Reason without God and God without Reason, where the 'twain shall meet

In my 1968 commentary I drew a parallel between the dark side of the Enlightenment that led to the Terror of the French Revolution to far left liberalism (Socialism)and Communism. The Enlightenment hinged heavily on Reason, as opposed to superstition, particularly from the Church. Many philosophers of the time rejected God in much the same way later Communists and Socialists would.

There are those that would have you believe that The Founding Fathers of America also rejected God, that however is not true. What they rejected was a state telling the people what about God they had to believe. They rejected the state making people worship in a particular manner. By and large however, the founder's were religious men. Many on the left will point particularly to Thomas Jefferson as one who rejected God, when this is patently untrue. Jefferson rejected organized religion, he questioned deeply if Jesus was the actual son of God but Jefferson did not reject a supreme being, a quote if you will.

And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that his justice cannot sleep for ever.

Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia, Query 18, 1781

A belief in a Supreme Being, regardless of how each founder chose to practice that belief, is apparent in their writings. Those who do not understand this have either deliberately discounted this aspect of the Founders, or they have not read the wisdom these men left behind. The reason this is important is because the founder's believed that it was not just reason that gave people inherent rights, but that those rights also flowed from a Supreme Being giving ALL the rights to pursue Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. The idea of tolerance for all and their beliefs. The left delights in pointing out that founder's such as Jefferson and Washington had slaves and so did not extend freedom to all. They do this by ignoring the times that the country was founded in. They ignore that by utilizing the very ideals that the founders enshrined into the constitution slavery was ended. What they miss is that it is the ideals that constantly push us to pursue an ever better society, and it was the Founder's, imperfect men that they were, who gave us those ideals.

When one leaves God out of the mix and only reason exists it leads to a moral dilemma. That dilemma goes by the name of moral equivalence. A dilemma that allows men like Robespierre to come to power, men like Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot and Saddam Hussein. And leads groups like the far left from condemning the mass murderers. It also leads the American far left to condemn the country that shelters it, instead of condemning those that have attacked that country. Moral equivalence allows monsters to come to power because they have no moral authority to answer to.

Which brings us to those who have God with no reason. One would think realistically those who so often jeer the concept of God would not find an ally in terrorists who use God as their rallying cry. Please note I use God not in a Christian terminology, but only as the terminology of a Supreme Being. The current enemies of this country do not see HUMAN rights flowing from God, they see only their concept of God who demands a society that makes women invisible, a God that demands all others submit to that societies religious precepts and those that do not deserve death. In other words this view does not provide any form of equality under the law, it provides for complete inequality as religious precept. Without reason, Islam has remained in the 13th century, awash in superstition not unlike Europe of the Dark Ages.

Yet, yet the far left cannot condemn them. The people who insist that George W. Bush is akin to Hitler cannot bring themselves to condemn an ideology that while it uses God as it's prop is truly no different than the ideology that brought us fascists, Nazi's, Communist's. They cannot because in their world view all things are relative. They attempt to be historical revisionists and prove that Islam all along has been peaceful when the reality is not so. It is as blantant a lie as if a Christian stood up and claimed that Christianity has always been peaceful, we know that is not the case, the far left has crammed that history down our throat. The difference here is that this is now 2004, the religious wars in Europe as well as those that took place between Islam and the Catholic Church are hundreds of years gone by. First the Reformation came, and then the Enlightenment, but Islam has yet to experience anything akin to either of those Western Civilization events. So yes, Islam has been very violent, and continues that violence. It has never stopped, it has always been present in their own society. It is only in the last thirty years that the modern West has had to grapple with it. Once upon a time the west believed they had vanquished the violence directed towards us from Islam. No more.

Under the guise of multiculturalism, the far left demands that the West simply allow the cultural norms of violence masquerading as religion, into our culture. To not do so is "racist". The left does not seem to grasp that it a mark of a democracy to be able to respect an adherent of a particular religion than it is to respect that religion. The tolerance that the Founder's enshrined is a tolerance towards individual people, it is not a tolerance of ideals that would wipe away that individual tolerance. The inability to see from both the left and from radical Islam that individual rights flow from BOTH reason and God, make them bedmates.

The inability to stand on moral principal is what allows the far left loonies to equate Bush to Hitler. It is what prompts Michael Moore to produce a movie that essentially shows Iraq as a peaceful wonderful country until the big bad Americans invaded. It is that same inability to stand on moral principal that allowed John Kerry to paint those who had been in Vietnam and those who were still there as akin to the army of Ghengis Khan. The same inability that prompted him to go to Paris in 1970 in an effort to parlay with the enemy, an enemy that later slaughtered hundreds of thousands of people when they had the chance to. Reason without virtue.

