:: Da' Militant One's Lair ::

:: Saturday, July 20, 2002 ::

Memo to the Washington Times on Dick Armey saying no to national ID cards:

For once Dick Armey has it right, but I notice the editorial writer did not mention the group responsible for eroding our liberties. No, it's not Bill Clinton. It's the crowd that currently occupies the White House, and the Times silence is as they say "deafening". Credibility is not always gained by criticizing your enemies it is gained by looking honestly at your friends. The Times has been a friend to George Bush, but not much of a friend. Can the country be run anymore incompetently than it already is? It says a lot that most observers agree that Al Gore was smarter than George Bush, but your crowd supported Bush anyway. Whatever happened to the "best qualified"? Oh yeah I forgot, that only applies to black folk trying to get into college or trying to get a job. You get what you paid for and I hope you have gotten your money's worth from this whollly unqualified "appointed" president. Knowing the character of the crowd that runs the editorial page, I assume that you will continue to prop up this failed presidency and continue to blame Bush's incompetence on Bill Clinton. So much for personal responsibility. I would leave my name and phone number, but I know that ol' Wes and Tony wouldn't have the guts to print this comment!

:: DM1 7/20/2002 08:53:00 AM [+] ::
...

Memo to Fox:

You know folks would probably be even more supportive of Bush's domestic agenda if you didn't have the loud mouths like Hannity constantly dividing folks between liberal and conservative. What is really ridiculous is that the folks like Trent Lott, Tom Delay, and Tom Davis who constantly criticize Tom Daschle as not being a team player or at worst unpatriotic never served one day in the military. Let's not forget Dick Cheney who received four student deferments during the Vietnam War. I believe that Daschle served his country in the Air Force. If you want moral clarity tell those who never served when they had a chance to sit down and shut up. And this rant comes from a republican. Granted I think the democrats have some problems when it comes to the issues, I get even more upset when folks who never served start pointing fingers at veterans like Tom Daschle as if they have the moral high ground. Just for the record I served in the Army from 1981 to 1985.

:: DM1 7/18/2002 03:59:00 AM [+] ::
...

Memo to Fox:

You know folks would probably be even more supportive of Bush's domestic agenda if you didn't have the loud mouths like Hannity constantly dividing folks between liberal and conservative. What is really ridiculous is that the folks like Trent Lott, Tom Delay, and Tom Davis who constantly criticize Tom Daschle as not being a team player or at worst unpatriotic never served one day in the military. Let's not forget Dick Cheney who received four student deferments during the Vietnam War. I believe that Daschle served his country in the Air Force. If you want moral clarity tell those who never served when they had a chance to sit down and shut up. And this rant comes from a republican. Granted I think the democrats have some problems when it comes to the issues, I get even more upset when folks who never served start pointing fingers at veterans like Tom Daschle as if they have the moral high ground. Just for the record I served in the Army from 1981 to 1985.

:: DM1 7/18/2002 03:55:00 AM [+] ::
...

Memo to The Washington Times:

I really wonder about the folks that sit on the editorial board. Why don't you rename the paper "The Republican Conservative Times" If there was ever an "American Taliban" it is surely your paper. Lest we forget that Bush lost the popular vote by more than 500,000 votes. Your paper crucified Clinton, not for winning, but for not getting at least 50% of the vote. Not only did Bush not get at least 50% of the vote he came in second with respect to all votes counted. When evidence came out in the many "scandals" surrounding Clinton, your paper turned a deaf ear, you even printed rape allegations on your front page about him. Your "jihad" against Clinton is about as pathetic as your lack of critical analysis of the 2000 Election. Remember that prior to 9/11 Bush was hovering at 50% in the polls. To say that the voters put the 2000 election behind them prior to 9/11 shows the disconnect that the "elites" in your paper have with most of America. Now unlike the total lack of support that most republicans gave Cinton, the democrats are supporting Bush almost totally. But beware, his support is based on the attack of 9/11 and the need to exact justice, revenge, or whatever you want to call it. His domestic policies are still wrongheaded and not well thought out. His foreign policy team other than Colin Powell, who he failed to listen to prior to 9/11, is failing him. His unilateralist polcies in the first six months of the 2001 created unnecessary problems when Bush had to go back to the same world community after 9/11 for support. No, our support of Bush is an extension of our support for the ideals and freedoms of our country. Now if folks such as yourself had shown Clinton the same type of support maybe we would not be dealing with the bitterness and hatred that exists against us today.

