As we enter the homestretch of what I consider the most important off-year election in American history, I find my head is abuzz with random thoughts.
For instance, I don’t know how many tax dollars the State Department wasted sending Imam Feisal Rauf off to visit various Muslim nations, but I would have preferred it if, instead, the money had been spent on ammo and body armor for our troops in Afghanistan. For one thing, Rauf is no more a moderate than Barack Obama is or ever has been. Rauf has denied that Hamas is a terrorist organization, claims that the U.S. brought about 9/11 by its foreign policy and has refused to say where the $100 million for the Ground Zero mosque is coming from, although I, for one, would be happy to take a guess.
Frankly, I don’t understand why it is that we keep trying so hard to reach out to Muslim nations. Those are the places where honor killings and female mutilations are encouraged and where people even suspected of adultery are stoned to death in the public square. It’s like trying to reach out to the ninth century. I, personally, believe that reaching out to the Muslim world is better left to the military than to the diplomats.
The odd thing is that we seem to spend most of our treasure and spill most of our blood defending Muslims. We defended the Croatian Muslims against the Serbs; the Kuwaiti Muslims against Iraqi Muslims, the Iraqi Muslims against Saddam Hussein, and the Afghani Muslims against the Taliban. How odd that I see an obvious pattern that Imam Rauf seems to have missed entirely.
In their insistence that the Muslims had every legal right to build the 13-story mosque at Ground Zero, nitwits Obama, Bloomberg and Pelosi, couldn’t resist insulting conservatives and every other decent American. Leave it to an arrogant liberal politician to assume that the rest of us can’t quite grasp the subtle nuances of the First Amendment. The truth, of course, is that we know the Constitution better than they do. All you need to do is to compare the decisions rendered by Scalia, Thomas and Roberts with those of Souter, Ginsburg and O’Connor. Unlike the liberals, we know it says nothing about the separation of church and state. We also don’t confuse having the legal right to do something with having a moral right. Which, in a nutshell, pretty well describes the essential difference between liberals and conservatives.
Much was made of Press Secretary Robert Gibbs going on a news show a while back and admitting that the Democrats might possibly lose control of the House in November. But as I recall, long before he stuck his foot in his mouth, Nancy Pelosi boasted that passing ObamaCare would very likely cost Democrats several seats in Congress, but that it was the right thing to do. But in terms of sheer unadulterated chutzpah, even her remark didn’t approach Henry Waxman’s contention that “It could be a good thing to get rid of the blue dog Democrats.”
Now, God knows I’d love to get rid of the blue ones, the red ones, the black ones, the yellow and even the purple polka dot ones. But inasmuch as the Democrats all hung together to push through Obama’s demented agenda, I’d love to know exactly which of his dear colleagues Waxman longs to see teetering on the edge of political extinction.
I wonder if it has occurred to Waxman and Pelosi that even though they have safe districts and will have no problem winning re-election, unless 216 other Democrats emerge victorious in November, she loses the speakership along with the keys to the jumbo jet and Henry will no longer garner more face time on CNN than Wolf Blitzer, and will have to resort to his earlier claim to fame, as the least photogenic member of Congress.
A while back, while watching the NY Yankees play the Texas Rangers on TV, I saw George and Laura Bush at the game, sharing a box with Rangers president and Hall of Fame pitcher Nolan Ryan. It was just about the time that Mrs. Obama was blowing a ton of our tax dollars vacationing in Spain, while pretending it was official business by having her photo taken with Spain’s royal couple. The IRS may buy her story, but I don’t. That vacation came just prior to the vacation in Martha’s Vineyard, which came just before the vacation in Florida.
It occurred to me, and not for the first time, that one of the downsides of electing a married man is that we wind up with a First Lady who got the job for no better reason than that she married some guy who, when they said that anyone could be elected president of the United States, set out to prove they meant absolutely anyone.
In the future, I propose that we change the system so that no matter what sort of arrogant jackass winds up in the Oval Office, Laura Bush would always be the First Lady.