, like sergents get the "real work" done for Generals. The top, the elite, needn't bother with messy details.... The parallel with security at  U.S. borders is striking, even devastating. The "leaders" (yes, the Bushes AND the Kennedys AND the McCains AND their predecessors AND business consultants)  clearly have been equally clueless about securing our borders.  You throw new light on why.

Who, for example, is George Bush?

A Harvard MBA.

Bingo!

 
August 14, 2007 "FRED'S SA WEAPON."

 

[Note: Will be on the road in September etc, remote locations, but on the look-out for internet cafes in this brave new telecom world of wonder. The following, somewhat redacted, was posted at state-of-the-art Fred Thompson site in response to new Fred post: 'Sanctuary Cities.' Incidentally, raising the Spencer Abraham issue will not make you popular at this state-of-the-art site.  I would know.]

...Now here is the Fred Thompson who has attracted the attention of myself and long-time colleague Vietnam vet Major Glenn Macdonald (Ret. USAR).  Major Macdonald  posts to U.S. military bases world-wide (including a searing  exclusive recently with the mother of  Pat Tillman, the American warrior slain in Afghanistan.)

Fred, in his new 'Sanctuary Cities' post,  demonstrates a talent for saying what George Bush can't and Dhimmicrats won't. Let me expand a bit on Fred's important theme.  Americans want an orderly influx, not a tax-funded invasion They want America the Generous, but not America the Sucker. They do not want brazen  race hustlers like La Raza ('The Race,' got it?) playing the liberal race card on them (with a little help from Dems) just for demanding enforcement of U.S. law.  Americans are sick and tired of having to apologize for being a sovereign nation.

In fact, this Fred Thompson post impresses me enough that I won't ask about the Debbie Schlussel report on his friend Spencer Abraham, such as "Abraham actively worked to delay computer systems to track foreign visitors, which Arab/Muslim groups, including Zogby's, strongly opposed. 1996 immigration law required computerized entry and exit tracking of all temporary visas, but was gutted by Abraham and other legislators."

Don't take this as my disingenuous. The above, you should know, happened before 9.11. Maybe Spencer Abraham has reformed?  Maybe the SA that Fred knows and who connects him to muslim concerns  is now a different man. It can happen. We all live and learn, do we not?

Fred may think so. He has named SA as his Campaign Chairman. After such clear and convincing statements as Fred's on Sanctuary Cities---which  delineates him from The Rudy and the Illegal Lobby---who could think that Fred, with the SA weapon, would shoot himself in the foot?

I'm half persuaded that it's not the job of a friend to think of such matters, let alone raise such questions. Many here on this board seem to agree.

August 08, 2007 "TILLMAN DIED, RUMSFELD LIED."

Long-time gringomanic brother in battle, the ever-expanding MCC (militarycorruption.com) has done it again. This time the mother of American hero Pat Tillman approached MCC, impressed with its growing reputation for truth-telling and rank be damned. Her son gave up a lucrative professional football career to serve with the Rangers in Afghanistan and was later killed under mysterious circumstances. Mrs. Tillman, now experienced with the MSM, or Lamestream media, instead selected MCC for this exclusive interview. She tells MCC that ex-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld "lied through his teeth" in recent Congressional testimony concerning her son's death.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
On the Fred Thompson front (as in recent gringommentary 'THAT FRED TRAIN') the proto-campaign is now fielding an upgraded, refurbished blog-enabled website, as reported in the NY Times. In a recent reply there to Robert Wells in Comments, the following was posted from gringoVision, redacted for clarity (via dan cameron rodill):

       I hear you loud and clear, whether or not some of these energetic well-meaning cheerleaders do. Any friend of Fred will want the Spencer Abraham kerfuffle to go away. (Who wants to think of Fred as buddy of a major Islamic lobbyist?) But any real friend of Fred can tell him what the odds are: The odds are that it is not going to go away. 

August 03, 2007 "THAT FRED TRAIN"

The Fred Train is chugging along, coming 'round that bend.

Impatient friends fret about the slow speed, even with the Election still 15 months away. Opponents are more worried. Alarmed at poll ratings---still surprisingly high for a yet-to-be-announced entry in the 2008 Presidential race---foes of Fred dig into the embankments for dirt or any old flotsam they can toss: Didn't that Fred vote for McCain-Feingold? Didn't this lawyer once represent abortion in one of his hundreds of cases? Didn't he, and even his sons, make some lobbyist moola? Didn't he defend a Judge who Democrats were able to label, in one of 7000 cases, "racist"? Hey, Trophy Wife, Trophy Wife!

Yet even hard-working dirt-diggers are resigned to the fact that former Senator Fred Thompson probably will make his campaign official in September. Friends know that he's not without misgivings over how McCain-Feingold has worked out for free speech and the Soros-funded; that he understands that in Western jurisprudence lawyers sometimes represent murderers, even abortionists; that he was so "attracted" to lobbying that he went into acting instead; that he defends judges who defend the Constitution; that he even believes that men who have known life may make better judges than the sterile abstractions who survive the Grand Inquisitors of confirmation and go on to demean, if not disgrace, the bench; that he married his very attractive wife Jeri---an attorney and Republican media consultant--- 17 years after the still amicable divorce from his first wife, and has two young children by her. Enemies seem caught between playing the bimbo card here---a virtual impossibility---or the "hottie" card---a possible gambit, but dumb---or else just shutting up and eating their hearts out---unlikely, except for the latter.

Does this mean that Fred is now more or less in the clear with all those who, in this Year 19 BC (Bush-Clinton), pine for Ronald Reagan and American clarity, realizing that Fred Thompson may not be the Second Coming, but who might be willing to let him demonstrate how close he can get?

Home free? The answer is no.

We now have revelations about Fred Thompson and Spencer Abraham. Abraham is an ex-Senator from Michigan, ex-Energy Secretary for Bush, and all-around high-powered Islamic lobbyist (although he himself is nominally Christian of Lebanese extraction.) He seems to be the kind of Republican that Republican voters, but not Republican hacks, are sick of. That Thompson would now wade in such oil slick does not convey the Tennessean who some admirers thought they knew. Reports have described this "moderate" Abraham variously as Thompson's new "Campaign Manager," or "Campaign CEO" or "adviser" or "Ambassador to Washington."

The current twist seems to be that Abraham will not--repeat--not function as "Campaign Manager." He will only be the "adviser." Whether or not this is just Spin For Dummies, one fact is clear: Fred Thompson indicates no intention of shucking away the high-powered Islamic Lobbyist Spencer Abraham.
This suggests that Fred sees no conflict here with the American people, despite the hints they gave to Washington during the furor over the attempted Dubai Ports deal. He may see no logical connection either with the national angst, bordering on fury, over illegals and alien infiltration. Like most politicians, he may believe that only some "nativists" or "bigots" question whether Islam is compatible with Western civilization.  Evidence that Spencer Abraham may not be anti-Israel would settle the matter for the typical American politician and his typical supporter. Israel is supposed to be the only bellwether for their "right-wing" flock. Passing the Israel test should be enough  to overlook an open-borders kind of guy who also stopped Arab profiling even after the notorious "Phoenix" case. Fred's Spencer Abraham is high-powered, all right. In the Phoenix case  the FBI would not investigate muslims taking flight lessons before 9.11 for fear of being charged with " racial profiling," In our great PC Republic the label "bigot" is like damnation.

Is this judgement, or just condescension from someone who hasn't done his homework on the nature of East vs. West?

Unfortunately for Fred Thompson, the matter has been documented by passionate right-wing blogeress Debbie Schlussel (gringo-dubbed 'Warrior Jewess Extraordinaire'). Schlussel knows Spencer Abraham. She knows Michigan's "heart of Islamic America" and Detroit and 'Dearbornistan' ad islamum. She knows it very well. She's taken personal risks there, unlike the media herd, and been threatened. Yes, her style may be shoot-from-the-lip. You might not invite her for tea and crumpets.   But you will note the attorney precision and wealth of evidence.

