« Fred Does Jimmy | Main | A Note From Monica »

August 28, 2007



What a fag Gittn dick in an Idaho bathroom your boy pleaded guilty as another liar resigns



Electricalcheck Pete

There's something about the media coverage of this event that bothers me. The statements of the officer and Senator have not been published in full. Also, the fact that Senator Craig voted against same sex marriage might have made him a target of radical activist groups. Some might say the Senator's comments don't pass the " smell test ". Methinks the mainstream coverage stinks(a.k.a. "smells like lib bias").

M. Vick

I am appalled by the coarse language on this blog! Some of my dogs had more couth than this.


I fail to see how you can find liberal media bias in the coverage of this story. Is it that Democrats' sex acts should be crowed about from sea to sea, but when Republicans' sex acts (in this case, true deviancy: solicitation of anonymous sex in a toilet stall) are reported, it must be because the media is biased?


Oh and repubs didnt spend billions too find out about
Biilys sordid cigar and dress. LIARS SCUM and droppin like the rat flies they are!!!!!!!! Semper Fi.! .NIEL

Chuck in Albany

Okay Jack .. That's enough funny business (Niel and Queequeg).


Jack Flynn

The wisest thing the Demos can do is keep their mouths shut, (which seems to be what they are doing for the moment), and let the RePubs clean their own house. But it is unlikely Harry Reid can keep his mousy mouth shut for long. What gets in my craw is the precious time wasted on this crappola while our Nation hangs on the edge of the abyss with momentous decisions to be made. In fact, it is infuriating.
Maybe what they need in Congress are two flaming transexuals, (one for each party), to act as whipping boys/girls for the rest of the lunatics up there. Then perhaps, they wouldn't be so predisposed to worrying about the sexual inclinations of their members and they can get down to the business for which they were elected.
That is all I have to say, or have said on the matter, Chuck.


But where's the real news in this story? A politician hanging out in toilets? This is shocking to who? What the guy did is indictable, sure, but where's the news?

Monica, as you seem to have a certain religious propensity, let's put it this way. A Christian may sin, and sin knowingly. Does that mean he wants his sin made legal, even unto matrimony? You can call this Republican a hypocrite for wanting his sodomy and eating it too (if you'll pardon the expression.) You can even call him a pervert. But you can't call him an idiot pervert. Unlike the idiots, he, like the Romans, at least understands the difference between private impulses and society's needs. Call it the upside of hypocrisy, something the English still haven't managed to educate Americans with.

Chuck in Albany

First and last thought on this Craig thing.

I think I get Gringoman's point. I suppose an official could understand that one's personal unwholesome propensity is not something that should be inflicted on society as a whole. That said, how convenient it is to deny something in public that one secretly lusts for in private, when it isn't something very popular among your constituents.

Beyond that, a senator hanging out in the men's room? That is downright creepy. Is there anything these people haven't done yet, in order to shock us? What's left, they start finding dead bodies buried in the backyard of some major figure? Devil worship, what?

It makes one long for the time when they just use to take graft or get caught by the wife with the busty showgirl. Imagine being elected Senator and then you say to yourself... hmm, I think I'll go hang out in the men's room. Do I recall a time when we would actually use to look up to these people?

And yes, we have so much more important business than this.

Next subject, Monica ....



I just don't see what this guy was denying in public that he secretly lusts for. Aside, of course, from this particular creepy malfeasance, which is now a legal issue for him. Of course he'll deny something that may end his career in politics. Maybe he has, for those who've followed him closely. I just don't see it right here. And while he may be a pervert but at least not an idiot pervert, that was meant strictly in the sense that he does not appear to be the type of perv who's become so unhinged that he wants society to respect, embrace and even legalize his perversions. Those kind generally run wirh the Dems. Otherwise, he was clearly an idiot for prowling public toilets like a common---instead of an uncommon--low-life. As for Monica's list.....

Voted YES on constitutional ban of same-sex marriage. (Jun 2006)

* Voted NO on adding sexual orientation to definition of hate crimes. (Jun 2002)

* Voted NO on expanding hate crimes to include sexual orientation. (Jun 2000)

* Voted YES on prohibiting same-sex marriage. (Sep 1996)

* Voted NO on prohibiting job discrimination by sexual orientation. (Sep 1996)

Yes, you can make the case that doing a public toilet tap dance is not what one expects from a pol with a record of the above measures. But a lawyer---which so many of them are---can easily point out that there is no conflict of interest here. Now, if he revealed a desire to "marry" the guy in the adjoining john, okay. That would indeed make him a hard-core shyster. But where's the evidence? In fact, he might even be sincerely repulsed by the idea of "marriage" here. That would be evidence that he's really a Republican sodomist, not a Democratic sodomite.

