This ain't Hell, but you can see it from here

Author: Jonn Lilyea

  • Marine anti-war veteran may lose “honorable” status (Updated)

    Marine anti-war veteran may lose “honorable” status (Updated)

    I’ve never heard of this guy Adam Kokesh, but apparently he’s some big deal in the anti-war movement. But here’s what I got from the Washington Post;

    Adam Kokesh, 25, a graduate student at George Washington University, faces a hearing Monday in Kansas City, where the Marines will recommend an “other than honorable” discharge from the Individual Ready Reserve. He was previously honorably discharged from active duty after fighting in Fallujah and receiving the Combat Action Ribbon and the Navy Commendation Medal.

    Upon learning he was being investigated for wearing his uniform during the mock patrol, Kokesh wrote an e-mail to the investigating officer, Maj. John Whyte. The combat veteran discussed his service and his critique of the war, and asked this officer assigned to look into his “possible violation” of wearing his uniform: “We’re at war. Are you doing all you can?” He concluded with an obscene recommendation about what Whyte should go do.

    OK, so far there’s a couple of things wrong with this whole story. First of all, everyone, including Kokesh at his self-serving blog claims he’s already been discharged, but that he’s in the Individual Ready Reserve. That’s impossible, junior. You might have a piece of paper that says you were discharged, but you ain’t discharged until you’ve served your time.

    According to the Washington Examiner, Kokesh was busted back after his first tour of Iraq;

    He was supposed to go to Iraq a second time, but was demoted from sergeant to corporal and not allowed to return after it was learned that he brought a pistol back after his first tour in 2004.

    “Not allowed to return” – that means he wanted to return, but the Marines wouldn’t send him back. I think his disillusionment isn’t with the war. He’s lucky he didn’t go to Leavenworth then. The Marines cut him a break.

    And that part of the story in Washington Post story about;

    He concluded with an obscene recommendation about what Whyte should go do.

    I’m guessing that refers to the same phrase that Vice President Cheney used when he told Senator Pat Leahy what Leahy should “go do”.

    The Uniform Code of Military Justice addresses that quite succinctly;

    889. ART. 89 DISRESPECT TOWARD SUPERIOR COMMISSIONED OFFICER
    Any person subject to this chapter who behaves with disrespect toward his superior commissioned officer shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

    Not much wiggle room there, junior. And who are persons subject to this chapter?

    802 Art. 2

    (d)(1) A member of a reserve component who is not on active duty and who is made the subject of proceedings under section 815 (article 15) or section 830 (article 30) with respect to an offense against this chapter may be ordered to active duty involuntary for the purpose of-
    (A) investigation under section 832 of this title (article 32);
    (B) trial by court-martial; or
    (C) non judicial punishment under section 815 of this title (article 15).

    Yikes! That’s you, Kokesh, buddy.

    As far as the uniform regulation, it’s covered by DoD Directive 1334.1Â (.pdf) which says;

    3. POLICY

    It is DoD policy that:

     3.1. The wearing of the uniform by members of the Armed Forces (including retired members and members of Reserve components) is prohibited under any of the following circumstances:

      3.1.1. At any meeting or demonstration that is a function of, or sponsored by an organization, association, movement, group, or combination of persons that the Attorney General of the United States has designated, under Executive Order 10450 as amended (reference (c)), as totalitarian, fascist, communist, or subversive, or as having adopted a policy of advocating or approving the commission of acts of force or violence to deny others their rights under the Constitution of the United States, or as seeking to alter the form of Government of the United States by unconstitutional means.

      3.1.2. During or in connection with furthering political activities, private employment or commercial interests, when an inference of official sponsorship for the activity or interest may be drawn.

      3.1.3. Except when authorized by the approval authorities in subparagraph 4.1.1., when participating in activities such as unofficial public speeches, interviews, picket lines, marches, rallies or any public demonstration, which may imply Service sanction of the cause for which the demonstration or activity is conducted.

