Lefty bloggers concerned about hypocrisy?

You may have missed the hubbub over the Jeff Gannon "scandal," but you haven't missed much. For some reason, Lefty bloggers are in a twit concerning a journalist working for an also-ran on-line news service ("Talon") who it turns out was using an alias ("so?") and is alleged to have been a homosexual prostitute (formerly or on the side). Now it's the last part that gets me: why does the Left care about this detail? Yes, I'm disgusted by the allegations, but I should be disgusted. How to explain the disdain? Where's the beef? Aside from the fact that Lefty bloggers seem eager to score a victory along the lines of Rathergate; the reality is that this is no scandal. It is not the White House's job to "out" homosexuals who happen to be journalists yet want to appear normal. ("Hypocrisy is the homage vice pays to virtue") That is the catch, some folks are less concerned about hypocrisy than they are about the possibility that someone would deign to pay homage to virtue.

Re. the On-line Tennessean story about Homosexual Marriage and Adoption

As I have noted recently, the on-line version of the Tenn. is a real hot spot in recent days as it has featured several articles on the current legislative "battles" over Homosexual Marriage and Homosexual Adoption. What caught my attention was that their page looked more like the "How you can help!" page on a pro-homosexualism site. Bonna De La Cruz posts the email addresses and phone numbers of the two legislators sponsoring the "controversial" bills and says something to the effect of "let your voice be heard!" Why not put the contact info for those who are in opposition to these fine, commonsense pieces of legislation? Well, because Ms. De La Cruz doesn't think Liberal legislators need to hear from voters.

Jerry and the pope are under the weather

Jerry's kidney stone is now history, and the Pope appears to be recovering well from his recent medical procedure. So, in the interest of "healing wounds" I want to take this opportunity to encourage you to remove any bumper stickers from the last election (not to mention the 2000 election) that may still be on your motor vehicle. This is just my opinion, mind you (I think Jerry is still sporting his sticker). My rationale is that while I agree a certain period of celebration (gloating?) is warranted after a hard fight battle, I really get tired of non-stop campaign mode (see this article from the Cleveland Plain Dealer about the "never-ending campaign"). It is inefficient (and Machiavellian) to constantly be angling for power and to care more about winning the next election than making any progress. So, I think by removing our campaign stickers we are focusing more on what unites us (we're all Americans) and less on what divided us (who we voted for in the last election).

The sad state of higher education

I clicked on a link today (which logically was advertising on the liberal Slate magazine) advertising an "essay" on racial profiling, and found duenow.com; a site that "doesn't condone plagiarism" but offers thousands of essays of varying lengths on almost any subject and allows you to pay an extra $9.95 to "hold" a paper for a 14 days (so, they say, that no other student in your class can purchase it). Sadly, too many college students don't do ANY thinking for themselves; which is why propaganda works so well on college campuses and why so much stupidity and intellectual sloth emanates from university campuses

More on abortion: finding "Common Ground"...

I must admit, I'm leary of talk of compromise when it comes to politics--especially on such issues as abortion (as opposed to, say, coming up with the best way to "raise revenue"). And the Boston Globe's editorial board demonstrates why such talk is usually just attempts at PR. The BG editors believe the way to win more support from Conservatives (particularly pro-lifers) is to . . . push an even more Liberal agenda! (Hat tip, OpinionJournal.com) Just more evidence that those who lost big in the last election are not paying attention.

Pro-aborts OUT AND PROUD!

This astonishing op/ed from the Philadelphia Inquirer shows how out of touch--how polar opposite, Elite Liberalism is from Mainstream American values. I sent a letter to the author and here it is for your edification...



Dear Ms. Buttenweiser,

I am astonished at your 2/17/05 op/ed extolling the virtues of abortion, because in an effort to justify your support of abortion you have created a false dichotomy: abstinence vs. freedom. Though your article dwells on the less than 1% of instances when conception is out of the woman's control--rape (fallacy alert: red herring!), your philosophy is premised upon the notion that women (and men) cannot control whether or not they engage in sexual behavior. But I would posit that you make difficult decisions every day based upon priorities and commitments and laws, and you have simply chosen sexual license (not "college" or a "perfect child"--in your friend's case) over innocent human life. Sadly, even your son who had crossed the bridge of concluding that abortion involved a "baby" was able to guess how you would choose between college and a baby. Hopefully, he hasn't connected up the reality of what happens when the baby is "not chosen."

In one sense, I hope that you are never dissuaded from articulating this view and that your article is widely read, for it is politically disastrous for voters to discern that such thinking is common among candid liberals; but I have to concede that it is more important that someone earnestly challenge you to contemplate the ramifications of your world view. Thank you for taking the time to hear me out.

Cordially,

Ned Williams

Nashville

Some folks have vaulted ahead in the debate over homosexual behavior...

There is a lot of buzz on this subject today--see this op/ed for instance, and I think that some of the indignation from the Left is because they fail to comprehend that the majority of Americans never accepted the argument (actually, the premise for so much of the homosexual agenda) that homosexuality is a normal activity or that it is something that a person IS rather than something that a person DOES. Sure, it might be bigotry or unfair prejudice to disfavor homosexual acting people if they had no say in their "status," but most of us just don't buy it.

From the "Demonization of America" Dept.

I just read this article about the incredible disrespect being given our President during his trip to Old Europe and in particular Belgium . . . Bush stickers to go on the back of urinals. (Hat tip, Drudgereport)

Slash 'n burn Dems

Two interesting columns crossed my path this morning: one from the Cleveland Plain Dealer relates to the Bush-hating campaign (really, the issues aren't relevant, whatever Bush proposes must_be_defeated!) that never stopped (in Ohio) and the second is an op/ed about the President's next steps in the war on terror. The connection? In closing a National Review article entitled "Next Acts," Paul Johnson writes:

"It seems to me that President Bush should ask himself and his closest colleagues the deadly question: How have we allowed our enemies to demonize me and our country? How is it that educated people all over the world have come to believe that our necessary and disinterested war against terror and mass murder, and in favor of democracy and freedom, is in fact aggressive and wicked? Why did we lose this vital battle while winning all the others? Granted the need to embark on the second phase of the War on Terror — involving perhaps preemptive strikes against nuclear terrorism — it is essential that America’s case be forcefully, intelligently, and effectively put this time. This may involve important institutional changes. It will certainly involve bringing forward clever men and women who understand the arts of geopolitical presentation — and giving them the means to practice these arts. But, not least, it needs the conviction in the White House and the whole administration that the battle to establish the moral case for American policy, all over the world, has hitherto been needlessly and heedlessly lost, and that it can and must be won."

To me, this is the most (in Ann Coulter's words) TREASONOUS aspect of the Left's slash-and-burn tactics for regaining some--any!, political power in Washington. It is a marketing campaign that is, at best, recklessly anti-American.