Of course, all this is just going by a press report, by its very nature superficial if not banal. Getting the real story might---but what's "the real story" got to do with politics?

ps Is there any reason why our Monica didn't mention this perv's connection to the dynamic Mitt Romney campaign?


What an intellegent response gringo man, the hippocracy in politics for the last 42 years is an amazing thing we are forced to pick from a few when there are so many that could actually be honest and try to help my America back to the strength it once
knew not to say it is weak bt no means but leading by
example is the only way to put lady libertys' feet back on the path to sainthood. God bless America and
lets pray for honest and wise leaders. no matter the party affiliation......SEMPER FI....Niel

Chuck in Albany


You said: "I just don't see what this guy was denying in public that he secretly lusts for."

Well, I'm pretty surprised for you to say that. I would think the answer is fairly hard to miss. His public policy agenda appears directly at odds with his private behavior, even though you say that it does not represent a conflict of interest. Without the fine tuning of pointing to specific reasoning for voting that way -- which I happen to agree with, by the way -- I would think most Pro-Gay groups would have scored Craig as not in keeping with their policy agenda. Assuming that Craig is in fact gay, or as I have characterized him "secretly lusting for in private" what he denies in public, do you not see this as part and parcel of his voting record? I think to separate the two is not in keeping with the agendas of opposing teams, as it were. And I think what you are saying is spin, frankly. I do not mean that with any sort of disrespect. I just don't see how what Craig does in Congress fits in with his behavior in a public bathroom (..Granted, IF you believe what the cop said). Unlike some here, I would fully expect this kind of low life behavior from men of the persuasion we are discussing and see no reason to candy-coat the observation so as to appear "open-minded" and embracing of all ways of life. (.. I leave that to the multi-faceting Mr Flynn/Niel, who has inordinate amounts of time in his schedule for such things -- heh heh). To me, asking what this has to do with politics is kind of like ignoring the 800 lb. Gorilla in the room. Further, I do think there is a hair's worth of difference between a sodomist and a sodomite when it comes down to the choice of condom. So, there you have it.

Chuck in Albany

Whoops! ... correction: The last two lines should have read ....

"Further, I do NOT think there is a hair's worth of difference between a sodomist and a sodomite when it comes down to the choice of condom. So, there you have it."

Hey, what's going on? No preview info for the Sept 1st show?
I feel so naked -- like blogging without a net ....

Chuck in Albany

Good Morning, here is a NEW feature on MonicaMemo.com ....

We try to predict what Monica SHOULD be talking about on her Saturday
program. Feel free to chime in at any time with your forecasts, opinions,
ruminations, and blog-speak:

1) Even Paris Hilton gets more time than Nifong ... the guy partially succeeds
in ruining the lives of three innocent students and their families, and gets
just ONE day in jail .........


Lawyers probably see this as a victory for their side, but they're still jealous
of Bankers who never go to jail for anything unless they make the mistake
of associating with the Clintons.

On NationalReview.com, Larry Kudlow points to the boondoggle in the
Big Easy. Nobody in the media ever seems to point out that we have spent
a grand total of $127 Billion in New Orleans (including tax relief). The entire
GDP of the state of Louisiana is only $141 billion.


Do we talk about the fact that the Bush Administration has elected to rebuild
the levies? This may be throwing good money after bad, since the new levies
will not withstand a future KATRINA-type storm any better than the old levies.
A real solution might have been to build a dike system similar to Holland,
but they rejected the idea of the $40 odd-billion price tag and the extra time
required to construct. The best government money can buy. Thanks.

Russia plans Man on Moon .... only 40 years late. Hey, but they had the idea
first, I'm sure. HA!


And last but not least ... Tony Snow resigns. Is anyone crying yet? .....


After I heard him try to justify that "Comprehensive" Immigration Reform
measure supported by the Administration, lets just say I lost my Tony Snow
Fan Club button.

Jack Flynn

This is one subject you can't drag Hillary into.
So I will.
If you are half as pretty and as omnipresent as she is when you are her age you will have won the Lotto for trillions.
She has over twenty years of political and life experience on you. She was a first rate Senator for the people of New York. She pulled a fractured marriage back together and dealt with a Lothario husband who couldn't keep his gun holstered. She saved that marriage and as a result we will now have our first Lady President who, except for her laugh, is, every bit of a lady, as you are Monica.
She, like you, is ambitious, hard hitting, embattled, undeterred, courageous and as beautiful as conditions warrant. You both have an endearing and natural laugh that takes on all shades of meaning.
If she ever did come on your show, she would walk all over you like Doris Kearns Goodwin did.
This time, however, you would more likely know that you were under attack and be ready for her.
It would be an interesting debate, i.e. if you didn't slip into that passive aggressive side of yourself and fold.
She could try on one of those, "Hillary is Satan" baseball caps and chat with you about the reasons surrounding it.