      3.1.4. When wearing of the uniform may tend to bring discredit upon the Armed Forces.

    Since Kokesh was pretending to torture prisoners and making a general nuisance of himself, I’d guess he’d fit under that last one, at the least.

    In fact, this from the IVAW website that Kokesh himself wrote just a few weeks ago (dated May 17th) when he infiltrated a military base in Germany to spread his bile;

    When we got to the gate, the guard said that I couldn’t bring Jeff on with me because I was not registered in their system, even though I had a valid military ID. Jeff busted out the perfect story, “We’re backpacking around Europe, and we just wanted to come on base to use the PX. I just need to get some toiletries. See, I used to be in the Army too, but my ID is expired.” The guard suggested Jeff give me a list and wait for me. So I carried on alone.

    Emphasis mine. He had a valid military ID card – he hadn’t been discharged, he’s subject to the UCMJ. Case closed.

    UPDATE: In fact, here’s another charge to tack on, Maj. Whyte;

    As I got to the security guard standing in the pedestrian passageway, the soldiers behind me started yelling. “Hey, stop that guy!” “Hey, you need to detain him!” “Stop him!” The security guard told me to stop and I just kept walking. He grabbed my sleeve, but didn’t even hold on. I turned the corner and just kept walking. I looked back and the First Sergeant was there watching me, but by then I was home free.

    If this story is true (and the authorities could probably check with the leadership at that Ansbach, Germany Army base), Kokesh is guilty of failure to obey a lawful order and resisting apprehension on a Federal facility – they have a big white sign at the entrance of all US military bases that says, in effet, that you give up up all of your 4th Amendment rights voluntarily by passing through those gates.

    According the Examiner Koresh made this statement to the press;

    “This is clearly a case of selective prosecution and intimidation of veterans who speak out against the war,” Kokesh said. “To suggest that while as a veteran you don’t have freedom of speech is absurd.”

    Sorry, buddy. You don’t have freedom of speech when you’re in the military – I didn’t have freedom of speech. There’s nothing selective about it. A field grade officer was investigating your illegal behavior and you were disrespectful – while you had, by your own admission, a valid ID card – that means you’re subject to the UCMJ. Welcome to the real world, goober.

    Looks like his lawyer is trying to frame this as a poor little Marine being railroaded by the Pentagon for his anti-war views. All it is an immature little turd who can’t follow the rules – at least as far back as 2004.

    From the Post story;

    The case also raises a fundamental question of interest to the roughly 158,000 men and women in the Marines’ and Army’s Individual Ready Reserve: Are they civilians — free to speak their minds — or not?

    “This case is about the Marine Corps seeking to stifle critics of the Iraq policy by officially labeling civilian acts of peaceful protest and political speech as misconduct and serious offenses,” says Michael Lebowitz, Kokesh’s attorney, who fought in Iraq as an Army paratrooper .

    […]

    But, counters Lebowitz, unlike other types of reservists who have specific paid duties, Individual Ready Reservists are not paid, have no weekend drill requirements and no chain of command. Therefore, he argues, they are civilians, unless summoned back to duty. And if they are civilians, they can say pretty much what they want.

    “For the military to try to punish civilians for speaking out against the war is completely outrageous, says Arthur Spitzer, legal director of American Civil Liberties Union for the National Capital Area….

    If he has in his possession a valid military ID card, and he hasn’t finished his military committment, he’s not a civilian. He’s forbidden from wearing his uniforms in public at political rallies. How hard is that to understand? He’s also forbidden to be disrespectful to superior officers. Again – real simple.

    Kokesh used his military ID to access a military installation and spread anti-war propaganda - Kokesh figured he was in the military when he flashed the card to get on base. Are we just supposed to ask him how and when he wants the rules applied to his behavior?

    “I will not be intimidated,” Kokesh says.

    That’s good, you’re going to need to remember that when you’re cell mates with Bubba.

    The Post also quoted Kokesh and his buddy who had this question;

    Kokesh and Madden say they have a question about all this: Don’t the Marines have anything better to do these days?