Her post is entitled, "Jihad Spence: Fred Thompson's Pan-Islamist Campaign Manager." (AP had reported 'Campaign Manager,' the unflattering fotos are her selection) She wrote,
"As a Senator, he{Abraham] took marching orders from James Zogby of the pan-Islamist Arab American Institute, opposing profiling of Arabs, the use of secret evidence against Muslims (at the behest of Muslim groups), attempting to repeal the Clinton counterterrorism package, refusing to fund computer tracking of student and other foreign aliens, giving millions in our tax money right to Hezbollah, and putting CAIR on the map on Capitol Hill (taking the group's officials around to meet other Senators and Members of Congress). He took campaign contributions from the relatives of Hezbollah-backed top Lebanese officials after he got the group millions in our tax money...."

Later in the post Schlussel wrote: "As Energy Secretary, he gave top secret tours of nuclear facilities, as well as detailed information on how we secure them to Muslim nations who are our enemies. And he gave out undue post-9/11 awards to Al-Qaeda money-launderers . . . at the White House. The money launderers were raided by U.S. Customs Service agents."

Schlussel (who knew Abraham personally) goes on to describe what he did for Islamists after leaving the Bush cabinet.

 
Lurid? Will a "correction" stating that Spencer is "just" Campaign CEO or adviser, not "Campaign Manager," be enough to placate Fred's former admirers? It probably won't be for those like 'GOP Mind' at MonicaMemo of ABC Radio's Monica Crowley who wrote, "And I was going to vote for this guy."

It might not be enough for two edgy ladies who had been impressed with Fred, like important New Media personalities Michelle Malkin and Laura Ingraham. On Laura's highly rated talk show Monday, July 31, Michelle made it clear that she's "troubled" by these Bush-like Abraham/ Islamic connections. Laura, although obviously taken aback by the revelations, seemed to be reserving judgement.

It might not be enough for Dymphna, of the well-known Gates of Vienna, now a part of major blogosphere enterprise, Pajamas Media. Here's her reply to a gringoman comment at Fausta's blog for the post "My Neighbor and Fred," August 01, 2007, a post which was very supportive of Fred. (Fausta also a prominent associate of Pajamas Media)....:
=======================================================================================
Unfortunately, I'm in gringo man's camp. I really liked Fred and I thought Mrs. Fred was cool (she reminds me of my daughter in looks).

But hiring Spencer Abraham blew it. What in God's green world was Fred thinking? Does he need the Muslim vote, is that it?

I leave him regretfully, here: Those Ripping Sounds You Hear

He'll have to have a mighty fine explanation for hiring an Islamist fellow traveler. Our most important issues are immigration and Islam. They are essential and darn it, Fred fell down on this one, scaping my knees when he did.
====================================================================================
Red Alert to Fred: Many---no, not everybody, but many--- are suddenly disappointed, even turned off. Wrongly so? Is it wrong to be asking now: "How does he fix a great big hole where judgement was supposed to be?"

Fred, of course, is welcome to set things straight, if that is possible now. He also has the option of not meeting this head on, of not thinking outside the Beltway box,  of not dealing with it in a way that mollifies the disillusioned and leads to reconsideration. A man of qualities, Fred undoubtedly would still have a number of backers even while connected to high-powered Spencer Abraham and CAIR, the Open Borders lobby, the North American Union lobby, (the Anchor Baby Lobby?), the Bush "It's a religion of peace" lobby etc.

And maybe this will be enough for that Fred Train, or will seem to be, during the initial euphoria of the coming  announcement.

Or maybe not. Many had been leaning to Fred over Rudy.

JULY25, 2007 "BUSH-CLINTON BORDER BUSTERS."

To paraphrase Tom Paine, These are times that try men's party affiliation. (In today's Politically Correct Republic, you can't say what he said, "men's souls." Too 18th century. )

But even Tom Paine might concede the need, nowadays, of squarely facing the crisis of party, of political affiliation, of Dems and Pubs, of so-called liberals and so-called conservatives, hacks and hustlers of Left and Right, so many swarming the rotundas and oak-panelled rooms with hot deals in their hearts and law degrees in their hands.

Case in point. I voted for George Bush in 2004. I committed this act as a recovering sort-of Democrat (the recovery in full swing after voting Clinton back in '92 and then watching, appalled, at how The Slick One, the "feeling" one, the Ivy League moderate liberal or liberal moderate with the Black Panther-friendly wife soon "rewarded" me with Waco and the barbecuing of peaceful black and white men, women and children on U.S. soil. Slick let something happen  for which the lamestream media would never ever forgive a Republican, i.e. a "crypto-fascist." While I hardly became infatuated with elephants, the utterly shameless double standard ruined me for donkeys and their apologists. Their droppings have failed to attract me ever since. I don't identify with a fly.

In the 2004 Presidential contest, of course George Bush inspired doubts. Of course he bore tell-tale birthmarks of Fortunate Son and Preppy Man. Was that his fault? Advantages can be overcome. Of course he would wrap himself in the flag. Wasn't he a Republican? Both candidates wrapped themselves in flags (Kerry less obviously.) At least Bush, for this elementary stump ritual , chose the American flag. This took on new meaning in the wake of the Twin Towers catastrophe. The Democrats' more "sophisticated" semi-French John Kerry chose the UN flag. Most liberals liked Jacques' preference. That kind of rally 'round- the- flag cheers them up. But in the Internet era it's easy to discover that the United Nations is even more corrupt, more bought and paid for. more incompetent, more immoral and more dishonorable than even the U.S. Congress.

So the moment arrived, post-9.11, to do the formerly inconceivable: cast a gringo vote for George Bush, After all, 'recovering Democrat' is now practically an American archetype, incarnated by no less than Ronald Reagan (while the Americanologist knows that the type goes back at least as far as the "Sage of Baltimore," the ribald newsman, columnist and author, H.L. Mencken, who had rollicking fun impaling the Harding-Coolidge-Hoover Republicans of the 1920's. Mencken at first welcomed the Democrats' FDR triumph in 1932, but he was also honest and clear-seeing. The honeymoon soured. Mencken soon saw Roosevelt's "Imperial Purple" degrading American liberty, the Constitution, self-reliance, personal responsibility etc. As Republicans mewed, the Republic of Washington and Jefferson was handed over to Big Government socialists and nannies, the professsors of "progress" with their two left hands. These nanny potentates, who could engineer society but never a building, were also very clever at saccharine labeling. They would provide names like "New Deal," "Fair Deal," "The Fairness Doctrine," "The Great Society" etc. Media admirers loved it. The new power elite seemed so very, very compassionate. Who wouldn't fawn?)

But in 2007, what are George Bush's voters seeing in a Republican who was supposed to stave off the Democratic hordes and their garlic-breath demogoguery of Winning Via Victimology?
True, Bush did nominate brainy Constitutionalists like Roberts and Alito to the Supreme Court, after a popular revolt against his foolish nomination of crony Harriet Miers. True, he ended the offer of U.S. ports to "moderate" muslims after a popular revolt quashed his Dubai Ports deal. True, his tax cuts ("for the rich," according to Dem Talking Points) may have super-charged the economy and stock market. True, he ended his Bush-Kennedy-McCain Shamnesty efforts (temporarily, at least) for a tidal wave of illegal immigrants, after a virtual national uprising by what he castigated as "vigilantes" or "nativists" or "bigots." True, the Democrats and their media paramours are gleefully polling the national discontent they help generate, exploiting his Iraq war mismanagement. But he stubbornly rejects their call to surrender and bend over for Osama bin Laden and the holy throat-cutters.