Chuck in Albany

Hey Jack, what a great idea. ... Only one problem I foresee, though. Hillary never goes on any program that would serve her up with any hard-hitting questions. She only goes for the softball interviews, the sympathizers, and members of the Liberal choir. (If I am wrong, then name one.) She's been invited on Fox a number of times and her campaign has declined all invitations. It causes one to doubt her abilities and her toughness. If she can't handle a couple potential barbed questions from a network interviewer like O'Reilly, how in God's name will she deal with the likes of Iran or Al Qaeda? Legitimate questions.

I think your characterization of Hillary is an idealized version. I don't see where the rubber meets the road as far as Hillary goes. And you say she did great things for New York? Care to point them out? She must have done them at 3am and I slept through it. I wonder what on earth you are referring to? I remember after 911 she was booed and heckled in Madison Square Garden at a gathering of New Yorkers, along with such names as Richard Gere who called for forbearance toward our enemies. Maybe the crowd had somehow confused her with Leona Helmsley. It must have been some kind of mistake, I am sure.

Going back to the "Hillary is pretty" issue .. this time, she's pretty for her age, I see. I really wonder what it is you see that I don't see. I think Monica possesses an Ethereal beauty that Hillary was not awarded in the heavenly realms. I don't think it really compares, do you? Does anybody really believe what you are saying? I do not dispute that this might be the way you experience her, but I just don't see it. I wish I did. I look at Monica and I see someone who still has the child-like spirit in her. When I look at Hillary, I see Nurse Ratched. I see fuming ambition and calculating subterfuge. I do not see the wonderful person there looking out for others best interests, and I certainly do not see a motherly figure.

In addition, I do not see how her holding her marriage together qualifies her for national office. She had everything to gain by running as Bill Clinton's wife. Why wouldn't she put up with his shennigans a while longer? She has nothing to lose and everything to gain.

Hillary is every bit the lady that Monica is? I beg to differ, Mon Freire. One of the prime qualifications of ladyship is the ability to graciously accept a gift. When Hillary was in Arkansas, some local yokels stood in a long line to meet the new Governor-elect and his "lady." They brought with them a basket of those items they grew themselves on their farm, vegetables and what-not. -- Not the most elegant of gifts, not even on the scale of what might be called "sophisticated" or hip -- but it was from the heart of these simple people. When they gave the basket to Hillary, she thanked them, and after the folks passed she turned to one of her aides and said snidely, "You see the sh*t I have to put up with?" ......... So much for the lady comment. Monica would never do this. I would bet you five bucks to your nickel, that Monica would have seen the love behind the humble gift and been touched to the point of tears. You cannot fake something like this. Either you have it or you do not. And Hillary does not.

Would Hillary walk all over Monica? Well, I'll believe that when I see it. One thing is certain. You don't bring a knife to a gun fight. If Hillary ever had enough of a pair to come on Monica's program, my guess is that Monica would give her one of the more memorable interviews of her political career. But then again, all of this is theory and will stay theory, because Hillary does not have the guts to confront any opponent on their own turf, or she would have by now. This does not speak very highly of her ability to lead, in my opinion.


A wise man once said: "CHARACTER is what we are in the dark."
Circumstantial evidence weighs heavily against Larry Craig, and Monica, being objective, is right not to defend him.
I don't know for sure if he's guilty or not of being a pervert, and making advances to the cop.
If he did, then, his principal fault is that of HYPOCRISY.
After all, homosexuality is no longer considered a crime,and we are constantly urged and forced into being tolerant and receptive towards those who are thus oriented. (In other cultures and societies, sodomites are usually in peril of losing limb and life.)
With that premise, if a man could make advances towards a woman--without harassing her--then shouldn't a gay man be free to make advances to whomever he finds attractive? BTW, I'm not into that lifestyle.
Interestingly, most of those who openly condone and support sodomy, are now yelping the loudest at Craig!
Mainly, because of his political orientation.


Charlie, NO!!

Jack Flynn

A lady to me is a lady in the living room, dynamite in the kitchen and a wh#re in the bedroom.