A general dissolution of principles and manners will more surely overthrow the liberties of America than the whole force of the common enemy. While the people are virtuous they cannot be subdued; but when once they lose their virtue then will be ready to surrender their liberties to the first external or internal invader.

Samuel Adams, letter to James Warren, February 12, 1779

Far from being rivals or enemies, religion and law are twin sisters, friends, and mutual assistants. Indeed, these two sciences run into each other. The divine law, as discovered by reason and the moral sense, forms an essential part of both.

James Wilson early American Congressman

The far left, the dark side of the Enlightenment. They slide the slippery slope of moral equivalence, and they have nominated John Kerry.

Red

About those 527's

In a previous post I noted that Zack Exley, organizer for Moveon.org is now working for the Kerry campaign. Since Kerry and then his supporters whined repeatedly about the Swift Vets for Truth who Kerry alleges are connected to the Bush campaign, I thought it worth the time to note various connections the Kerry campaign has.

While this has been written about in various sources, I think it is time to highlight it even more precisely because despite those connections, Kerry has the balls to complain about a group that has the audacity to do exactly what he and his running mate invited them to do. And the Swifties are being very effective, not only the Swifties, but the various blogs that are now going through Kerry various stories and non events with a fine tooth comb.

So let's start with Zack Exley. Exley is a computer programmer from Massachusetts. He came to fame as the 2000 presidential campaign began. At that time Exley created a website called GWBush.com, which featured doctored photo's of George Bush with what appeared to be cocaine on his upper lip and nose. The site sold bumper stickers with sayings like "GWBush, not a Crackhead anymore." And "GWBush, Born with a silver spoon up his nose" The site featured a cartoon of Bush dancing with a beer bottle in his hand, with the song "Louie, Louie" playing in the background. The Bush campaign of 2000 filed an FEC complaint, which brought the whole thing into the news media. After time the whole hoopla died down and that would have been the end of it, except that Exley became an organizing director of moveon.org

Moveon.org was founded by multi-millionaire California software designers Wes Boyd and Joan Blades. In 1997 they sold their company and formed moveon.org the next year. The original purpose of moveon was to save Clinton from impeachment. Obviously Clinton was still impeached. Moveon had threatened that if impeachment did take place then the group would continue their activities against those who had moved the process forward. According to the FEC Boyd and Blades formed moveonPAC on Oct, 23 1998. They put in $12,000 and on Oct 26 the group announced a wide ranging effort to defeat Republicans in the November elections. With the 2000 elections moveon targeted some 30 House and Senate races from around the country. All their contributions went to Democratic candidates, approximately 2.4 million dollars according to the FEC.After the election moveon branched out, they became more "issue oriented" and moved to issues such as gun control, campaign finance reform, stopping the war in Iraq and especially defeating George Bush.

They gained great publicity with the last superbowl when CBS refused to run their ad "Child's Pay" CBS stated the ad violated their policy against running issue advocacy advertising. Cries of censorship! filled the air as the group much like Michael Moore, seem to not realize that the constitution provides for freedom of speech, but does not make it your right to be distributed.Over time moveon has become closely linked to Democratic candidates. In 2002, less than a week before voting was held, founder Boyd sent an email to supporters asking them to contribute monies to a long laundry list of House and Senate candidates. Declaring that it was essential to to avoid the reality of right wing domination, "America's worst nightmare".

The group also pushes the "issues". In 2000 the group gave fiscal sponsorship to Proposition 22 in California, a measure that defined marriage as that between a man and a woman. It was their largest "fiscal sponsorship" that year, to the tune of $162,000.In late 2003 it was discovered that moveon had set up websites outside the United States for the explicit purpose of taking foreign donations to help defeat George W. Bush in the 2004 elections. After the controversy over it moveon shut down the websites though did not disclose how much money they had already raised. While it was not strictly illegal for moveon to do this, I doubt if the majority of Americans want their presidential elections influenced with foreign funds.

Next let us take a look at one of the funders of moveon.org, The Tides Foundation. An internet search of the foundation brings up multiple links. After scrimming a very large amount of articles what jumps out at me is that the Tides Foundation is secretive, and secretive with a purpose. Drummond Pike, who founded Tides in 1976, states to the Chronicle of Philanthropy "Anonymity is very important to most people we work with." No doubt because of the groups that Tides funds. I have no intention of getting into what Teresa Heinz Kerry has funded or not through Tides, but what I would like to note is that the Tides Foundation DOES fund many far left liberal groups, as well as incubate new ones. Moveon.org is not some nonpartisan issue oriented group as it would like mainstream America to believe. The point I would like to make is that Zack Exley worked as an organizing director for moveon, that the group is funded by the Tides Foundation, a group that consistantly funds far left liberal causes and that Zack Exley now works for John Kerry. A much tighter connection for Kerry to a 527 than Bush to the Swifties.