    No they don’t, actually. This isn’t the DC Metro police who only investigate crimes that occur in Popeye’s chicken joints or in the frontseat of their patrol cars. This is the United States Marine Corps which relies on good order and discipline in order to defend this country from our enemies. The rules are enforced uniformly and with good reason. If you don’t like being prosecuted, don’t be such a retard.

    Robin at Chickenhawk Express reports that he was engaged in the same behavior this past weekend, too – still wearing his uniform even though he knows that the military disapproves of it. Obviously flaunting his misbehavior hoping someone throws his monkey-ass in jail.

    Leftist blogs are busy spread inaccurate propaganda about poor little Adam. From “Courage to Resist“, an obvious talking points memo;

    Due to their outspoken opposition to the war, the Marine Corps is now formally threatening to revoke their discharges and retroactively change them to “other than honorable.” This is a new, unprecedented step the military feels is necessary in order to suppress a growing anti-war voice from within the military itself.

    No discharge is being changed – he hasn’t been discharged yet. I know the Left depends on misinformation to keep the brainless minions on the plantation, but this is really beyond all reason.

    From An Even Keel;

    On June 4, the Marine Corps will hold a hearing in Kansas City, MO. Adam is being re-activated just for the hearing so that they can discharge him again with an Other Than Honorable discharge. This for a man who has served two tours in Iraq during his six years of service. He has been on inactive reserve and was due for complete separation on June 18, just fourteen days after this hearing.

    He only served one tour in Iraq – his second tour was cancelled because of his misbehavior – an offense that should make the anti-gun Left freak out, by the way. The Post story said he’s been in nearly eight years (I tend to believe that since a tour in the military is eight years). And as I pointed out above, he committed an offense worthy of a court martial and reactivating him to face charges is perfectly legal and common.Â

    Lefty blogger Wonkette reported that Kokesh was just arrested by the Capitol Police last month for being a spaz. Don’t bother reading the comments – what a bunch of foul-mouthed creeps. (Editor’s Note; Ha! She deleted the comments after I linked to them.)

    UPDATE: Curt at Flopping Aces has even more at “The Dishonest AP At It Again” and Robin from ChickenHawk Express and Newsbusters emailed me this article entitled “Marine Admitted to Uniform Violations While Parodying Military Operations“. Robin also wrote on Chickenhawk Express that Kokesh requested that a Brigadier general perform the same impossible sex act as the field grade officer. So I guess that’s twice he made two mistakes.

    I’m sure the Leftists think he’s a fricken rocket scientist, but the other 70% of the country are pretty certain he’s a spoilt child.

  • Not much news out of Venezuela, huh?

    Funny how there was a flurry of news reports the other day from Venezuela after Hugo Chavez ordered opposition TV station RCTV closed and Venezuelans took to the streets, but now there’s barely a peep.

    Chavez decision apparently is effecting the financial markets there, according to Bloomberg;

    Venezuela’s bonds fell to an 11-month low after the government’s shutdown of Radio Caracas Television sparked clashes between police and protesters.

    * * * * *

    “Venezuela is underperforming, reflecting the latest move against the television station,” said Alberto Ramos, a senior Latin America economist with Goldman Sachs Group Inc. in New York. “Every single iteration reminds us of the moves against institutions that erode checks and balances in Venezuela.”

    That prompted Venezuela’s announcement that they’ll be selling joint bonds with Bolivia this year, as reported by Dow Jones;  

    Venezuela’s government plans to sell $500 million in bonds through a joint issue with the Bolivian government, as the country extends its debt issuance program, Finance Minister Rodrigo Cabezas said Wednesday.

    The bond with Bolivia could be sold in the first half of this year, Cabezas told reporters after a finance commission meeting.

    President Hugo Chavez’s administration is also looking to sell another joint bond with Argentina, dubbed the Bond of the South III, for between $500 million and $1 billion, Cabezas said.