Democrats and Republicans view each other as mortal ememies. When a member of one side falters or falls; the other side regards it as a victory, and rejoices and celebrates.
If this country is to survive, we've got to be aware of the perils that loom, and form a united front in battling the real enemies--both within and without.
If not when the ship sinks, we're all going to go down with it.

Jack Flynn

"A wise man once said: "CHARACTER is what we are in the dark."

Yes, the character of the Republicans is clearly evident when not one of Craig's Republican friends stands by him—not to condone or defend, but to give the emotional support any friend would give another, unless he or she has committed a crime so heinous, they cannot in good conscience give him or her support of any sort.

When it comes to loyalty and friendship, "St. Peter in the Alley" seems to be the archetype the Republicans employ.

You cannot tell me that in all his years in the Senate, Craig has no friends.

Where are you, you bloody cowards?

Your character flaw is far worse than Craig's.

Jack Flynn

Did you ever see the movie: "Ship of Fools"?
I especially recommend the scene between Lee Marvin and Michael Dunn.

Unity does not mean that we must be alike and think alike. Unity simply means consensus on certain issues. Some issues require agreement. Some require dissension.

OH! The Wisdom to Know the Difference!

Chuck in Albany

Jack, if what you say is true, then unfortunately that must disqualify Hillary on several counts. Though I do recall a book written by an ex-secret service agent who claimed he once walked in on Hillary performing oral sex on Markie Post. I suppose then she probably gets a pass on your last requirement, though probably not what you had in mind.

Charlie, is this a new revelation or yours, everyone pulling together in unison? You should speak for yourself on the rejoicing aspect, when seeing others fall in the opposing party. As a Republican, I take no pleasure in seeing the other falter. It just causes me to shake my head. When mistaken policies fail and mistaken leaders appear mistaken as a result, then what joy can that bring except to the purveyors of Schadenfreude? Perhaps I might introduce you to our friend Jol who has engaged in such activities from time to time and may tend to project his own predilections in that area.

Jack Flynn

Did you say, on "Markie's post"? Markie who?
Gee, I wonder if that's where Bill got the idea.
There ought to be more oral sex in the Whitehouse. Get the Iraqi ministers over here and blow the s##it out if them. They'll live up to the benchmarks in no time.
What I want to see is a President in the Oval Office who would be willing to go down on an estranged world leader for the good of the country.
According to your report, Chuck, Hillary seems like just the gal. I guess you'll be voting for her then.

Chuck in Albany

No Jack, only a very twisted mind could construe Hillary's actions as having a positive influence on capturing my vote. Sorry to disappoint you.

And that's Markie Post, the actress. One of your colleagues. Oh, I forgot ... they took you off the A-list. My apologies.

Jack Flynn

Please Chuck,
Don't confuse a flexible, open mind with a twisted one.
Sometimes one has to screw the mind up corkscrew-like to see whats going on from a wider perspective and, granted, it might look "twisted" to more limited minds poking the bushes at ground level.
But of course, Chuck, you wouldn't include yourself among that lowly sort.
When you say that a mind is twisted, you are tacitly proclaiming that you are able to crawl right into that mind and are privy to its workings—a rare talent indeed.
You are no doubt the Magister Ludi of Monica's blog.

Keep up the good work Chuck. . . and


Good Night and Good Luck.

For myself, there is only one thing on my mind this evening. I must prepare mentally and physically for two seven inning games of Sunday morning softball. For four solid hours, I intend to strike fear into opposing pitchers and make nigh to impossible catches in the outfield.

As Carl Jung says, "One monad at a time."
In other words, Chuck, you don't have to be big, to be big.


They say that their is no honor among thieves. The same can be said of most politicians, I'm sure.
I agree that Democrats are more cultlike in their relationships, and are more reluctant to jettison their own, even when he/she is caught with blood on his/her hands.
But, how far should one go in supporting and defending someone who makes a fool of himself, and shames those with whom he's associated.
In this life, one may be lucky to get a really true friend--one that is willing to make sacrifices, or even lay down his life for you. I'm sure you're knowledgeable enough to know that most 'frends' are not real friends,though.
If you really want true friendship and loyalty, try a dog. If we treat them kindly (and in most cases, even if we don't) they seldom let us down.