Still, there may be another reason, possibly ominous, for Bush's dismal poll showing. Why are his numbers only twice as good as the catacomb numbers for Congress? The immigration fiasco and chaos is a clue, a symptom. It's about borders.

George Bush, it turns out, is no friend of borders---at least not U.S. borders. While managing the muck in Iraq, he does seem interested in trying to secure Iraq borders, especially from Syrian and Iranian illegals.
Now how can this be? Why would this President, sworn to defend, be less serious about defending U.S. borders and enforcing U.S. laws? In a May 08, 2006 post, 'OUR FIRST MEXICAN PRESIDENT,' gringoman.com, illustrated El Presidente Jorge Bush in a fine blue business suit and spanking red tie as he also wore a great big dashing Mariachi-type sombrero. But that was having a bit of fun. It couldn't also be profoundly true, could it? Is George Bush no less a threat to U.S. sovereignty than was the more articulate Democratic President Clinton who became the Godfather of NAFTA, engineering this border-bashing Big Business dream through Congress and happily signing it in 1993? (And Republican voters puzzled recently at how multi-national Poppy Bush and family later "adopted" the Democratic Bubba who had grown up with a father issue.)

Some are beginning to wonder. Among them is Nancy K. Matthis at American Daughter. In an article, North American Union, she begins an extensive look :

It’s almost a done deal. While most patriotic Americans have been preoccupied this summer with the invasion of illegal aliens across our southern border with Mexico, President Bush has been quietly finalizing plans with Stephen Harper and Felipe Calderon to eradicate our national sovereignty. They’ll wrap it up on August 20 at a meeting in Montebello, Quebec....

The Border Busters, inspired by the European globalista-socialistas, seem to have big plans afoot, further detailed in the Matthis article. Who is 'they'? Republicans? Democrats?

And party affiliation signifies what, as in the Bush(Republican)-McCain(?)-Kennedy(Democrat) Amnesty Gambit? Clinton's corporatist NAFTA? The "anti-racist" Democrats' embrace of La Raza? Jeb Bush's wife, from the ruling segment of Mexico's bottomless-pit, the profoundly corrupt Narco-Republica of 100 million which the corporatists/socialists now plan to graft on to the relatively successful USA and bill the U.S. middle class for the incalculable damages?

In the 2004 campaign two Yalies, George Bush and John Kerry (not to be confused with the Clinton Yalies) wrapped themselves in flags. Signifying what?

Are the 'Bush Borders' just another name for the 'Bush-Clinton Republican-Democratic Borders,' as suggested in 'THE BC ERA' (May 11, 2007, the gringommentary for IRAQANOIA at gringoman.com) in this the Year 19 BC (Bush-Clinton Era)?

And are these indeed the times that try men's party affiliation? Or will the 2008 Presidential candidates of both parties deign to explain why they are not really border busters too? Will any mediacrity ask? Will any citizen ask ? And in the lamestream will a candidate's Council of Foreign Relations kind of disingenuous, parsing, slick or outright non-answers be accepted as usual?

July 18, 2007 "WILLING TO BE RUTHLESS?" 

 [Based on commentary for  "Religion of 'Peace', " the blog post  by ABC Radio's Monica Crowley at monicamemo.com]

 

Monica,

 

You mention "willing to be ruthless" in battle.

 

Okay. Sounds pretty warrior-like. And let's assume that "battle" means not only the everyday street-and-IED action in suicidal/human shield Iraq, but also the wider war,  the counter-Global Jihad ( I'll be pc for a moment and resist a gringomanic  'The Planetary Crusade.') And let's assume our focus is on Americans who actually believe there is a war on, and it's global. We'll exclude the  MSM millions and website "progressives" enjoying  delivered pizza and diet cola and suspecting that, like the rubble of the Twin Towers, this "war" is  just a product Made-in-Bushland.

 

As you and the cogent Walid Phares seem to understand, it's not just about  getting assassins and wannabe caliphate commandos.  Unfortunately,  the War of Ideas is crucial;   unfortunate for Americans  more comfortable  with the thrills of action than the lightning of ideas. Not a fair perception? See any TV, video or cinemaplex. Case closed. Jihadis know it, even if kufars do not.

 

So what is the point of "ruthless" in a war barely grasped?  How many have the foggiest on  what it's about (aside from the Mother Sheehans and Soros-blessed KosKidz  et al who know it's all about Baaaaaad USA and Cowboy Nazi)? Has a Great Non-Communicator in the White House helped or hindered via military muscle with a vision that is only the politically correct "vision thing"? Or does knowing matter?  Is it enough   to thrash about, even "ruthlessly",  at opponents who are half-understood at best, while they understand you 95%?

 

Okay, you want a specific, something that will demonstrate how hard this really is for americanos? But is an American willing to go back thousands of years?  What public school American can? There were not even bags of potato chips, let alone I-Phones and Starbucks.

 

Anyway, here's a  paraphrase from a gringommentary of many news cycles ago:

 

....If Christianity is the  offspring of Judaism,  its rebel son, then Islam is clearly the upstart grandson. (Monica,  you would know about Mohammad rifling through Judaism, the Pentateuch, the Patriarchs, circumcision,  turning kosher into halal, defining the infidels as "unclean animals,"   the Arab co-opting of the Hebrew Abraham etc, so let's save bandwidth and if some are disturbed, let the duffers do their homework.) The educated  understand that the three monotheist religions, despite  differences,  are deeply and organically related.  We can leave the others to Doctor Phil or Gangsta Rap for White Boys.

 

And why does this matter? Think War of the Monotheists (a good 1500 years old, but the term  gringo-coined) Think birth of  fanaticism. Religious fanatics  were despised by the Greco-Roman "pagans" who considered them barbarians. (Getting controversial enough for you already? ) And the "progressives" and other self-righteous of strong moralistic odor  usually bracket all this under the general headings of "Bible thumping" and "irrational moonbats." They  prefer "Atheism For Dummies."   

 

Here's a key point :  Judaism may have generated religious  intolerance millenia ago---a fierce legacy once embraced by Christians too---as the rationalists never stop repeating--- but that was then. This is now.  It has long since ameliorated and reformed the old bloodlust, really toned it down (even anti-Zionists, lefties and muslims who want Israel incinerated must admit that nuclear-armed Israelis have demonstrated remarkable restraint repeatedly after endless provocations. ) Most Jews you know want peace, and many will even  bend over to get it. They don't want to smite the  heathen or slaughter the first-born for Jaweh or anyone else.  They will leave the stoning of harlots and hanging of homosexuals and honor killings  to the muslims in Pakistan or Iran or Saudi Arabia.

 

In brief,  Judaism became Westernized. So  did Christianity. All three of these world-shaking monotheisms came from the East, yet  only one,  in effect,  REMAINS in the East. Only one is purely of the East.  Of the three, Islam is clearly the most purely Eastern religion, (while determined, of course, to heed Mohammed and conquer the planet for the "peace" of Islam.)  Christianity fuses Jesus of Galilee with Greek philosophy (Aristotle via Thomas Aquinas  et al) and Greek art (inspiring Michelangelo  et al.) mingled with Roman hierarchies and governance ("pagan" Rome had its  Pontiffs robed in splendor on the Field of Mars). Christianity became very Westernized, even with the Lutheran revolt from Roman "excess." Muslims and even some Jews must and do consider Christianity  "pagan" to a significant  degree.  The art treasures, the statues, the "graven images" and paintings, ('idol worship', you know)  the divinity of a "man" Jesus, the  Trinity---Islam sees all this as forbidden to Abrahamics and indisputably Greco-Roman "pagan" and "kufar." Yes, "unclean."  Only the muslims---"moderate' or what have you---are clean, you see. Every "moderate" is cleaner than any infidel.  Mohammed got a whole lot out of the Pentateuch.