    What bubblehead would risk their capital in South American debt given the current climate?  Evo Morales, President of Bolivia and Chavez’ poodle, throwing his country’s treasury in with Chavez’ is guaranteeing a massive meltdown when those interest payments come due.

    Bonds are only as good as the debtor’s ability to pay, and the investors’ willingness to buy debt – and things ain’t looking so good down there. Seizing oil fields and gas fields isn’t going to make foreigners want to buy – especially buy debt. Of course, it’ll somehow be the US’ fault.

    And Chavez isn’t done destroying the infrastructure in Venezuela yet, either, according to Reuters today;

    As tens of thousands of people marched here Tuesday in protest of President Hugo Chavez’s closure of opposition television station RCTV, the leftist leader called the news channel Globovision an enemy of the state.

    The protests were in their fourth consecutive day, but state television showed hundreds of government supporters marching in downtown Caracas to celebrate Chavez’s move.

    “Enemies of the homeland, particularly those behind the scenes, I will give you a name: Globovision. Greetings gentlemen of Globovision, you should watch where you are going,” Chavez said in a broadcast that all channels were required to show.

    “I recommend you take a tranquilizer and get into gear, because if not, I am going to do what is necessary,” he added.

    Chavez accused Globovision of trying to incite his assassination and of misreporting protests over the closure of Radio Caracas Television in a manner that could whip up a situation similar to a coup attempt against him in 2002.

    But that hasn’t stopped Globovision from reporting favorably on the anti-Chavez protests today;

    A las 11:00 de la mañana se concentraron en la Plaza Brión de Chacaito jóvenes estudiantes de las universidades Católica, Central, Santa María, José María Vargas, UNEFA, Metropolitana, con la intención de marchar a la Defensoría del Pueblo, donde exigirían al organismo defender sus derechos fundamentales.

    (A rough translation: At 11 am this morning a concentration in [some town square] young students of [some universities] assembled with the intention to march on People’s Defense Office organized to defend the  fundamental rights of citizens.)

    From Venezuela’s English-language newspaper, The Daily Journal;

    Information Minister Willian Lara on Monday accused Globovisión of encouraging an attempt on Chávez’ life by broadcasting the chorus of a salsa tune – “Have faith, this doesn’t end here” – along with footage of the 1981 assassination attempt against Pope John Paul II in St. Peter’s Square.
    “They incite the assassination of Venezuela’s president,” he said.
    Globovisión director Alberto Federico Ravell denied any wrongdoing, calling the allegations “ridiculous.”

    Today’s La Voz (The Voice) headline reads; “Estudiantes no abandonan las calles” (The students won’t give up the streets) 

    Chavez needs enemies, either real ones or pretend ones to circumvent the laws – that’s why he needed Bush as his chief boogieman and he fired up the crowds with Bush’s evil intentions to assasinate him. Of course, his strut around the UN last year was just playing to the cameras for folks back home – just like Chavez’ pledge of support for Iran was playing to the US cameras for the anti-Bush Left.

    All ya’all Venezuelans better not be around when Chavez runs out of enemies.

    According to AP;

    The State Department on Tuesday called on the Chavez government “to reverse policies that limit freedom of expression.”

    However, I haven’t heard any of the so-called “liberals” condemning the loss of freedom for Venezuelans to hear an opinion that might be opposed to the government’s. Where are they? In fact, the usual suspects are strangely quiet given the extent of the news coverage last weekend and the holiday.

    Great background on RCTV’s closure by Fausta Wertz at Pajamas Media.

    Fox News’ Adam Housley still has a live blog from the protests up over there. Strangely, he hasn’t been blogging today although the Venezuelan press reports that protests are in their fourth day.

  • They never learn

    The Democrats are heading towards their socialist roots again. At least during the 2004 campaign, John Kerry gave the impression that he was concerned about our national security. But since Kerry’s defeat, the Democrats have decided that the American people will never elect their candidates to national office as long as there’s a war going on – so they act as if there is no war.