No, I haven't seen "Ship of fools." But I suppose parts of it deals with unity.
I've been around long enough to know that unity doesn't mean thinking and acting alike. If so, then we would all be mere clones. Variety is, indeed, the spice of life.
Its always healthier to have a two-party or more system, though, rather than a one-party or a dictatorship. The opposing side, in some measure, helps to keep the other 'honest'.
I am not against just and fair criticism. But when it sinks to childish petulance, and puerile antics, I draw the line.
When a household is under threat, the occupants usually set aside their differences, and form a united front.
Right now, the US is faced with all sorts of enemies and problems. 9/11 momentarily shocked us, but we're now back to business, as usual.
If we think that the enemy has given up, then we're very naive, indeed. I'm sure they have bigger targets in mind. I could imagine what and where some of their intented targets would be, but I won't mention them here because I don't want to put ideas in their heads--if they don't already have them.
As the wise Franklin said: "We must all hang together (unite); or we shall all hang (on the gallows) separately."



I know enough about partisanship and human nature to realize that "everyone pulling together in unison" is sheer fantasy.
Catastrophic disasters sometimes temporarily unite people, as was exemplified when we were threatened by Hitler and Nazism. Back then, Americans were a different breed, and most were truly patriotic.
Now we have a contentious and disparate populace--made up all nationalites, cultures and sub-cultures, a good part of which nurses from the sow, but still hate Uncle Sam.
An enemy within is far more dangerous than one without.

BTW, good to see how magnanimous you are in not being elated when misfortune strikes members of the opposition. One could say you are rather unique or, perhaps, saintly.
Keep well.



Jack Flynn

George Bush finds his,(our?), enemies where he chooses. He is after Iran presently and it is likely that he will precipitate a "Gulf of Tokin" type event, or a domestic event,(on the order of the Timothy McVae handiwork in Oklahoma), before he leaves office.
But consider this:
Only 3.5 per of the insurgents come from Iran. Fifty percent of them come from guess where?
That's right, Saudi Arabia.
And it was mostly Saudis who crashed the towers.
So we should unify to defeat WHAT enemy?

Oh yeah, we know, it's the Islamo fascist terrorists who are doing it all.
What do they want anyway? Bin Laden, (another Saudi), said it. They want us off their lands, just as we don't want them on ours, blowing things up and killing our people.

Haven't we evened the score for 9/11 yet?

Georgia Tech, 222
Cumberland University, Zero.

The U.S., approx. 200,000, (including Desert Storm).
The terrorists, approx, 10,000.

Of course, we have killed scores more of their children. We are way ahead there.

Jack Flynn

Don't you fools get it. War is not a viable policy for the future. We will only defeat the blood lust enemy by doing what Ghandi and his followers did to defeat the forbidding well armed Brits. They were willing to take a beating and/or die for the cause of their freedom. They defeated guns with determination and courage. They proved across the board that winning is strictly a matter of attitude, whether you are talking about the four straight Red Sox victories against the Yankees in the 2004 playoffs or the U.S. against the terrorists, or the terrorists against the U.S..

As a nation, we have forgotten how much we have endured to get here. How many sacrifices on so many lands and oceans.
How much of our yearning for peace and family has been lost.
It is men who have created the problems because men believe that violence—capital punishment/war is the ultimate solution to everything. They prove it by their most cherished 2nd Ammendment right to hunt down and kill mother nature's creatures, for the "sport" of it. Golf, swimming, tennis is to tough for them.

Let's get down to it.

They take PLEASURE in killing and justify it, not because they and their families need the food, but excuse themselves by proclaiming self righteously, "I and my family eat what I kill". RIGHT, take it one step further. You LIKE to kill. And that is why you are unwilling to give up War, even if it is your sons and daughters you are sending to their doom. Some parents you are, you sins of b#tches.

Your wives and especially your small children know it. That is why they look at you so forlornly at times.
As long as we have to continually send our children to fight our wars, we will have failed both them and their children's future.

Jack Flynn

Steady yourself, son. Here comes the crap.



8/28/07: Bush warns: Withdrawing U.S. forces would allow Middle East take over by extremist forces & put the security of the U.S. jearpordy. Nuke holocaust danger if Iran gets nukes. http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8RA6IS80&show_article=1

8/25/07: Iran's Revolutionary Guard trying to disrupt U.S. military gains by ramping up weapons & training support for radical Shi'ite groups.

8/24/07: Why Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week Is Needed


8/22/07: Iran's military drops leaflets into Iraqi Kurdish villages calling for their immediate evacuation. Leaflets warn of impending Iranian military strikes and cleansing of the areas. http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/WTARC/2007/me_iraq_08_22.asp

8/21/07: THE West still underestimates evil of Islam - Australia & the US have been duped into believing there is a difference between the religion's moderate & radical interpretations http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22279722-2702,00.html

8/17/07: What immigration has done to Britain

8/16/07: Muslims in Iraq increasingly pressure Christians to abandon their faith or their homes using videos of actual beheadings

8/14/07: Ahmadinejad: Islam Must Rule the World - Rule of Islam only way for salvation of mankind

Jack Flynn

Where do you get all that racist crap Pete?