 

And where does this lead? Where must it?   This leads inescapably to the great dread of  the pc-ers, the diversity mongers,  the multi-culties, the  liars or just the dopey and  deluded:  This Global War is in  effect a clash of East vs. West. Clash of civilizations? Choose your semantics. The Islamics, the jihadis are clear. They will not beat around the pc bush with the "sensitive" and "tactful" white guys who run Europe and America and don't dare to talk straight. They call it Holy War.

 

Holy War? But that's totally unacceptable in the West (except to some 'Christian wingers'.)  So the pc-ers, and the make-nice socialist Sammys and Jorge Bush's Bidness Globalistas who have a world of Free Trade to manage and even juicy Wahabbi or Shia contracts to sign , must deny or downplay  the obvious:  Islam is the East. The medeival East. Judaism and Christianity  went through historic Reformation.  They became Westernized and Enlightened. Burning at the stake today is definitely a no-no. The New York Times still awaits the first Christian suicide bomber. CNN still has no footage of Jewish doctors in London packing  a Mercedes with explosives, hoping a syringe will enable detonation and kill as many non-Jews as possible.

 

Islam never Westernized, and possibly never will. The black blood of oil has infused it with  new life, resurrection from  the medeival mausoleum. Now the enormous  Body will go forth, Saviour or Deliverance to many, Monster to many others. Not stupid, in fact rather cunning,  the Body sees the Trust Fund Baby Ruling Class in the West today as emasculatos and globalista bureaucrats.  They may be fervent socialists or bright MBA business types , but they are not defenders, let alone warriors, of Western Civilization. Their function is to placate The Body and do contracts in their globalista market states.

 

Good news for the Euros or the Americans? Possibly not. Probably not. Is this a war that Americans can fight? "Ruthlessly?" Trust Fund bambinos and their bureaucrat underlings of Europe and America, up against The Holy Scimitar they do not even dare to name?  We know that Europeans are finished (barring massive  uprising from the folks.) And Americans can fight such a war?  Ruthlessly? They can?

 

Monica, how real do you expect pc-ers and panderers and globalista groupies to get during all those fat sheikh contracts, those fabulous speaking fees from emirs,  that lush  Beltway power brokering with the 'moderates'? Or will they just keep muddling along, made-up nicely for Sunday morning cameras until, suddenly, that day comes when the Moment of Truth hits and hits very, very hard?

 

From GRINGOMAN.COM, the most penetrating blog never read.

 

 

 

July12 "THE FALL OF BAGHDAD?"

[Based on gringommentary at monicamemo of ABC Radio's Monica Crowley. Note: Monica interned for Richard Nixon during the last years of his life.]

Senator Joe Biden is doing what a Democratic Presidential hopeful---who voted in 2002 for Iraq war authorization--- must: horsewhip George Bush on Iraq. Bush policy? Simple. It's "doomed to fail."

Unlike the nervous Republicans who may simply jump ship, Biden will even use a whip made in Vietnam. The loquacious Delawarian asserts that Bush policy, including the "Surge," will not only fail, but may turn Baghdad's specially protected Green Zone into something like Saigon in 1975. He refers, of course, to the historic Fall of Saigon: Vietnam's last remaining Americans (except a few like myself) fleeing to the U.S. Embassy for helicopter evacuation. A great panic was on as an allied Government collapsed, a Communist Army surrounding the South Vietnamese capitol.

It's a stock parallel now in the Iraq Digest of Possible Scenarios. But Senator Joe seems to downplay other historical facts and parallels: E.g. the Democrats, just like today, were the major backtrackers, the leading force, when it got too rough,  in demanding U.S. retreat (along with some rattled Republicans of the "moderate" or "globalist" persuasion.)

The Democratic Congress also compounded its interruptus, or  pull-out proclivities. It drastically reduced aid to an ally, in effect tossing the South Vietnamese to a fanatically determined enemy who knew how to work the media and the "peace people" and college students wanting draft deferments. This was seen as a great victory for "progressives" and left-wingers over "war-mongers" and "imperialists," i.e. right-wingers. (What happened to the Cambodians and Vietnamese after Americans left and the socialists "liberated" them and brought "peace" is not a favorite subject with the "peace people." Nightmares, even in the name of anti-U.S. imperialism, are problematic. A film like "The Killing Fields" wasn't seen till almost ten years later.)

George Bush is certainly fair game, as the Republicans may have mismanaged Iraq as much as the Democrats, under Kennedy and Johnson, mismanaged Vietnam. Senator Joe Biden is just doing his thing as disingenuous Democrat, ignoring well documented history as he urges U.S. pull-out from Iraq in an increasingly unstable Middle East powder keg. In the U.S. many chanting college students and the Walter Cronkite media wanted Americans out of Vietnam. In 1973 (under Republican President Nixon) the massive pull-out pressure finally succeeded: The Paris Peace Accord provided a timetable for U.S. withdrawal. The Ultimate Debacle---as many still see it---had begun.

In 1974 the Fall of Richard Nixon preceded the Fall of Saigon (1975). That is, with the Watergate scandal taking Nixon down, liberals rejoiced. The excited, re-invigorated Democratic Congress went further. It drastically cut funds to the South Vietnamese. The inevitable was now crystal clear. This always problematic ally of ten years, despite some heroic stands as in Xuan Loc, essentially collapsed in 1975, leaderless, when the Hanoi Communists broke the 1973 Paris Peace Accord signed by Henry Kissinger, who was rewarded with the Nobel Peace Prize, shared with his Communist counterpart, Le Duc Tho (who I later interviewed on camera in their Victory Celebration at the Presidential Palace.) The anti-Communists, knowing they had been deserted, disintegrated, and there were many suicides. In the U.S., college students cheered defeat and dishonor when Republican President Ford, as the former ally was sinking fast, told them that we were finished with Vietnam.

There's always been a haunting question about that American disgrace. Does it apply to Iraq today?
Without Watergate, or if Nixon had somehow survived Watergate, would he---unlike President Ford---have stood idly by as the Communists defied the 1973 Paris Peace Accords? Would the U.S. Air Force, with its B-52 bombers, have slept while the Communist Army marched South defiantly? Would U.S. military morale have sunk to an all-time low for years to come? Nixon reportedly had promised Saigon "severe" retaliation against the Communists if they violated the 1973 Paris Accord. It was such promises that helped get the South Vietnamese to go along with the agreement despite their knowledge of the enemy. They had to trust the Americans. And they wound up with the Americans, although not with the Richard Nixon of 1973, but the Gerald Ford of 1975.

Lots of parallels? Maybe Senator Joe missed some.
But who knows what the non-Gerald Ford would have done in 1975? After all these years, who can know?
Someone who used to work for Richard Nixon?

Monica Crowley?

July 06 "HAPPY BIRTHDAY, MILITARY CORRUPTION!"

July 4 marked the seventh birthday of www.militarycorruption.com /arguably the world's only website that both serves and battles the U.S. military---defending the lower ranks against  command abuse from the unscrupulous and the rear echelon cover-up artists.

MCC is now read on every US military base here and around the world. Many of its stories---and not just the previous blasts against (finally) departed Bush-favorite, SecDef Donald Rumsfeld---are known to get "special attention" in the Pentagon. (See June 19 gringommentary, PARIS HILTON OF THE AIR FORCE, on how top pc brass dishonor the uniform, depress morale and cover up for what may be a well-connected slut who, on a hormonal-and-abortion stampede,  created an international incident, demeaning her country, her Air Force and possibly busting marriages in the meantime.)

Editor-in-Chief Major Glenn Macdonald, USAR (Ret.) did three tours in Vietnam (where he met Dan Cameron Rodill who you may know as 'gringoman') and where he developed what few civilians understand---that sense of jaundiced grunt humor about incompetent or unaccountable brass,  especially the REMS, those rear-echelon 'chair-borne warriors" enjoying the AC while real soldiers tread the sand or the mud and face the trip-wires, the ambushes,  the IEDs.