    Jackie Calmes in the Wall Street Journal writes that the Democrats no longer fear mentioning their plans to inflict a national health care system on us;

     Now, the growing list of Democratic presidential candidates calling for universal, cheaper coverage — Illinois Sen. Barack Obama yesterday became the latest — suggests the days of health-care incrementalism are over. Nor are these Democrats alone in embracing the once-toxic political cause of universal care: The best-known state models have been championed by Republican governors, including Mitt Romney of Massachusetts, who is now running for president.

    This shift reflects rising and inflation-topping out-of-pocket costs for health care and insurance premiums, co-payments and deductibles. Also, the number of uninsured has spiked to about 45 million, from 37 million when Mr. Clinton was president. Business leaders increasingly are seeking a government-imposed solution, saying employee health costs put them at a disadvantage with foreign competitors.

    Those forces, in turn, have combined to embolden politicians in both parties to once again propose universal health care that inevitably would mean a big role for government — and possibly upend the powerful insurance, medical and pharmaceutical industries.

    Never mind that national healthcare systems are undoing the economies of Old Europe, nevermind that Canadians are flocking across our borders for neccessary health treatments that their government can’t provide in a timely manner. Nevermind that States are more easily able to tailor a healthcare system for their own people’s needs better than a huge, uncaring bureaocracy in Washington could ever provide.

    And how does Obama plan on funding this healthcare plan of his? Why, it’s easy – just roll back the Bush tax cuts on the rich. I wonder how many of us who consider ourselves middleclass will suddenly find ourselves among the rich when his plan is launched.

    Think Hillary learned a lesson about proposing her national healthcare system back in 1993? She thinks so;

    Now, as Mrs. Clinton campaigns for president, a staple of her speeches is a self-deprecating nod to the scars she bears from that fight — and assurance that, as she puts it, “I know what not to do.”

    But healthcare isn’t the only bugaboo looming on the Democrat’s horizon. Hillary is coming for our wallets, too, according to an AP story;

    The Democratic senator said what the Bush administration touts as an ownership society really is an “on your own” society that has widened the gap between rich and poor.

    “I prefer a ‘we’re all in it together’ society,” she said. “I believe our government can once again work for all Americans. It can promote the great American tradition of opportunity for all and special privileges for none.”

    That means pairing growth with fairness, she said, to ensure that the middle-class succeeds in the global economy, not just corporate CEOs.

    “Fairness” is a Democrat code word for increased taxes on the middle class. Taxes and growth are not words usually paired, so she replaced the word “taxes” with the word “fairness”.

    Ownership – that’s one of the reasons we warred against the King of England in the 18th Century. Now, we’re supposed to trade our personal property for the good of all. I’m sure this resonates well with the lazy people in the country – the people who squandered their equal opportunities to be productive.

    But here’s Clinton’s punchline;

    Clinton also said she would help people save more money by expanding and simplifying the earned income tax credit….

    See? Clinton is insinuating that all money belongs to the government, so Clinton is going to help you save money by giving you back more of the money that the government took from you. I’m sure she got a big round of applause for that one. Especially up there in State-tax-free New Hampshire.

    Remember when her husband promised us a middleclass tax cut in the 1992 election campaign? I’m still waiting for it. All of his targeted tax cuts weren’t targeted at a family of five with two parents working, apparently. It took me ten years to completely recover from Clinton’s tax policies.

  • Unequal protection

    Reading the Washington post this morning, I stumbled over an article by Roberts Barnes who fawns over Ruth Bader Ginsberg’s flaunting the conventions of the Supreme Court by reading her decision aloud in a case in Alabama;

    The court ruled 5 to 4 that Lilly Ledbetter, the lone female supervisor at a tire plant in Gadsden, Ala., did not file her lawsuit against Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co. in the timely manner specified by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

    * * * * *

    Speaking for the three other dissenting justices, Ginsburg’s voice was as precise and emotionless as if she were reading a banking decision, but the words were stinging.