Anyone keeping up with not only the internet, but even mainstream media should be realizing how very important internet connections are to this campaign. Zack Exley certainly does, and it is his job to make it important to the Kerry campaign. Exley has become a seasoned warrior against George Bush and if the Swift Vets are to be castrated over the minor connections they have had with Republican funders, may I ask why Kerry is not receiving the same attention from the Mainstream media?

Though moveon.org bills itself as nonpartisan, it is anything but. Only those who wish to deliberately close their eyes can swallow such claptrap. I believe it is important to put a very large spotlight on the 527's that push the Democrats issues. Just as Kerry's broadside against the Swifties opened up the debate over not only how he got his medals, but his anti-war activity, his continued pursuing to have Bush denounce that group in particular gives all interested parties a hole big enough to drive a truck through to question Kerry and all his various ties. Just as the blogs have been hammering Kerry on his medals and anti-war activity forcing it into the Pop Media, the blogs need to start looking just as heavily Kerry's connections to the 527's, particularly moveon.org

It is my belief that most Americans do not fall into the far left liberal catagory. However those that do exert tremendous amounts of influence on the regular hardworking joe American. They do so with disinformation campaigns that don't quite tell the whole story, then get up in arms when someone comes along with the complete picture. When the complete picture is told then the far left liberals scream "smear campaign."

Some will say so what? The liberals have their groups and funds and so do the conservatives. To that I say, yes true. The crux of the matter is that Kerry has made a big damn deal over the Swift Vets with the mainstream media covering Max Cleland attempting to deliver a letter to George Bush in the attempt to make Bush look like a jackass for not denouncing the Swifties specifically when Kerry has more obvious ties to moveon.org and if Kerry can complain because a donor to the Republican party also donated to the Swifties, than I can complain about the funding of moveon.org by the Tides Foundation. Tell me how this is so different?

The leftist intellectuals just think that Joe American isn't bright enough to figure it out, so they attempt to handfed us what they believe we will swallow. Without the internet this would be much easier since Pop Media's political leanings are those of the far left.

Red

Lie down with dogs, get up with fleas

Associate yourself with men of good quality if you esteem your own reputation for 'tis better to be alone than in bad company.
George Washington

Let's talk a bit about John Kerry's old "band of brother's". The Vietnam Veterans against the War.

A little history if you will. One of the founder's of VVAW was Mark Hubbard. Mr. Hubbard claimed that he was an Air Force pilot who spent 2 years in Vietnam, who crashed and was injured at Danang or in another version that he was flying a transport plane into Danang when he caught some shrapnel.

However-
"Alfred H. Hubbard entered the Air Force in October 1952, re-enlisted twice and was honorably discharged in October 1966, when his enlistment expired. At the time of his discharge he was an instructor flight engineer on C-123 aircraft with the 7th Air Transport Squadron, McCord Air Force Base, Tacoma, Washington. There is no record of any service in Vietnam, but since he was an air crew member he could have been in Vietnam for brief periods during cargo loading, unloading operations or for crew rest purposes. His highest grade held was Staff Sergeant E-5."

Ah, ooops. It was Al Hubbard who as executive Director of the VVAW who appointed Kerry to the Executive Committee. Considering that many of those who participated in the Winter Soldier "Investigation" also were not vets who used the names of real vets, or were vets that had not been in Vietnam one has to ponder if it is not Kerry's experience that exaggeration of his deeds in Vietnam are a norm and that the news media will not report on it. Despite knowing shortly after the hoopla on the mall in 1971 that Al Hubbard was not a vet who was in Vietnam the major papers and media outlets would not publish it.

Then there is Scott Camil, another founder of VVAW. The brain who thought assassinating hawk Senators would be a good thing. In his own words.
"I did not think it was terrible at the time. My plan was that, on the last day…we would go into the [congressional] offices…we would schedule the most hard-core hawks for last-and we would shoot them all.” L: “Were you serious about this?” C: “I was serious. I felt that I spent two years killing women and children in their own fu*king homes. These are the guys that fu*king made the policy, and these were the guys that were responsible for it, and these were the guys that were voting to continue the fu*king war when the public was against it. I felt that if we really believed in what we were doing, and if we were willing to put our lives on the line for the country over there, we should be willing to put our lives on the line for the country over here."--Scott Camil, former Vietnam Veterans Against the War leader, in a 1992 oral history of the anti-war movement still on file at the University of Florida

Nearly from the time the VVAW was formed there were accusations that it was linked to Communists. Again I note that I do not believe John Kerry is a communist, but it seems to me he is not uncomfortable being in bed with them.