 MCC recognizes a fact which  many "patriots" shy away from: The uniform is not enough. You can dress a pig  in one.   What matters  is what's inside the uniform.   Major ("I'm a Scot") MacDonald is also  a highly experienced  and award-winning newsman (veteran of the AP and NY Post). His insider knowledge of the military is extremely rare in the press corps  

MCC, "Fighting for the Truth, Exposing the Corrupt" reports that its 'hits' reached more than 1.4 million in June.   What makes this "Maine-iac" son of the late Judge Paul MacDonald still eager to post truth to politically correct power and the military bureaucracy? His hometown weekly, The Lincoln County News, ('Serving Maine and Lincoln County for over a century') has done a detailed article on MCC and 'Major Mac').
 
 July 05 "JIHAD DOCTOR"

[No time here for the  gringoing re The (sic) Fairness Doctrine at the Baroness Alexandra's Allthingsbeautiful, or likewise with Bush/Libby Commutation and our "story inside the story" at Monica Crowley's MonicaMemo.]

Two days ago, after last week's aborted terror  in London and Scotland, gringoVision proposed, to Debbie Schlussel, Warrior Jewess Extraordinaire, a new category in The War: 'Jihad Doctor.' ( That's The War that half the population isn't sure how to fight, and the other half doesn't think exists.) And now today, from the UK Telegraph:
         A group of 45 Muslim doctors threatened to use car bombs and rocket grenades in terrorist attacks in the United States during discussions on an extremist internet chat site.

  Prophetic? Hardly. The crystal gringoball has imperfections. It did NOT predict 9.11. These things are best left to prophets, gifted gypsies, Nostradamus Associates etc. 'Remote viewing' a concept like 'Jihad Doctor' had more to do with something mentioned to the Lady of Tradition, American Daughter, namely, getting 'writerly.'   

And of course some will look at the new jihad evidence and pooh-pooh. (Guess who).  And they won't be totally clueless, not even those who don't recognize The War.  The alarming news---of 45 muslim medicos declaring their jihad--- is, after all,  from web sites. Even I, who considers the Internet magic, admit it's not gospel. These web site reports cover a 3-year period. Some Brit officials are downplaying them. No point in panicing the UK public which needs muslim practioners due to their socialized medicine's doctor shortage.  The U.S. is  increasingly dependent on imported doctors due to the shortage of Americans in the semi-socialist HMO system which Michael "Sicko" Moore rates as inferior to Fidel Castro's despot socialism.  Muslim doctors, even good ones who meet Western standards, might be unfairly compromised. Maybe the Al-Quaeda groupies even want that, to sow discord. Islamophobia can be a two-edged scimitar.  

Yet how to escape that image of a medical syringe used as part of a firing device, reported by ABC News? Hundreds might have died, but the  syringe malfunctioned. It gives a whole new meaning to medical "side effects."

Related, is  there anything  to the news out of multy-culty and muslim-welcoming  Canada, i.e. that 76 nuclear devices are missing, some known stolen? And can be used to make the "dirty bomb"? And that doctors and medical technicians have useful expertise in this area? And that the progressive press explains  how to  dirty-bomb a city in order to wreak colossal economic damage?  

Hmmmmm. The times, as the old Chinese maxim suggests, are becoming increasingly "interesting."  Might muslim doctors, under pressure, try a make-over? They can't convert to Christianity without becoming  apostate, which could mean a death sentence. What then? In the interest of public relations with their infidel hosts, might they  volunteer to do what almost nobody  does anymore: make house calls? Will the HMOs permit it? Will Americans  accept it?   

Or will we see a  looming Clash of Medicalizations?

July 03"Get Me a Muslim Doctor?" Yet another medico has turned up in the UK-Scotland terror strikes. Despite the multy-culties and their  "poor, disadvantaged, illiterate underclass," their understanding  The Religion of Peace, their desire to stop making muslims angry etc, the number of highly educated terrorists in this latest UK foray totals seven---all either accredited doctors or medical students (cream of the Umma). This has prompted the following to the unique Warrior Jewess, Debbie Schlussel (see "Circimcise This" below.)

Debbie,

Okay, so we have some differing nuances over  circumcised fanatics, but as a peace offering, and in view of your exceptional work, gringoVision offers The Debbie File a new category for semantic clarity: JIHAD DOCTOR.

Enjoy.

June 29  "The (sic) Fairness Doctrine"

The Fairness Doctrine would  likely attract George Orwell. He had a nose  for shifty language. The Fairness Doctrine is to fairness as Air America is to America: camouflage for socialist frustration with the  free market.

 

Of course  Democrats and progressives and Soros workers   feel a fatal attraction.  The Fairness Doctrine targets their  bane of banes, conservative Talk Radio. Such uppity Talk Radio unnerves them,  despite the explosion in other media outlets for every imaginable opinion, lunacy and ideology , from Stalinism to Hitlerism to Hillarycare.  The (sic) Fairness Doctrine, by sigging the dogs of Bureaucracy, PC police and "equal time" on radio---an idea too ludicrous to use against corporate MSM and other media---  would in effect  shut down what's become the national Town Forum.

Still, the progressivists must and will try.  Talk Radio, for them, is unfair:  too free-wheeling, too irreverent, too popular,  too politically incorrect. In other words, too American, too  democratic in a dangerous sense,  too vox populi for governmental taste.  Worse yet, it seems to tilt  Right at a time when most intelligentsia, bureaucracies, academics, junkies, pornographers   and speculator billionaires like George Soros want the U.S. tilting  Left.    European eliteniks and their U.S. counterparts,  either in envy or  horror,  see American Talk Radio as a  Wild West of megaherz and kilohertz. It's just too American! It must be tamed, or better yet, destroyed.

The Left, earnest foe of cannibal capitalism, has a perennial fairness dilemna : How to deal with the huge numbers it sees as either too ignorant or too ill-intentioned for Mondo Socialismus.   The Left  appears to know how smart, knowledgeable, sophisticated, legalistic,  and righteous it is. Its press and publications constantly demonstrate this to itself.  Books, judges, bureaucrats and tenured professors  back up the Truthiness.  On the web many thousands  will spout these accepted Truths handed down from the mandarin elite. It's heady. They feel  empowered, kicking U.S. imperialist butt.  It can  also  bolster their  potty-mouth anger against "the idiots, the morons, the wingnuts, the anti-abortionists, the Christian  crazies etc. And don't forget  the   corporate overlords who won't invent energy-saving electric cars, or let us invent them. They  profit from oil and war, the bourgeois bastards,  and make the muslims mad at us." 

Yet the problem continues. Outside of Hollywood and the  campus soviets, so many still don't adopt the Left's vision thing. Worse yet,  so many   flock to  Talk Radio,   The crux of the problem:  Left media, despite decades of effort,  can't seem  to function in a free market. It advocates for The People, yet the People turn away, even run away. Despite "listener donations," unless it gets hand-outs from Government and/or "progressive" philanthropists, it dies like a dog. The Left and a free market (of ideas too) mix like oil and water. For the "progressive" and anti-American imperialist of all ages and pedigrees, this is deeply frustrating. Likely embittering.  Without Congressional pork or Soros-type subsidy, they feel like the brunette who loses the guy to the blonde. It's not fair! And they're right. It's not fair. It just is.   Air America (despite the pretentious name, astonishng amount of free publicity and support by the 'non-biased' MSM) failed even in New York City, a Liberal  Valhalla.  Fair? Maybe not. Galling? And how.   Ratings, being free market,  apparently can't be manipulated like elections.