    “In our view, the court does not comprehend, or is indifferent to, the insidious way in which women can be victims of pay discrimination,” she said.

    Last month, Ginsburg rebuked the same five-justice majority for upholding the federal Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act and for language in the opinion that she said reflected “ancient notions about women’s place in the family and under the Constitution — ideas that have long since been discredited.”

    Now, I’m no lawyer, although I work in the law field, sort of, but this sounds like Justice Ginsberg is making her decisions based on Constitutionally-prohibited grounds. According to the Fourteenth Amendment;

    Section. 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

    Now the 14th Amendment prohibits giving a longer lawsuit filing period for women than for men, yet based on her experience as a woman, she seems to think that she’s an expert on these things called “women’s rights” – what that means, I have no idea. I’ve done a search of the Constitution and no where can I find the word woman, or a variation thereof. The closest thing is the 19th Amendment;

    The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.

    It made us all equal in the voting booth, it didn’t take away any men’s rights and it gave equal rights to women. 

    So can someone tell me what, exactly, the Constitution guarantees women that it doesn’t guarentee men, or what it guarantees gays and not straights. Where are these “[fill in the name of your particular group of malcontents here] rights”?

    And someone tell me how a justice on the United States Supreme Court, the court which, since Marbury v. Madison in 1803, has had the responsibility to interpret the CONSTITUTION as it applies to protections of citizens from the government, can make decisions based on extra-constitutional information.

  • That’s what we get

    On this morning’s front page of the Washington Post, reporter Jon Ward Anderson announces that “US, Iran Open Dialogue“;

    The United States and Iran held their first official high-level, face-to-face talks in almost 30 years Monday to discuss the deteriorating security situation in Iraq, and officials emerged generally upbeat about the renewed dialogue, suggesting additional meetings were likely.

    Yay! We did what the Iraq Study Group said was crucial for ending the war in Iraq.

    This morning, Charles Johnson at Little Green Footballs calls it the “Worst Idea of the Year” and the Iranians waste no time proving Johnson right. According to AP, by way of Fox News Channel;

    U.S. academic Haleh Esfandiari and two other Iranian-Americans have been “formally charged” with endangering national security and espionage, Iran’s judiciary spokesman said Tuesday.

    “Esfandiari has been formally charged with endangering national security through propaganda against the system and espionage for foreigners,” Judiciary spokesman Ali Reza Jamshidi told reporters. “She has been informed of the charges against her. The complainant is the Intelligence Ministry.”

    So that’s what we get. To us Westerners, negotiating is just the civilized thing to do – discussing our differences is reasonable. But to 7th century throwbacks like the Iranians, it’s a sign of weakness. This just an attempt to see if they can push us even further than they’ve already pushed us.

    In fact, on the main issue, that of Iranians supplying anti-government forces in Iraq, the Iranians were evasive and downright mocking in their tone;

    The American envoy called the meeting “businesslike” and said at “the level of policy and principle, the Iranian position as articulated by the Iranian ambassador was very close to our own.”

    However, he said: “What we would obviously like to see, and the Iraqis would clearly like to see, is an action by Iran on the ground to bring what it’s actually doing in line with its stated policy.”

    Speaking later at a news conference in the Iranian Embassy, Kazemi said: “We don’t take the American accusations seriously.”

    They don’t take our accusations seriously is probably the understatement of the year. Mainly because no one in the West has the cajones to stand up to the goat ropers of Iran because we’re hamstrung by the anti-Bush/anti-US Democrats and the “Peace at any cost” Euro-weenies. And the Iranians are fully aware of it – these talks are just attempts at running out the clock on their nuclear program. In addition, any fingers they can stick in our eye are just frosting on the cake. 

    More here from a relative expert.