"John was also very anticommunist. He made it very clear one night in the office.
I do these photo spreads for the Liberation News Service.... I just give it away like to the New York Press Service, and so there was a spread on VVAW in the Daily World, an American communist newspaper, and my sh*t got in there. We pinned it up on the wall. At that same time, Al Hubbard received a peace award from the Soviets. John went off. He says, "That's a communist newspaper. Isn't that prize a communist prize that Al Hubbard got there?" He's got his feet up on the desk and he's a little nervous, which is making him think, “Maybe I should leave this radical organization." But we had no political philosophy; it was just a mixed bag of rednecks all the way to Maoists."--Sheldon Ramsdell, a former VVAW member, from Winter Soldiers - An Oral History Of The Vietnam Veterans Against The War 1997 Richard Stacewicz

Ok then. John Kerry was not a communist, but he was very willing to work with people he knew to be forging ties with them.

From the same book.
"That was also where there was actually some discussion of assassinating some senators during the Christmas holidays. They were people who I knew from the organization with hotheaded rhetoric.
They had a list of six senators ... Helms, John Tower, and I can't remember the others, who they wanted to assassinate when they adjourned for Christmas. They were the ones voting to fund the war. They approached me about assassinating John Tower because he was from Texas. The logic made a certain amount of sense because there's thousands of people dying in southeast Asia. We can shoot these six people and probably stop it. Some of us were willing to sabotage materials, but when it came to people ... I mean, there were a lot of angry people. They had been in Vietnam, they had lost friends. This had gone on for years; some of them had been protesting for five or six years. They were cynical, nihilistic, and some of them did talk real tough rhetoric, but nobody ever got shot by any of these people. It was just talk.
When I got back from that meeting, I couldn't get up the enthusiasm any more.
The meeting in Kansas City brought in a new steering committee. John Kerry, Craig Scott Moore, Mike Oliver, and Skip Roberts resigned from their leadership positions and were replaced by several new members. Al Hubbard and Joe Urgo remained in office and were joined by John Birch, Lenny Rotman, and Larry Rottman."

This is the meeting that John Kerry has denied attending, though recent release of FBI files indicate that he did and that he had a terrific falling out with Al Hubbard, yet to this day what has John Kerry said about his time in the VVAW and his anti-war activities? I believe he says he is proud of his fight against the war, even if his testimony was a bit over the top. That testimony came in large part from the Winter Soldier "investigation" as well as from a book by Mark Lane "Conversations with Americans". Mark Lane also helped set up the Winter Soldier put on. From Neil Sheehan, a Pulitzer Prize winner who wrote for the New York Times-in a review of Mark Lane's book.
"Chuck Onan says he was in an elite Marine long-range patrol unit, that he went to parachute, frogman and jungle survival schools and received a special course in torture techniques. "How were you trained to torture women prisoners?" Mr. Lane asks. "To strip them, spread them open and drive pointed sticks or bayonets into their vagina," Onan replies. "We were also told we could rape the girls all we wanted."
Onan says he deserted after he got orders to go to Vietnam and put his knowledge into practice. "I was pretty gung-ho until the last phase of the training. Then it all began to seem so sick. They just went too far."
Now here is some information that Mr. Lane did not include in his book. Marine Corps records say the only combat training Onan received was the normal boot camp given every Marine. He then, according to the records, attended Aviation Mechanical Fundamentals School at Memphis, Tenn., and next worked as a stock room clerk at the Marine air base at Beaufort, S.C., handing out spare parts for airplanes. He left Beaufort on Feb. 5, 1968, with orders to report to Camp Pendleton, Calif., for shipment to Vietnam after 30 days leave. He deserted. There is no indication in his records that he ever belonged to a long-range patrol unit and received parachute, frogman and jungle survival training. The Marine Corps contends it does not give courses in torture.