Americans love to hate. They would do themselves the most good if they turned the hunter/2nd Amendment freaks into the current scapegoat. The toughest battle will be the one between the last man with the gun and the unarmed citizenry.
Guns are going to go in this country and thousands, we hope not millions, will die in the battle to achieve it.

Guns are the seed and seat of terrorism in this country.
The threat from Al Quaeda pales before it.

Jack Flynn

Say you are sitting in the eating area of a mall. Three suicide terrorists arrive and spray the area with bullets, killing many hundreds because they don't stop firing and reloading until the cops come on the scene and take them out.
Rats, you left your gun at home.
Or you left it in the car.
Or you have it with you but everything is happening so fast, you don't have time to reach it.
Yes, you die, but not because you had or didn't have a gun.

Jack Flynn

The Gun Lobby's credo:

"If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns".

Once the public is relieved of its guns and hunting is permanately outlawed, the efforts of law enforcement can be aimed at criminals who still have guns. In their effort to corner and capture them, the police will uncover all sorts of habitual felons.

That would make a quick lie out of the Gun Lobby's favorite propaganda piece.

I'm reminded of the farmer in "Cold Blood". He had a
gun. Did it save him, his wife and three daughters?

They were all executed.

Am I totally against guns?
No. The states, under strict supervision could issue guns on government shooting ranges, and clay pigeon ranges, for sportsmen. The public would have the right to the best weapons and equipment available for their hobby. Without the dark side of hunting dragging them down, it could very well become a prominent sport in America, close to Nascar in scope. The best shooters would be known and respected instead of having to defend themselves as killers/slaughterers.

Teach your son to kill?
Don't be surprised when he does.

"Don't listen to them kid.
Hunting has NOTHING to do with being a man, until you reject it."

Jack Flynn

The man had two daughters, I believe, not three.

Jack Flynn

When the Magister Ludi is away, the libs will play.

You've just got to do something about Sundays Chuck.
That flaming liberal Jack is eating up this blog every time you are MIA.

Jack Flynn

I've been thinking a lot about this Craig arrest. Especially late at night. I might as well come clean. Here goes. When nobody is around, the thing I really love most is a nice stiff dick. Don't be surprised. I've been fantasizing about meeting Larry Craig in a dirty train station bathroom after my softball game and he just came from target shooting. I wait for him in the stall on the end. You know, the handicapped one. That one is the most fun. He's in the next stall tapping his foot. So I swipe my hand under to let him know he has the green light. I make him call me Hillary, you know Mama, or whatever. We both recites the kinky parts of the constitution we agree with and then, oh my .. the Big Oh is never far away. Can you imagine anything more romantic? I can't. I think homosexual sex in public restrooms should be legal. Who does it hurt? Let's decriminalize it in the first term of the new Hillary Administration.

Honk your horn if you agree. Pete might answer or maybe it will be Niel.

Fred Klein

This a family blog and no place for your gay proclivities. Do not expect me
to cover for you anymore. This kind of smut is unacceptable. - Fred



Let's cut out the rudeness and crudeness, and concentrate on the points.

I see you're a pacifist in the mold of Gandhi. His policy worked against the British, but would it have worked against the likes of Attila or Hitler?
How would you have dealt with Hitler and the Nazis?




Steyn: Misconceptions about Iraq and Vietnam
Commentary by Mark Steyn

George W. Bush gave a speech about Iraq last week, and in the middle of it he did something long overdue: He attempted to appropriate the left's most treasured all-purpose historical analogy. Indeed, Vietnam is so ubiquitous in the fulminations of politicians, academics and pundits we could really use antitrust legislation to protect us from shopworn historical precedents. But, in the absence thereof, the president has determined that we might at least learn the real "lessons of Vietnam."

"Then as now, people argued the real problem was America's presence and that if we would just withdraw, the killing would end," Mr. Bush told the Veterans of Foreign Wars convention. "Many argued that if we pulled out there would be no consequences for the Vietnamese people.... A columnist for the New York Times wrote in a similar vein in 1975, just as Cambodia and Vietnam were falling to the communists: 'It's difficult to imagine,' he said, 'how their lives could be anything but better with the Americans gone.' A headline on that story, date Phnom Penh, summed up the argument: 'Indochina without Americans: For most a better life.' The world would learn just how costly these misimpressions would be."