  • Sheehan leaves politics (she says)

    In a piece entitled “Good Riddance Attention Whore” (at DailyKos), Cindy Sheehan claims to be leaving the political stage and retiring to her villa in the south of France (OK, I made that last part up, but…), in some ways I feel for her…no, really. I’m not just saying that. Here, let her tell you why I said that;

    The first conclusion is that I was the darling of the so-called left as long as I limited my protests to George Bush and the Republican Party. Of course, I was slandered and libeled by the right as a “tool” of the Democratic Party.  This label was to marginalize me and my message. How could a woman have an original thought, or be working outside of our “two-party” system?

    However, when I started to hold the Democratic Party to the same standards that I held the Republican Party, support for my cause started to erode and the “left” started labeling me with the same slurs that the right used. I guess no one paid attention to me when I said that the issue of peace and people dying for no reason is not a matter of “right or left”, but “right and wrong.”

    She found out that this nation’s Left can turn on it’s own people faster than a mongoose – something most of us have known all along. But, the Left, in the personage of Maureen Dowd, gave her “absolute moral authority”;

    But [President Bush’s] humanitarianism will remain inhumane as long as he fails to understand that the moral authority of parents who bury children killed in Iraq is absolute.

    But that absolute part was less absolute than Ms. Sheehan realized. She learned that the American Left, despite the fact that they claim otherwise, really don’t care about the troops or the troops’ parents – only to the extent that they can use it against Republicans and the current administration.

    Sheehan fell for it, and even in this piece, she chastizes the Republicans for calling her a “”tool” of the Democrats”. Probably the most painful thing for her, is realizing that Republicans were correct. Of course she’ll never admit that we were right, but I think she knows it.

    But some of us understand how she feels at this point, some of us who’ve been Democrats and dreamily drifted towards the Democrats’ siren song, were also awoken to the reality that the Democrats are all about politics and votes – nothing more. There’s nothing altruistic about being a Democrat – you can convince yourself that it’s compassionate, but only to the extent that it keeps Democrat politicians in their positions.

    Look at what they did to Joe Lieberman. Did you really expect them to be different to you, Cindy? In fact, Lieberman threw the pro-Life crowd under the bus so he could be the Democrats VP candidate, and they still dumped him for disagreeing with them ON ONE SINGLE ISSUE.

    But then she loses all of my sympathy in her last line;

    Good-bye America …you are not the country that I love and I finally realized no matter how much I sacrifice, I can’t make you be that country unless you want it.

    It’s up to you now.

    Um, Cindy, baby, we were around two-hundred or so years before you, I think we’ll make it through the rest without you. With or without your advice. And drop the anti-American crap, it doesn’t play well in Peoria.

    Maybe you should go to Venezuela and hang out with your buddy Chavez, I hear they’re having a big party in the street this week.

  • Welcome, GI Jane

    I want to welcome to the staff of writers (that’s a staff of two writers, now – me and one more) GI Jane whom I’ve known for three or four years. We’ve slammed back beers together a few times when she was stationed in DC (there’s a picture floating around the internet somewhere of us side-by-side, holding the bar up, beer mugs in hand) – but now the 28-year three-time combat veteran platoon sergeant has retired from the Army and moved to the frozen north country.

    She has her own blog at The Foxhole, and she’s graciously agreed to write with me when she has a chance.

    Her first contributions are on John Edwards and Jimmy Carter – two of my favorite subjects. I hope we see alot more from her – I’m sure you’ll enjoy her hard-assed NCO style as much as I enjoy it. 

  • Jimmy, Cindy, Joe and Hugo (Updated 5-29)

    Fox News is broadcasting that Adam Housely (who live blogged the protest), on the scene in Caracas, Venezuela is reporting that the crowds fairly peacefully protesting Chavez’ decision to shut down the popular, dissenting RCTV television station are being fired upon by federal troops with rubber bullets, tear gas and shot guns are being fired over their heads. The reporter also said that the crowd wasn’t budging – which means that if Chavez intends to squelch this dissent he will have to ratchet up his response.

    Chavez claims were that RCTV was engaged in “subversive” activities. How many times have we heard that phrase used in the last 50 years?