Also, folks in your paper are going out of their way to blame Clinton for 9/11. Well Bush had been president for 8 months when this happened. A report outlining terrorist threats to the US had been presented to him in the Spring of 2001. He did nothing to address the concerns raised until after the 9/11 attack. Your paper preaches personal accountability and responsibility. It would be a good start for you to practice what you preach.

:: DM1 7/18/2002 03:52:00 AM [+] ::
...

Letter to Bruce Wilson UK

Dear Bruce,

The reason why you have been receiving so much negative email is that the truth hurts. Americans are notorious enablers when it comes to their presidents! To american conservatives George W. Bush is not William Jefferson Clinton. It is as simple as that. The american press and the democrats have for the most part rolled over for George W. Bush. You have the courage to say what a lot of americans are thinking, but are unable (afraid?) to express publicly. You are quite correct about the effect of September 11th on Bush's presidency. Examples: terrorist alerts that include every mode of transportation and delivery system known to man, a threat assessment chart that has remained at "Yellow?" despite warnings almost daily of imminent terrorist attacks, John Ashcroft (enough said!), The Patriot Act, Dissenting opinions ridiculed as unpatriotic, an ability to stand before the American People and have no clue as to how to articulate a vision that is a true path to peace, incompetence rewarded as virtue. It goes on! There is a method to the madness: 2004. The conservatives want to remake the judiciary among other goals. This is one of the primary reasons for their backing of George W. Bush. Believe me, in private they will admit that he is not the brightest bulb, but he was electable. They will defend Bush to the very end and the current beginnings of a police state in America is their way of controlling events. Beware of your head my friend! Keep telling the truth because we sure need someone to stand up and shout" "The Emperor has no clothes!" Good Day.

Da' Militant One

:: DM1 7/16/2002 10:43:00 PM [+] ::
...

Memo to Representative Ganske


I find it disgraceful that you could suggest that in some way Senator Harkin does not share your degree of patriotism. I researched your biography and his. Guess what Senator Harkin served several years in the Navy as a jet pilot. I am also a republican and find your questioning of his patriotism to be very sad and believe me it reflects poorly on you. I am just glad that you don't represent my state. I may even send Senator Harkin a donation to let him know that not all republicans are as ridiculous as you. By the way, according to your biography, you are a gifted surgeon and are a LTC in the Army Reserve, you do not do the uniform any good when you unfairly attack a veteran. If you want to question his opposition to the flag burning amendment fine, but to question his patriotism well let's hope that this is not indicative of your campaign strategy. I hope that you are a bigger man than that. Just to let you know, I served four years in the Army and I respect Senator Harkin as a veteran even if I may not agree with some of his positions.

:: DM1 7/16/2002 10:41:00 PM [+] ::
...

I see that blood is in the water. King George is feeling the heat. To all concerned; "Beware of your heads my friends!" Enemies of the State! The conservatives are not about to roll over. Let's hope that all of you have the stomach for the coming battle

:: DM1 7/16/2002 10:38:00 PM [+] ::
...

It's time for republicans to stand up an say, "The emperor has no clothes!" Subtract 9/11 from the ledger and the Bush Adminstration's record is dubious at best. Like many companies with the inability to truly be profitable, the Bush team has resorted to leveraging 9/11 to cover it's "losses". Folks are always talking about selecting the "best qualified". Well that maxim sure was buried by the results of the 2000 election. What has resulted is what you get when someone who is appointed to the presidency is wholly unqualified. One last thing with all of the issues facing Bush and the U.S. how did Bush find time to read "BIAS" by Bernie Goldberg? I would have been more reassured if he had been reading Sun Tzu's "The Art of War". Just a few observations from a disgusted REP!

:: DM1 7/01/2002 01:06:00 AM [+] ::
...