I don't know about "the world," but apparently a big chunk of America still believes in these "misimpressions." As the New York Times put it, "In urging Americans to stay the course in Iraq, Mr. Bush is challenging the historical memory that the pullout from Vietnam had few negative repercussions for the United States and its allies."

Well, it had a "few negative repercussions" for America's allies in South Vietnam, who were promptly overrun by the north. And it had a "negative repercussion" for the former Cambodian Prime Minister, Sirik Matak, to whom the U.S. ambassador sportingly offered asylum. "I cannot, alas, leave in such a cowardly fashion," he told him. "I never believed for a moment that you would have this sentiment of abandoning a people which has chosen liberty.... I have committed this mistake of believing in you, the Americans." So Sirik Matak stayed in Phnom Penh and a month later was killed by the Khmer Rouge, along with the best part of 2 million other people. If it's hard for individual names to linger in the New York Times' "historical memory," you would think the general mound of corpses would resonate.

But perhaps these distant people of exotic hue are not what the panjandrums of the New York Times regard as real "allies." In the wake of Vietnam, the communists gobbled up chunks of real estate all over the map, and ever closer to America's back yard. In Grenada, Maurice Bishop toppled Prime Minister Sir Eric Gairy: It was the first ever coup in the British West Indies, and in a faintly surreal touch led to Queen Elizabeth presiding over a People's Revolutionary Government. There were Cuban "advisers" all over the island, just as there were Cuban troops all over Africa.

Because what was lost in Vietnam was not just a war but American credibility.

Do the British qualify as real "allies" to the Times? The Argentine seizure of the Falkland Islands occurred because Gen. Leopoldo Galtieri had figured if the commies were getting away with all this land-grabbing, why shouldn't he get a piece of the action? If the supposed Yank superpower had no stomach to resist routine provocations from its sworn enemy, the toothless British lion certainly wouldn't muster the will for some no-account islands in the South Atlantic. "The West" as a whole was infected by America's loss of credibility.

Thanks to Margaret Thatcher, Galtieri lost his gamble, but it must have looked a surer thing in the spring of 1982, in the wake of Vietnam, and Soviet expansionism, and the humiliation of Jimmy Carter's botched rescue mission in Iran — the helicopters in the desert, and the ayatollahs poking and prodding the corpses of American servicemen on TV.

American victory in the Cold War looks inevitable in hindsight. It didn't seem that way in the 1970s. And, as Iran reminds us, the enduring legacy of the retreat from Vietnam was the emboldening of other enemies. The forces loosed in the Middle East bedevil to this day, in Iran, and in Lebanon, which Syria invaded shortly after the fall of Saigon and after its dictator had sneeringly told Henry Kissinger: "You've betrayed Vietnam. Someday you're going to sell out Taiwan. And we're going to be around when you get tired of Israel."

President Hafez Assad understood something that too many Americans didn't. Then as now, the antiwar debate is conducted as if it's only about the place you're fighting in: Vietnam is a quagmire, Iraq is a quagmire, so get out of the quagmire. Wrong. The "Vietnam war" was about Vietnam if you had the misfortune to live in Saigon. But if you lived in Damascus and Moscow and Havana, the Vietnam war was about America: American credibility, American purpose, American will. For our enemies today, it still is.

Osama bin Laden made a bet — that, pace the T-shirt slogan, "These Colors Do Run": They ran from Vietnam, and they ran from the helicopters in the desert, and from Lebanon and Somalia . And they will run from Iraq and Afghanistan, because that is the nature of a soft plump ersatz-superpower that coils in the fetal position if you prick its toe. Even Republicans like Virginia Sen. John Warner seem peculiarly anxious to confirm the bin Laden characterization.

Depending on which Americans you ask, "Vietnam" can mean entirely different things. To the New York Times and the people it goes to dinner parties with, it had "few negative repercussions." And it's hardly surprising its journalists should think like that when its publisher, Pinch Sulzberger, in a commencement address last year that's almost a parody of parochial Boomer narcissism, was still bragging and preening about his generation's role in ending the war three decades later.

Joseph Nye, Dean of Harvard's Kennedy School of Government (apparently some sort of elite institution for which people pay many thousands of dollars to receive instruction from authoritative scholars such as Mr. Nye), told National Public Radio last week: "After we got out of Vietnam, the people who took over were the North Vietnamese. And that was a government which preserved order." That's so, if by "preserved order," you mean "drove a vast human tide to take to the oceans on small rickety rafts and flee for their lives."

But, if you're not a self-absorbed poseur like Mr. Sulzberger, "Vietnam" is not a "tragedy" but a betrayal. The final image of the drama — the U.S. helicopters lifting off from the embassy roof with desperate locals clinging to the undercarriage — is an image not just of defeat but of the shabby sell-outs necessary to accomplish it.