    Housley made the point that international media is the only way to get word out about Chavez now because he’s shut down the last dissenting media voice in Venezuela. Housley also displayed what appeared to an expended low-base 12-guage shotgun shell he claims he recovered from the ground after federal troops fired it in the air (the video of Housley appeared to be via cell phone).

    There’s nothing to link here yet, just some background in a generic AP story on Fox News;

    Inside the studios of RCTV — the sole opposition-aligned TV station with nationwide reach — disheartened actors and comedians wept and embraced in the final minutes on the air.

    They bowed their heads in prayer, and presenter Nelson Bustamante declared: “Long live Venezuela! We will return soon.”

    Chavez says he is democratizing the airwaves by turning the network’s signal over to public use.

    Germany, which holds the European Union presidency, expressed concern that Venezuela let RCTV’s license expire “without holding an open competition for the successor license.” It said the EU expects that Venezuela will uphold freedom of speech and “support pluralism.”

    I’m sure Chavez is quaking in his stumpy little boots having seen the Euro-weenies “expect” all kinds of civilized behavior in the last few years.

    My question is how do Jimmy Carter, Cindy Sheehan and Joe Kennedy feel about their pal, Hugo now? Will they rush out to condemn, not only the poor treatment of protesters, but the silencing of opposition – which is a basic human right according to our own traditions. 

    I’d guess not. The Left in the United States kept silent about Stalin, Mao Tse Tung, Ho Chi Minh, Pol Pot, Fidel Castro, even North Korea for several decades. I’m waiting for evidence that our own administration has done things worse than Chavez has done. I guess the authors of the Black Book of Communism will be able to write a Hugo Chavez chapter, now. And Joe, Jimmy and Cindy will go down in history as Chavez’ enablers.

    Because, why should the Left acknowledge that socialism is a morally bankrupt philosophy that runs counter to basic human rights?

    A-ha! found the story at that CNN place. Must be new network, I’ve never heard of CNN before.

    National Guard troops fired tear gas and rubber bullets Monday into a crowd of protesters angry over a decision by President Hugo Chavez that forced a critical television station off the air.

    University students blocked one lane of a major highway hours after Radio Caracas Television ceased broadcasting at midnight and was replaced with a new state-funded channel. Chavez had refused to renew RCTV’s broadcast license, accusing it of “subversive” activities and of backing a 2002 coup against him.

    Two students were injured by rubber bullets and a third was hit with a tear gas canister, said Ana Teresa Yepez, an administrator at Caracas’ Metropolitan University. She said about 20 protesters were treated for inhaling tear gas.

    The new public channel, TVES, launched its transmissions with artists singing pro-Chavez music, then carried an exercise program and a talk show, interspersed with government ads proclaiming, “Now Venezuela belongs to everyone.”

    Got news for ya, pal. Venezuela only belongs to Chavez. Criticize him and see for yourself.

    With her usual clarity, The Anchoress picks apart the media’s coverage of Chavez’ “liberation” of the Venezuelan people from the truth.

    Update: Apparently, Chavez is in the process of tossing out the international press, too, according to AP:

    Venezuela said Monday it was filing charges against US cable network CNN for linking President Hugo Chavez to Al-Qaeda, and against a Venezuelan TV network for encouraging Chavez’s assassination.

    I guess it was only a matter of time.

    Not surprisingly, we read at the Daily Kos, (via Little Green Footballs) that the American Left – who like to call themselves “liberals” and “progressives” and the true defenders of human and civil rights, the inheritors of the Jeffersonian legacy – support Chavez’ actions of the type Thomas Jefferson had the foresight to preempt in the very first amendment.

    I guess the Left forget that our Constitution’s Bill of Rights was written to protect the minority from the heavy-handed majority in just such circumstances. And that the Constitution protects all citizens from government. It’s not to protect government from criticism – and the Declaration of Independence was a universal declaration for the liberty of all people, not just those living in the English colonies, to exercise the rights and protections given us by our Creator.

    It’s not a multiple choice test which has fluctuating correct answers depending on the season or culture.