Senator Diane Feinstein, ranked as the 5th richest U.S. Senator,  and other leading Democrats, are now publicly intending to "look into the Fairness Doctrine" despite their 2006 Election success.  Feinstein can't be happy with the  medium  that might question whether she enabled her husband's huge no-bid Pentagon contracts and his millions  made in China Would "simplistic" Talk Radio, after thoroughly reporting the Republican "culture of corruption" (to use the Dem term) be "simplistic" enough to air the Dem brand too?

Actually,  Democrats have always loved the (sic) Fairness Doctrine. The attachment is hardly recent.........  

   Bill Ruder, an assistant secretary of commerce under John F. Kennedy, admitted to CBS News producer Fred Friendly that “Our massive strategy was to use the Fairness Doctrine to challenge and harass right-wing broadcasters and hope the challenges would be so costly to them that they would be inhibited and decide it was too expensive to continue.” {h/t http://www.agoravox.com/article.php3?id_article=6325/)

................And this means the Dem/Left and the Soros workers  are the only species of homo politicus who want to terminate  the Free American  Forum of the Air? Not so fast. It's  known that Republican Richard Nixon's "enemies list" extended to broadcasters decades ago.  And  today? Now that elite hacendado Georgie Bush's Bidness Globalistas have had their Amnesty Travesty throttled in the U.S. Senate (June 28), phone lines to Congress burning up,  due largely---surprise---to the unprecedented will of the folks, does any owner of an impartial brain believe that  certain Pubs are not listening  to Senator Lott? That's the Mississippi Lott  who just recently said   they need to "deal" with Talk Radio.

  Understandably liberals and progressives have a problem with Broadcast Freedom and letting Americans decide what they want. After all, in the  Free Radio Forum of America  even their "famous comedian" Al Franken failed , while assuring everyone that conservative Talk Titan Rush Limbaugh was the "Big Fat Idiot."  And they're  right that  Michael Savage, when not quoting from Cicero, Suetonius and Moby Dick, or his toy poodle, can make even conservatives cringe with his commentary about homosexuals, bombing "the enemy,"  and "the mental disorder known as Liberalism." But are Democrats and progressives  the only ones  too "intelligent" and "sophisticated"   to make it in an unscripted  medium of ideas, facts, opinions and ad hominems,  like Talk Radio? Maybe not. Maybe some Pubs measure up, too. Some very, very important Republicans are not very  happy withTalk Radio. (Amnesty For Illegals  Guy John McCain, his Presidential candidacy fading fast, will understand. The many friends and associates of  Texas hacendado Jorge Bush will understand too.)

Arguably,it might come down to who will next occupy the White House and appoint the #5 to the FCC, which can re-implement the Fairness Doctrine.  The fifth member swings it either to the two libs or the two cons. You know what a lib will do. And you think you know what a con will do.

ps. Re Election 2008, wanted to mention Monica Crowley (ABC Radio) and the Fred Train that's comin' 'round the bend, and her opinion that Fred's engine  will chug, eventually,  to a grinding halt.  Maybe later.

  June 22, 'CIRCUMCISE THIS'

If one had to get succinct about Debbie Schlussel, very succinct,  'a boldly right-wing super-Jewess' might do. The daughter of Dr. Schlussel (Army veteran),  mother born in a Nazi concentration camp (Bergen-Belsen) she storms into politics, media and Jihad while based in the Detroit area ("the heart of Islamic America," she'll remind you.). The Jewish Ann Coulter?

An attorney and competitive athlete (track and tennis), she is also a media dynamo and  pain in the liberal tookus. A take-no-prisoners commentator all over the MSM, cable, radio and the blogosphere, including Howard Stern, O'Reilly, quoted by the NY Times, Wall Street Journal etc etc,  she's earned the title  "Enemy #1"  from the feminists at Ms Magazine. She's  been a hard-driving Republican activist since high school. Oh, her resume also includes five languages. Her Arabic presumably was useful when she went under-cover in a hijab, exposing what's going on in U.S. mosques where they practice what Georgie Bush terms, "The religion of peace." Her recipe seems to be: add guts to smarts and shake well. As a columnist and blogger she has a tendency to fire-bomb the Left and at times make even compassionate conservatives cringe, if not run for cover.

Question: is a multi-lingual Mensa firebrand with a law degree  and an MBA immune from doing or posting something dumb on her weblog? Debbie recently posted, CIRCUMCISION DECLINES: ANOTHER SYMPTOM OF ILLEGAL ALIENS. This post did have a certain originality. Give circumcision-friendly  Debbie her due. The allegation was strange  It focused on a very legitimate immigration issue, health,  but ignored the evidence of a real health problem, such as the thousands of tubercular illegals entering the U.S. from known TB zones in Mexico, Latin America and probably Asia too. Instead Debbie, arguably, went whacky. She was concerned about the waves of  illegals crossing our borders while uncircumcised.  She feared that their un-cut state, by lowering the over-all percentage of un-cut males in the U.S., would thereby make the U.S. more subject to AIDS, penile cancer and urinary tract infections.

But Debbie, at least, doesn't call for the practice that is widespread in Africa and muslim regions, i.e. female circumcision,  She's content to keep it male. The more male members that are sliced, the better for the U.S. This post  prompted many Comments, including the following gringommentary (redacted for gringoman.com).....................

Debbie, do snap out of it. Circumscision is not a health issue, except for those gulled by scientific "evidence" which is never ever really definitive or "proven." You're too smart not to know that circumcision is essentially an article of religious faith for Jews and muslims. Jews have been cutting the  penises of helpless infants for 3000 years, due apparently to Abraham's deal with Jaweh.  It's virtually certain they learned this strange custom from the Egyptians who were doing it 5000 years ago (wall paintings) and there are well-known art depictions from 2300 BC, or  a thousand years before Abraham did it to himself at age 99, followed by his entire household, including the slaves. The muslims, of course, in order to legitimize themselves as descendants of Abraham, Mohamet co-opting the Israelite's monotheism, joined the compact. Christians, with some exceptions, disdain it, preferring "the circumcision of the heart" as a deeper sign of faith. But for Jews, and especially muslims today, their  unnatural penises prove to them how superior they are  to everyone else---the heathen, the goyim, the infidels.    Practically nobody perpetrates this procedure on helpless male infants anymore except  traditional Jews, muslims, and profiteering U.S medicos. Europe has always rejected it. Non-muslim Asia has always rejected it (Korea a possible exception.)  And as you can see here, latinos are not eager to surrender part of their manhood either. Do some research, Debbie. You'll find that even some Jews are wise-ing up, and even rebelled against the practice in Biblical times. You got so many comments here because genital mutilation is always a sensitive topic. PS. As for the urban myths about sexual preferences: If you think that un-mutilated women do not appreciate the un-mutilated man who knows what to do with those still-intact hundreds of nerve endings the mutilators seek to remove, well, Debbie, uh, maybe you need to expand your horizons. I haven't posted on this in a long while at gringoman.com. Debbie, don't tempt me.

 There were many more Comments. One that directly addressed the gringommentary:

love how people talk about things that they have no clue about. Case in point senior gringo. I'm not going into what Jewish Law says on this topis bec. it would be too indept, however I will say that on most things if the Europeans do/don't something Americans should do the oppisite. Also, it's a religious and sacred custom. Don't demean what you don't understand. BTW, you can call me El Guapo! LOL

Posted by: OneIrishJew

 

OIJ was  a little too, well, inadequate to warrant a  reply. Nevertheless, one was made, in order to more fully address Debbie's post.

GringoReply to OIJ: 1. Speaking of clues, do you have any about the origin of this practice? If not, you might check out the Egyptian wall paintings on it that are 5000 years old, long  before the Israelites entered Egypt and eventually  adopted this Egyptian ritual. 