It is worth noting that Neil Sheehan is the reporter that Daniel Ellsburg leaked the Pentagon Papers to. That is how he got his Pulitzer. Mr. Sheehan had also been a reporter in Vietnam, and he knew that Mark Lane and his stories were "over the top" as Kerry says. In a review of Mark Lane's book, Mr. Sheehan said-
"This book is so irresponsible that it may help to provoke a responsible inquiry into the question of war crimes and atrocities in Vietnam. "Conversations with Americans" is a lesson in what happens when a society shuns the examination of a pressing, emotional issue and leaves the answers to a Mark Lane."

Yes, Sir Mr. Kerry, when you lie down with dogs you get up with fleas. Or perhaps this one, you reap what you sow. While Mr. Kerry screeches along about the Bush attack machine, demanding that the President more or less shut down the Swifties, his own activities as an "over the top" anti-war protestor involved with an "over the top" radical group will come out one way or another. There is too much anger over this issue for it to go away.

All this talk of the Vietnam past has a great impact on today, though there are many in the liberal media who are busy trying to make it not important. But it is. The split that occurred in this country during the Vietnam War is not gone, it was simply papered over for awhile. That split is not simply people over a divide shouting at one another over a long ago war either. It points to deep divisions regarding how America is seen by various groups of American people. That means it impacts our culture TODAY. The culture Wars are alive and well, but it is not a simple thing here. It cuts to the heart of how American's see their country and ultimately which view will win.

Are the founders great men to be emulated or are they stupid white men? Will America truly have equal justice for all under the law or will we institute special laws making it more of a crime to kill a gay man than a man who is not? Will we be a country that expects it's people to have responsibilities along with rights or not. That divide that is seen so clearly right now in the presidential election campaign is a divide that has it's birth many, many years before now. John Kerry was in the vanguard of that original division, his views have not changed a great deal over the year by his senatorial record, and that is why his anti-war activities and the "band of brothers" he worked with then are so important now. His were not the rantings of a immature young man who has since rethought those stands. Instead it was the time he formed himself and his character, and yes character counts.

The last thing that begs to be addressed here is as a member of the Executive Committee for the VVAW who attended a meeting where assassination of members of Government was discussed, even if Kerry resigned immediately, why did he not inform the appropriate authorities? Yes, indeed character counts. George Washington understood that. Benedict Arnold did not.

Speaking of 1968

1968. The year Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated. The year Robert Kennedy was assassinated. The year thousands showed up at the Democratic convention to protest, leading to angry confrontations, mass arrests and perhaps even more massive press coverage. Why is this important right now in our history?

It is important because John Kerry has made it important. By highlighting his Vietnam service repeatedly he has invited great scrutiny of his anti-war activity as well. By virtue of inviting this scrutiny he has made this country revisit a past many would prefer not to. By bringing to the forefront a debate that never died, only simmered in the background, he invites all of America to live through those contentious times all over again. By the leftists utilization of language to describe President Bush as a Hilter, a Stalin- the left and their current leader Kerry vitually force us back to 1968.

The radicalism of the election of 2004 began the moment there were contentions over the 2000 election. Cries of "he stole the election" began almost the moment Florida teetered between the candidates. Talking heads were dispersed to the media and George Bush as well as his family were vilified repeatedly, not to mention the talk of throwing out the electoral college. The more far left elements of the democratic party and the leftist groups that associate themselves with the democrats quickly morphed before our eyes into the true radicals they were. The horrid events of 9/11 forced these groups and people to draw back for awhile. But that drawing back lasted but a short time.

By the time the Iraq War commenced the radical left was busy denoucing Bush by drawing a picture of a war for oil, one that was brought on by Bush's wish for revenge for Saddam's attempt at assassinating his father, one in which Halliburten and Dick Cheney were the current military industrial complex.

Over the next year and a half, the shrills from the radicals with Michael Moore and moveon.org as the vanguard, became that of the shrieking banshee Irish banshee of lore. Doom, doom, doom the banshee screamed over our heads. If, as news pundits and the New York Police Department, are right regarding the protests expected at the upcoming Republican Convention then what happens there is the fault of those far left radicals, not the Bush administration and not the republican party.

From a look through the net it is obvious that many of the groups converging on New York are not intent on public protest. They are intent on public mayhem, and if they can manage to harm a police officer, the same group who rushed to the rescue of those in the World Trade Center, then all the better. What is being planned is not political protest, or a freedom of speech issue. It is political terrorism. Many anti-Bush websites have encouraged those who are going to New York to bring slingshots to attack the horses police officers will be using. Encouraging "protestors" to throw marbles under horses hoofs in the hopes that it will cause the horse to lose it's footing, thereby harming the horse and it's rider. The Ruckus Society is planning massive protests at the Republican Convention. Per FrontPage Magazine, the Kerry campaign has had Zack Exley as Director of Online Communication and Online Organizing since April of this year. Mr. Exley was also trained by and worked as a workshop facilitator for the Ruckus Society. It is worth noting that the Ruckus Society was a major player in the protests in Seattle in 1999, where the anarchists caused millions of dollars in damages. A quick search of google also reveals that Mr. Exley is one of the main organizers behind moveon.org and Kerry has the audacity to publicly complain that the Swift Vets are linked to the Bush campaign? And why has not mainstream media called Kerry on his hypocrisy? Perhaps for the same reason they have not done so since he entered the public eye in 1971.