At least in Indochina, those who got it so horribly wrong — the Kerrys and Fondas and all the rest — could claim they had no idea what would follow. To do it all over again in the full knowledge of what followed would turn an aberration into a pattern of behavior.

And as the Sirik Mataks of Baghdad face the choice between staying and dying or exile and embittered evenings in the new Iraqi emigre restaurants of London and Los Angeles, who will be America's allies in the years ahead? Professor Bernard Lewis' dictum would be self-evident: "America is harmless as an enemy and treacherous as a friend."

- Mark Steyn is a nationally syndicated columnist.

Jack Flynn

The spammer is at it again, posting his homosexual obsession in my name.
I thought he had turned over a new leaf, when, as of late, he began posting quasi-normally as "Chuck in Albany". I even tried to engage him in a civilized manner until today when he posted that disgusting piece above in my name.

When I posted my sincere condolences to Monica he posted the following:
Please excuse the low class joke Jack Flynn has tried to make above at your expense. When his wife drops dead unexpectedly, we'll be sure to remind him of this indiscretion. Maybe someone will flatten his thick nose at the bar next weekend when he opens his big mouth again. Never can tell what will happen. He really is the worst kind of low life scum who ever lived. I just had a vision that he might have a lot of bad luck very soon. “

That he would desecrate a tragic event in a woman’s life to get at another person is beneath contempt.
The coward signed that post “Buddy Reardon”, which is the name of the protagonist in my novel “Buddy Reardon in Pursuit of the Lone Ranger” which was published in 2002.

The spammer, (a name too good for him), also posts sometimes as “Fred Klein”, a name he usurped from a legitimate poster who quickly stopped posting on here when he saw what the spammer was doing.
And he posts as Semper Fie “Niel” whom he pretends he is at odds with, and he accuses me of being both Niel and Fred.
This is one sick cookie we have on here. He respects nobody and has no boundaries.
If you have responded in a serious vein to “Chuck in Albany”, he has taken you for a ride as well. Join the club.

Jack Flynn

Yes, American credibility was lost in Vietnam, but not because we "cut and ran". Our credibility was lost because bad judgment,(the domino theory), took us there in the first place, and the great "Gulf of Tonkin" LIE kept us there.
Yes, Those colors did start running in Vietnam and they continued to run with the Kennedy and King assassinations, Reagan's nasty little wars in Latin America, and they are currently running to inkblot status thanks to the war criminal presently residing in the Whitehouse.
You are blind Pete. You are blind to the death and destruction GWB, backed by a cowardly congress, has
Don't you think we have gotten even for 9/11 by now?
How much more of the world do we have to destroy to prove we aren't wimps.
The bridges are falling, the roads are crumbling, the waters are polluted, the food is going bad, people are dying because of poor healthcare, crime is rampant in the streets, prisons are bursting at the seams, education is sub standard for most, and our constitutional rights are being usurped by an autocratic administration.
And you think our problem is credibility?
Hundreds of thousands have died already. And you want how many more to die for our f#cking credibility?
Stuff your credibility Pete.
You have lost your moral compass, as has the U.S.

We should all be alarmed and ashamed at what our government is doing in our name.

Ike was right. The military/industrial complex is running the show. Murder, is being committed in the name of freedom, and we the people, swamped with false pride and bereft of our national heritage, are fighting amongst ourselves for the remaining crumbs.

But no doubt GWB thanks you Pete, for those fine, "enabling" words.


Jack, I don't believe you are a real poster. Have you ever considered seeing a psychiatrist to treat your schizophrenic condition?

Jack Flynn

Yes, I have seen a few psychologists in my life.
One said that I was obsessive compulsive.
He was correct.

I went to another one so I could learn to stop analyzing.
He said, "Just stop."
I did.

Haven't needed one since.

If the Shoe Fits

Obsessive huh? Obsessed with homosexuality is my guess

GET HELP you sicko - before they find the bodies

Jack Flynn

I doubt very much that you have seen a psychologist. Your "quiet life of desperation" is designed to keep you in familiar territory where everything is quiet and uninterrupted, where as long as you know the answers as well as the questions, you are safe.
The answers glide through your mind like frisbees and you own none of it.

Where is your voice in all of that, Pete?

Jack Flynn

Are we getting warm?

If the Shoe Fits

You old toothless Fag. Go analyze your Fked Up Alcoholic family then come back here and talk about Pete.

What a PRICK !

The comments to this entry are closed.