2. The practice was considered  barbaric by the most civilized cultures of the ancient world. It horrified the Roman. You might notice that Greco-Roman statues, whose artistic perfection has never been surpassed in thousands of years, glorified the natural, i.e. proudly displaying the male prepuce. (Another reason why Jews and muslims forbid 'graven images', while Christians clearly compromise?) As for these hysterical Jewish/muslim factoids about 'cleanliness," use your IrishJewish noggin. Roman baths were a wonder of the ancient world. Italy, unlike the Israelite/Mohamet  homeland, was more known more for rivers and lakes and great viaducts and baths and rainfall, than for deserts and drought. From that you can deduce the difference between life in Europe and tribal life in the desert with respect to personal hygiene. Who do you think had less water for washing up? Need I get any more graphic?   

3. You say if the Europeans do something, that's a clue for Americans to do just the opposite. Well,  I must ask you to use your noggin again. . You ready? It is NOT just Europeans, going as far back as Rome and further, who frown on this mutilation of the male member. It is also China. Japan, Vietnam, Cambodia etc, in fact most of Asia outside of what the muslims conquered. It is also virtually all of Latin America. But you do have a consolation. You're not doing the opposite of all the world: you're with the muslims on this! Today, almost 3/4 of the world's circumcised are muslim. Jews only about 1%. So, religion-wise, Islam practically owns the franchise today.

 

Incidentally, on the "cleanliness" factoids which the slicers use for their  "evidence," most Asians consider themselves naturally cleaner than most Africans and caucasians, and they don't use any recondite guidelines from either kosher or halal or the Koran 'najis'  for that, although they night not appreciate you entering their homes without first removing your shoes. Suggestion: don't  even try to slice them, or tell them that you're cleaner or morally superior.  That line generally works only in the U.S.with  dummies.

    

June 19: 'PARIS HILTON OF THE AIR FORCE.' Supposedly in  today's new Progressive  co-ed BC (Bush-Clinton) U.S.  military, so-called discrimination is defeated, gender bias ended, hormones are tamed and fairness triumphs. Yet MCC (militarycorruption.com) keeps reporting otherwise in this BC pc military.  The latest lurid example has proven too hot, so far, for most of the liberal Mainstream (if not Lamestream) Media to handle. It involves Air Force Major Jill Metzger who may have faked her own kidnapping, had a secret abortion and now, in our Brave New Politically Correct World, faces not justice and criminal prosecution,(like many enlisted personnel would, not to mention Marines in Iraq.) Instead, this 'uniformed Paris Hilton'   may get a nice, generous  taxpayer-funded retirement.  Double standards? PC discrimination ? Hormones tamed in the new BC co-ed U.S. military? You decide.  (Also, in brand new MCC report, see what happens to an Air Force instructor who broke the rules with female cadet but who, being white male without clout, lacks 'Paris Hilton' cache and influence in the new BC  pc military.) On the Jill Metzger abuse and travesty of feminism, MCC posts this:

 
               
MILITARYCORRUPTION.COM IS CONDUCTING AN INTENSIVE INVESTIGATION INTO THE MAJ. JILL METZGER COVER-UP.  WE ARE PLANNNING NEW STORIES ON THIS CASE IN THE  VERY NEAR FUTURE.  DON'T MISS OUR "BREAKING NEWS."  CLICK ON THIS SITE SEVERAL TIMES A DAY SO YOU WILL SEE THE BULLETINS  WHEN THEY OCCUR.

June 14 GLOBALISTA WHITE HOUSE

 

[ As George Bush and the Beltway Boys try yet again to revive their Globalista Amnesty that was "defeated" last week after a virtual national "uprising"....here is a gringomanic response  to a Monica Crowley ABC Radio segment.]

 

Good interview with the sterling Peter King (R-NY), solid ex-Marine that he is.

 

You asked---and a very good question it was--- why George Bush is doing this, i.e. trying to steam-roller through Congress this  Bush/Kennedy/McCain Amnesty he won't call Amnesty. (My paraphrasing, of course) Or  in gringoSpeak: Why is an American President "protecting" our border like a Mexican bandit? Why won't he or the Donks or the  Pubs enforce existing legislation? Why do they let  laws already on the books rot like mackerel in NY Times fish wrap? Why does a Republican President stoop, like La Raza  or a Reverend Tawana Sharpton, to Liberal Racism,  to playing the Left's  race card, and against his own base? 

 

Not burdened with  Congressional responsibility or party constraints,  some can tell it like  they really think it really is, and not to  worry about advertisers, corporate suits, contracts, flak from the vile and the vicious, or  threats to invoke the Fairness Doctrine. (Obscurity has its rewards.) 

 

So why exactly is this President doing what he's doing?

 

 

1. The short-short answer: George, an elitenik  Bush family transplant from the Eastern seaboard, under cover of a Texas accent, is fundamentally a Harvard MBA in cowboy drag. It's all about 'bidness'

2. The short answer. Tactical. George Bush the North American Free Trade Zone globalista is not running again, and his eight years in office are running out. Unlike the incoming 2008 White House globalista, he's got nothing to lose. Now is the  moment, the time  to strike and strike hard for the invisible "base," the  Bidness Globalistas. Oligarchs  expect Republicans to  hem and haw as  Georgie connives with the liberals to  nullify U.S. borders and U.S. law.  But they know that  Republicans are civil. They  won't  call Georgie  a lame schmuck.

 

3. The sort of short answer. George Bush, like Poppy and like NAFTA's god-parents, the Clintons, is also a Yalie globalista. Why did  elitist Poppy Bush, an old New England Yankee,  stun the naive electorate and "adopt" the father-conflicted Slick Willie he once called a 'bozo'?  (Hint: It was about more than learning  how to have fun and get away with it.) The Bidness Bushies and Clinton Globalistas are  brothers under the Ivy League skin. In fact the "progressive" Clintons are now raking in far more Dubai and Saudi gold dinars than George Bush could ever hope to, at least while in office. [As pointed out in THE BC ERA (Bush-Clinton) at gringoman.com, Americans  are now living in the Year 19 BC.]

 

4. The non-sound bite answer. Detailed in   COMPASSIONISM, USA. The de facto ruling ideology today is Compassionism, a powerful fusion of Left agenda, the border-less Bidness agenda, MSM enabling and even many Christian pieties. The Bushies are perfect embodiments of today's ruling Compassionism. Georgie in Texas sees himself as a hacendado, taking care of the peons under him, learning the art of the Latin American ruling classes, even as brother Jeb in Florida does, with his ruling class Mexican wife. That said, Ivy League  MBA George  Bush is but a cog, or  spoke du jour in the oligarchs' great wheel of Compassionism, as are his more shifty and articulate  fellow travelers, the Clintonista Globalistas. In the long run, coming and going, they are all inter-changeable globalista parts. In the daily media blitz they will  differ at times, or seem to.  For example, their political jockeying on Iraq and Islamic bestiary  is par for their  racetrack.  Some global apparatchiks  talk offense, some talk defense, others just nonsense, while the medicated extremes screech from the margins of Left or Right.

 

Over and above the slings and arrows of outrageous partisanship, hover the two real questions---real  for them, that is : (1) how best to finesse and globalize away the USA without appearing to, and (2) which jockeys win their way to politician's Valhalla, i.e. the laurels of tax-funded office and all its tax-funded "glory" in the coming Free Trade Utopia where the U.S. is owned by The Other and the new masses are demanding their entitlements.

 

(Courtesy of gringoman.com---latest ranking in Bob's Blogodex, #37, 428, 213, after recent surge in traffic from 'Unknown.')

 

 

June 08. BYE, JOHNNY (MCCAIN):  On the latest  setback (fatal?) for the Bush-Kennedy-McCain 'Amnesty-We-Won't-Call-Amnesty' Illegal Immigration Bill  in the Senate: Americans, in rare fury and angst, clearly burned up  phone and fax lines to Congress, and swarmed the ear drums of any who dared visit the home front.   As for Globalista Georgie the Yalie,  "this fine President" of the national crisis in illegal aliens,  two previous posts at gringoman.com (with vivid art work), are still  fresh and  relevant as ever,  and  add to the 'Conversation': OUR FIRST MEXICAN PRESIDENT and IS GEORGE BUSH OVER?