The founders of this country were men of the enlightenment. Each in their own ways were highly influenced by the Enlightenment thinkers-David Hume, John Locke and Adam Smith. Also influencing the founders were Voltaire and Rousseau from France. The founding fathers of this country were able to use the thoughts of these philosophers to create the Declaration of Independence and our constitution. It took years for them to get there though, something I think many people forget in an age that finds more Americans demanding instant results from any government action. Now it is reasonable to ask just what the Enlightenment has to do with the election of 2004, and the actions of protestors of 1968.

I cite the Enlightenment now because the radicals of 1968 and the radicals of 2004 are the offspring of the radicals that created the Terror in France, led by Robespierre. While the founder's of this country rejected the more radical elements of the enlightenment, much of it from Rousseau, Robespierre embraced it. The Terror that came out of the French Revolution was certainly not what Thomas Jefferson had envisioned when he initially supported that Revolution.

The Enlightenment spawned two different world views. One that lead to the Republic that the founders of this country shaped, as well later many other countries that were initially colonies of Mother England. The other is the view that created the French Terror, the Bolshviks and later Communism.
"What we learn from the study of the Great [French] Revolution is that it was the source of all the present communist, anarchist and socialist conceptions."Prince Petr KropotkinRussian naturalist, author and soldierwriting in 1909 on the eve of the Bolshevik Revolution

One side of the Enlightenment brought us social justice, with the ultimate power resting in the hands of the people. The Constitution that enshrines that thought process into law was the result of much compromise by the crafters. A pragmatic view if you will. The other side of the Enlightenment brought social control, with power resting in the words of Robespierre, "A sovereign" to force people to be free. And if political terror was necessary to achieve that goal than terror it would be.
"Terror is naught but prompt, severe, inflexible justice; it is therefore an emanation of virtue; it is less a particular principle than a consequence of the general principle of democracy applied to the most pressing needs of the fatherland."Maximillien Marie Isidore de RobespierreAddress, National Convention, 1794

Modern day communism, largely debunked today, was not in 1968. The north Vietnamese were and still are communists, the intellectual inheritors of the French Reign of Terror, as all communists are. The protestors of 1968, and the continued protests through the early 70's sympathized with those who used the very same tactics that Robespierre utilized. Mass Terror. It was under the flag of North Vietnam that John Kerry marched, it was under the shadow of that flag that all of his anti-war activities took place, including his slander of all Vietnam Vets, as well as the slandering of the overall military.

John Kerry is the intellectual descendent of the side of the Enlightenment that brought the concept of social control, social engineering also known as socialism to the world. In service to a Utopia that can never exist those that have followed this path have been as benign as the anarchists that fought the police in Chicago in 1968, the anarchists that smashed windows and burned vehicles in Seattle in 1999, and the potential anarchists that plan on demonstrating in New York City 2004. It should not need to be said I am using benign tongue in cheek. Of course taken to an extreme, which some will inevitably do, the descendents of Rousseau and Robespierre brought us the mass murderers of Lenin, Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot.

Do I think that John Kerry is a communist. No. However I do believe he has willingly associated himself with those that are, and that he slandered many millions of good men to as he cozied up to communists. That even today he is unwilling to acknowledge that those same people he supported against his own and against his country, mass murdered in classic communist style thousands upon thousands as soon as they occupied South Vietnam. Something that many warned would happen, but that Kerry believed would not. Is there even a whisper of apology for being so wrong? A whisper of apology that he defamed and debased the United States military, as well as the country that had nutured him?

I don't expect the New York protestors to set up a guillotine, but I do expect a replay of 1968, if nothing else it will be in spirit. The ghosts of those times are already floating around our heads, brought to you courtesy of John Kerry and the democratic party. As Grandma used to say, if you lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas.

