Replies

The headline of this article seems to say it's about the anti-Kerry feelings at a VFW hall. Yet the article gives only one example. The rest is just atmospherics, or a few lame attempts to spin an anti-war message from the VFW.

Oh well -- it's the NY Times. For them, this counts as an aggressive, hard-hitting attack on Kerry. Remember -- they aren't "liberal," they're "urban."

It's like "Cheers," as rewritten by Fox News

Huh? Fox News rewrites entertainment shows now? Talk about bias!

By that token, I guess most West Village "neighborhood" bars are like "Cheers", as rewritten by the New York Times -- full of people pushing the gay activist agenda.

Sheesh!

"I don't want to see [my children] in harm's way," he said. "Of course, it's selfish, but it's very natural. I'd rather see the kid across the street go than my kids. If anyone tells you different, I think they'd be lying."

Since the NY Times makes this anti-war point, I'd like to supply the other side of the argument:

"[A] generous parent should [say], 'If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace;' and this single reflection, well applied, is sufficient to awaken every man to duty." Thomas Paine, The Crisis, December 23, 1776.

That's what America is all about -- it's about not shirking trouble, so we make sure that trouble doesn't have a chance to grow and get worse for future generations. Anyone who says otherwise is mistaken.

Notice these two sentences that turn this otherwise legitimate article into the usual journalistic bullsh*t of the New York Times. Applebome writes, "But it's far less common for the children and grandchildren of the members here to serve than it was for them. Like the delegates at both conventions, it's common for people to honor the military, with the assumption that someone else or someone else's children will be out fighting."

Helloooo, you bigoted moron. Less people are serving because we are not now, and have not for two generations, fought a war in which 4 million Americans are in arms on uniform. THAT -- history, you shm*ck -- is why it is less common for the children and grandchildren to be serving.

So it doesn't have a rat's *ss to do with anyone's "assumption that someone else" will be fighting. And as for the fairness of who is serving and who is not, we now have a volunteer army -- so no one is there who does not choose to be. I spit on the New York Times.

Congressman Billybob

Latest column, "Down the Memory Hole: Joseph Wilson Disappears"

If you haven't already joined the anti-CFR effort, please click here.

"It's a kind of war we've never experienced before," Mr. Guiry said.

With all due respect to Mr. Guiry, I think that quite a few of our conflicts with Indians had quite a bit in common with the threat of domestic terrorism.

Likewise, from the very start of our country we've had Islamic crazies preying on our international shipping -- not too different in some ways from the present threat to our air transport system.

The point is, as a great man once said, we're Americans and we've been through the fire before. We're not scared of the so-called "terrorists" -- we've faced down much worse threats in the past.