As for the increasingly embarrassing  Senator John McCain, who  I used to like and admire, we are witnessing the political implosion of America's most celebrated POW. What was clear weeks ago is now flash-point obvious.  He used to be an American, then became something a little different, i.e. a Washingtonian and a  border sell-out. It can happen, even to a famous war hero. The great Beltway Demon can embrace your ambition, drink to your ego, gild your dreams, salivate your vanity, then chew it all up and spit you out like Chinese antifreeze toothpaste. Johnny boy, no White House for you, now or ever, with or without the bleeping temper. Hello Giuliani, or Romney  or that 'looming shadow" Fred Thompson.  Bye, Johnny.

Gratifying, yet sad. Or is it sad, yet gratifying? 

Technorati Tags: Politically Correct, ACLU,Hip Hop, Same-Sex Marriage

Immigration, Amnesty

.Debbie Schlussel, Circumcision,Fairness Doctrine,Talk Radio

Comments

[Phillip Wedeen]

The story Gringoman tells is apocraphyl.
The ACLU does not canvas with clipboards on various issues.Its activities are fund raising and lawsuits. Gringoman must be conflating the ACLU with some other group hustling for signatures to get some measure on a state ballot or a petition to some legislature. Urbanites understand that petition drives may come from the right or the left.

Gringomans feeling of being "mentally indicted as a homophobe" is interesting; especially as Gringoman's former blog GRINGOMAN.US carried the tag line "Gay Conservative", a phenom also exhibeted by gay Republicans in congress who vote down gay issues.

Then Gringoman evesdrops on passerby singing rap and then he clinches their context (and backrounds). Get this: "they were on their way from school back to the projects"... Just how does Gringoman know this?
Hey Archie, those (sic)ACLU kids with the clipboards were asking you to sign a "petition on gay rights"?
Right.
Like I said. You keep dreaming.
Saul Bellow had a model for his novel, MR SAMMLER'S PLANET. Gringoman, like Sammler, had trouble navigating NYC, in the world that passed him by...
But I'll bet Gringoman when "...(doing) business at the financial firm", you were treated with all of the niceties due to a man of distinction:
"Thank you, Mr Gringoman."
"Will there be anything else Mr Gringoman"
"Have a nice day, Mr Gringoman."
Next time, gringoman, travel by hansom.
Transport yourself back to the victorian age, but do mind the chamberpot being dumped from the upstairs window, and do see that the help gets back to the Projects.

[gringoman]

Wedeen, you seem to like words beginning with 'a,' like 'apocryphal'. How about 'ass'?
Or 'assinine'? If you have any memory left from whatever the comrades are smoking these days, you might recall 'acadummy.' I granted you that much after your claim of having a job at, not just a small campus soviet, but UCLA. Now I'm wondering if that term over-rates you. Why? Well, it at least implies some basic reasoning power, along with elementary English comprehension. I tried to help. I realize you have a self-image problem, namely being an idiot with a law degree (i.e. possibly a law degree, but undeniably an idiot.)

The vivid scenes in POLITICALLY INCORRECT apparently did nothing for you except to goad you to reveal your inner dumb cluck, yet again. I don't think you told a stupid lie this time (except with the comment about 'Gay Republican'---an issue I hesitate to analyze further in your case.] Instead you jabber about the clipboard boys not being ACLU members or workers. So what? The gringonarrative never said they were members of anything. All it said is what they did. Like a typical intellectual wannabe,or post-grad shyster, you have no point, so you try to concoct one for a pre-selected jury of half-wits, or a demented judge (obviously your kind)How sad. How can "reasonable doubt" be a concept for a fool without reason?

Then you propose to give the narrative no benefit of a doubt when it indicates that the black boys are rapping their way from school back to the projects. Like a cloistered cockamamy, you pretend to know what you do not know---real life on real streets lived by real people.

Is 'acadummy' inaccurate in your case? UCLA? You were eligible for Affirmative Action? Or maybe you mean the UCLA janitorial service? (Don't take this as an insult. There are some wonderful janitor autodidacts,but most would know about the streets, which you obviously do not.)

[Phillip Wedeen]

Gringoman:

Have you ever been envious of a certain anchorman blogger?

Nudge, nudge, wink, wink, know what I mean, know what I mean?

Let's face it, the diminutave pudendii on the greek statuaires (where all the street savvy travel) help explain why the big stick.
Nudge, nudge, wink, wink, know what i mean, know what I mean?

Back to your reply to me above... here is what you wrote twice regarding the street smart canvassing kids avec clipboards:

"Wanna help the ACLU" & "It's for the ACLU"

Nudge, nudge, wink, wink,... Ever read "Mr Sammler's Planet"? It is set in your country, right in your city... and on page 67 it says, 'gringoman'.

[Trevor]

Is Phillip Wedeen a real person or a software program?

[gringoman]

Is Phillip Wedeen a real person or a software program?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Interesting scientific query. The Baronness Alexandra thinks PW is just an anti-American weasel. I'll bet MIT could settle it.

[gringoman]

Wedeen,

For the moment at least, despite Trevor's spot-on question, I'll give you the benefit of a doubt. Let's assume you're not a progressive cyborg from Hell, created by Comrade Eduardos who then left you to your own unfortunate devices, like post-Stalin law school loony. In that case, if you're really not just wires and electrodes, maybe you can feel embarrassment at making a boob of your Canadian self in front of another Canadian (now naturalized American) who's lived what you can only fantasize about.

[Phillip Wedeen]

Wasn't Major Metzger abducted by wiccans like that other "hardhitting" MCC piece about Col Shue?

In fact Col Shue's widow (also a retired officer)was so enamoured with the MCC reportage that she wrote the following piece commending, er, condemning the (sic) MCC journalism:

(Scroll down to Shue letter)
http://namguardianangel.blogspot.com/2006/12/personal-statement-of-veteran.html

[Phillip Wedeen]

Ruthless?

Ruthless?!

RUTHLESS?!!!

I wonder where Ruth is?

One thing is certain; Gringoman is definitly NOT ruthless. A full eleven paragraphs of namby pamby, maybe this, maybe not, mamma Sheehan, globalista, yada, yada yada yada!
A hundread ways to beat around the bushes instead of saying that he orgasams over the thought of nuking muslims. Ruthless wimp.

[Phillip Wedeen]

Here is some fodder for MILITARYCORRUPTION.COM that you'all ain't a readin' in the MSM, Gringoman!

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2007/270707tillmanexecuted.htm

Somehow unless Tilman was friggin' in the riggin' there is no use for a real corruption story in MCC!

[Stu]

Taras know, i will fuck my father, thank you.
I am from Afghanistan and now teach English, tell me right I wrote the following sentence: "You can save up to on airline ticket worldwide, travel deals promotions."

With love 8), Stu.

[Donat]

Hi. We succeed only as we identify in life, or in war, or in anything else, a single overriding objective, and make all other considerations bend to that one objective.
I am from Uganda and know bad English, tell me right I wrote the following sentence: "Ford is a registered trademark of ford motor company."

8) Thanks in advance. Donat.

[Tymon]

Good evening. Greatness is more than potential. It is the execution of that potential. Beyond the raw talent. You need the appropriate training. You need the discipline. You need the inspiration. You need the drive.
I am from Albania and learning to speak English, please tell me right I wrote the following sentence: "The surface likely uses ultimately miscellaneousdermatological peanut antifungals or male-pattern months to help the eyelashes for winding the participants, scratching them in a evolved cereal and day, and relieving the drugs in a long repentance to cause a free factor hairline."

Thank you so much for your future answers :-). Tymon.