Red

Stolen Valor

I have always been a political person, but never have I felt a personal interest in political elections. This presidential election however, is personal.
Just over 4 years ago myself and my family were on our way to Hawaii for a vacation that was much more than a simple vacation for me. From 1969 to 1971 I had lived in Hawaii, stationed at barbers Point Naval Base, with my active duty dad. The flight to Hawaii, with a short layover in Los Angeles, was going to take us some 10 hours so I had bought a book to read. That book was "Stolen Valor".
I had gone to Barnes and Nobles looking for anything that would capture my attention through a long plane ride. I rarely read fiction, and generally look for books on history. I have been an amateur student of history for years. After looking around I came across "Stolen Valor". I'm not sure that I would have picked that book had I not been going to Hawaii. Let me explain that a bit.
The years we lived in Hawaii were some of the most contentious over the Vietnam war. We landed in Hawaii the night I turned 6 years old, so while I was young during this time frame, I clearly remember the nightly news and my parents reactions to not only the news from Vietnam, but their reactions to anti-war protestors. Discussions over the war, the way my parents and their friends felt it was being reported on and the behavior of anti-war protestors was common occurrences in my home. My memories of Hawaii have always loomed large in my head also because it was the last place that I had lived with my dad. My parents split up and later divorced shortly after we came back from Hawaii.To top off the way I was feeling about going back to a place where I had been an exceedingly happy youngster and all those memories of being with my dad, was the news I received two days before we were to leave.

My dad had called to ask me to find time to get to Tennessee where he lived so I could go through his home and decide what I would like from it. He told me that he and my step mom had decided to downsize the house and he wanted me to pick out various pieces of furniture etc... That I would like. None of this made any sense to me. My dad had retired after 33 years of service only a few years before that, and the house was not a large house to begin with. I simply knew something was wrong. So I questioned him several times when suddenly he dropped the phone and I could hear him weeping. The only other time in my life I had known my dad to cry was when we had visited the USS Arizona so I knew something was very, very wrong. After a couple minutes my step mom picked up the phone and explained that my dad had melanoma that had spread to his brain. One the small area of his head that the hair had thinned, and the cancer had spread to his brain. He had just started radiation therapy. The cancer was extensive and while he had started the necessary therapy, I knew as a Registered Nurse, that it was not likely to be successful. The trip to Hawaii took on even deeper tones than it had already.

It was the following day that I took my trip to Barnes and Nobles. With all the intense feelings and memories I was having regarding my trip to Hawaii, the book "Stolen Valor" just seemed to be the right book at the right time. There was no way to separate the time I had spent in Hawaii from the controversies and feelings regarding the Vietnam War. For those who are not familiar with the book, it details repeatedly those people who claimed Vietnam experience who were never there. And not only that, but how many of those who claimed service that also claimed to have committed atrocities, who claimed they could no longer fit into American society because of it, that claimed they were drug addicts or drunks because of the non-existent time in service in the war that tore this country apart. The overall gist of the book is the demolishing of the myths that have been perpetuated by the media, and by those who became the vanguard of the anti-war movement. I would highly recommend this book to anyone who is seeking to understand why the men that make up Swift Boat Veterans for Truth are willing to put their reputations on the line after 30 some years of silence, in order to keep John Kerry from becoming the Commander in Chief of the United States. Find the section on the Winter Soldier investigation and let it sink in what the man who seeks the Presidency of this country did to the Veterans of the Vietnam War. Not only to the Veterans of that war, but to every American who values not only the freedoms and liberties that we enjoy but also to every American who believes in truth. Not someone's version of truth, but the plain reality.

What is that reality? That John Kerry was not simply a man who volunteered for military duty and spent 4 months in active combat in Vietnam. He is also a man who came home from that war determined to protest it. Certainly a right, nay even an obligation of an American who feels strongly that his/her government is in the wrong. Yet John Kerry did not simply protest the Vietnam War, he did not simply protest that he felt his govenment was wrong. In his zeal to not only protest, but to make a name for himself he took a broad brush and painted the soldiers, sailors and marines of that war as akin to the army of Ghengis Khan. A name that has the same horror echo as does Hitler. He, with his then band of brothers, the Vietnam Veterans against the War, helped tar every single member of the military as baby killers, war criminals unable to live with themselves or others because of the horrid memories of what they did in Vietnam. It is necessary to understand that John Kerry was not a minor figure in the anti-war movement. He was not one of those who marched along quietly and then went home.

John Kerry did not simply help bring closure to the Vietnam War. As a major figure in the anti-war movement he was not content to smear the character of the military man that had been in Vietnam. No, he also managed to paint the United States military as an evil entity, something many in the country still fervently believe. In a time that terrorism as evil as Nazi Germany threatens this country, this is not the man who should ever, ever be allowed to lead the military he has denigrated for over thirty years.

It has been over four years since I read "Stolen Valor". I didn't need the Swift Boat Vets to tell me all about John Kerry, I already knew. What has surprised me is that it has taken someone this long to get the story out. From the time he announced his bid for President I have waited for someone to challenge him not so much on his time in Vietnam, but what he did afterwards. Perhaps it should not have surprised me, knowing from the book that Dan Rather once had a story on Vets who lived in the Pacific Northwest, out in the forests there "off the land" as they say, who claimed they did this because their experience in Vietnam had made them unable to live a normal life. The problem with the story is that some of the men who claimed this WERE NEVER IN VIETNAM. Yet a major journalist and a major network NEVER BOTHERED TO FIND THAT OUT. Nor was the public that watched that program ever told by those who ran the program that it was essentially false. So much for truthful journalism. Knowing this, the way the mainstream media has gone after the Swift Boat Vets should not raise any eyebrows. Mainstream can barely afford the truth to come out any more than John Kerry can. For if it truly does, then that media has much to answer for regarding the way they have swallowed hook, line and sinker the myths and distortions of not only the Vietnam Vet, but the entire way they have slanted their reporting for over thirty years.

My family has been heavily military for years. Not only my dad, who was a flight engineer on a P3-Orion and later an instructor. His brother spent 20 years in the Navy, his uncle retired from the Air Force after having initially enlisted in the Army Air Corp in WWII. My mom's two brothers spent each spent 4 years in the Navy. I have 4 uncles, now deceased, who fought in WWII, one who came out of the Battle of the Bulge wearing one sock and his dog tags . While John Kerry was protesting the Vietnam War my cousin was losing part of a lung and part of his intestines there. My family's military service goes back to the Revolutionary War to Capt. James Crabtree who was given his commission by Thomas Jefferson while he was Gov.of Virginia. Yes, I am very proud of my family and their contributions to this country. I love this country, and revere the founders who not only crafted the documents that this country stands on, but who were willing to put their very lives on the line to do so. Regardless of rather I think Bush is right, wrong or indifferent I would not vote for John Kerry if he were the only man on the ticket.

While John Kerry vows to work with our "allies" and the useless UN, I recall the words of George Washington.

'Tis folly in one Nation to look for disinterested favors from another; that it must pay with a portion of its Independence for whatever it may accept under that character; that by such acceptance, it may place itself in the condition of having given equivalents for nominal favours and yet of being reproached with ingratitude for not giving more. There can be no greater error than to expect, or calculate upon real favours from Nation to Nation. 'Tis an illusion which experience must cure, which a just pride ought to discard.
George Washington, Farewell Address, September 19, 1796

Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence, (I conjure you to believe me fellow citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake; since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of Republican Government.
George Washington, Farewell Address, September 19, 1796

The words of Alexander Hamilton.

Foreign influence is truly the Grecian horse to a republic. We cannot be too careful to exclude its influence.
Alexander Hamilton, Pacificus, No. 6, July 17, 1793

While John Kerry has consistently voted against the military I remember the words of our founders.

It is a principle incorporated into the settled policy of America, that as peace is better than war, war is better than tribute.
James Madison, letter to the Dey of Algiers, August, 1816

It is the madness of folly, to expect mercy from those who have refused to do justice; and even mercy, where conquest is the object, is only a trick of war; the cunning of the fox is as murderous as the violence of the wolf.
Thomas Paine, The American Crisis, No. 1, December 19, 1776

If we desire to insult, we must be able to repel it; if we desire to secure peace, one of the most powerful instruments of our rising prosperity, it must be known, that we are at all times ready for War.
George Washington, Annual Message, December 1793

We must never forget the wisdom of our founding fathers. And we must never put someone in the seat of Commander in Chief who willinglydisregards the words of those founders. I believe that John Kerry not only does this, he also represents a party that since the turbulent times of Vietnam has shunned the wisdom of those who gave us the country that they seek to lead.

This blog is intended to give voice to the millions that live between each of our seaboards that the mainstream media credits with little intelligence. The people who the mainstream media roll their eyes at because we believe in God, country and family. Who believe in black and white morality, not moral equivalency. We are here, we will no longer be silent while a liberal agenda is forced down our throats. The internet has given us the ability to ferret out the information and to share that information. We don't want backdoor socialism, we don't want multicultural masquerading as tolerance. And we will challenge the mainstream media to be truthful.

John Kerry has brought us back to 1968. How many of us really want to be there again?

Red.