LEFT IN THE MAINSTREAM
Re: R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr.’s The Hippies’ Last Hurrah

Mr. Tyrrell Jr. posits in his post, “The Hippies’ Last Hurrah,” that “As I say, there is something familiar in the air this spring.” Yes, there is. How familiar it is to hear his YAF petite bourgeois dismissal of a world gone mad or at least left. As uncomfortable as it may be Jr., the hippies won this debate a long time ago, in the ’60s. It’s no surprise that your aging side of the aisle has gotten us into the same old mess your godfathers did before. What has changed is that the left is the mainstream. Furthermore, we don’t revere these putative leaders you have thrown up at us. We are taking care of business ourselves. Even Time magazine could see that. So, when you wake up from your fantasy America, turn on your computer and pass the whole wheat bread.
— Brad Parker
Valley Democrats United, President
Progressive Democrats of Los Angeles, Vice President
Progressive Caucus of the CDP, Officer at Large
DSCC of the CDP, Delegate, 42nd AD
CDP, Voter Services Committee

Yes, by all means talk about illicit drugs, promiscuous sex and throw in rock while you are on a roll. Just don’t mention the fact that you were on the wrong side of history on civil rights, equal rights, the Vietnam war (those domino’s never did fall like you claimed they would if we pulled out) and the environmental movement and still are. The main failure of the boomer generation continues to be YOU! We let self-gratification morph into a profit at-all-costs and damn the social consequences. But thanks to W’s complete incompetence we might get that fixed too. Thanks for tying your ships to that dead weight. Hope you enjoyed the freebies while they were handed out. Neo-cons are not just dead in the water, they are approaching the bottom of the ocean. History has passed you by again.
— Joseph E. Conroy

Tyrrell is reasonably clever. He acts like he is making a case for the demise of both the 60’s left and right. However, it is mainly a list of the left, with unpleasant emotional phrases to describe them. He says how bad the Clinton years were without giving any facts. However, he doesn’t mention habeas corpus. He doesn’t mention the breaking of international law He doesn’t mention how Cheney and W broke domestic law and tried to subvert the judicial system. He doesn’t mention how we have lost another war (ask Petraeus). And he ignores that we have no international respect left. He does mention Russ Limbaugh. If there is any intellectual honesty in the article, I don’t see it.
— Alan Shapiro

Flop. Flop. Is that the thrashing of a fish on its last breath on the deck? Nope, it is Mr. Tyrrell, Jr. expending his last blasts of vindictiveness towards “hippies.” Surprise — some of us are cleverly disguised as annuity millionaires these days. We cut our hair, shower, shave, advise our children and grandchildren against health risks of indiscriminate sex and — teach them to respect and defend the concepts of a constitutional democracy. We mix it up right alongside you and your cronies. You just don’t notice. Remember the old saying: “Give them enough rope to hang themselves”? Um … I think there is enough rope now. Cheney and Bush brought in a whole motherlode — not the hemp you smoke, rather, the hemp you hang a political party with. See you at the town square.
— Karin McKenna

GILMORE FOR PRESIDENT
Re: Melanie Harmon’s Lower Tier Troubles:

As an occasional contributor to your fine publication and a consultant to Jim Gilmore’s presidential campaign, I must say I was surprised to read Melanie Harmon’s rather panicky piece about My Guy and the state of our efforts to date. While we appreciate the concern, I would remind dear Melanie and your readers that the Governor has been in this for just over one month, unlike others who have been gearing up for years (and in one particular case, a lifetime). Relax, Melanie…your “analysis” notwithstanding, I am happy to report that the water is just fine in the Gilmore pool, thank you very much.

While I’m at it, I must urge your readers to start each and every day with a visit to www.gilmoreforpresident.com and to join us in our effort to represent the Republican wing of the Republican party.

Warmest regards,
— Christian Josi
Communications Consultant
Gilmore for President

HAS RUDY LOST IT?
Re: Philip Klein’s Giuliani’s Gaffe:

Rudy had my support all the way to the part about the public financing of death. With that comment, he lost me for good. Time to Republican shop! We all need to be praying for a Ronald Reagan conservative, but I’m not convinced that one exists. While I like Mitt, he is just too nice a guy to compete with the Clinton septic tank, slime machine and I fear that they will eat him alive. And God help America if we wake up one morning to the tune of president elect Hillary Clinton!
— Jim L
East Sandwich, MA

Far from the “biggest blunder of his nascent presidential campaign,” this may be where Giuliani picks up the support of folks with brains who are fed up with tiresomely canned statements often tantamount to lies.

In this case, RG responds to a question: “So you support taxpayer money or public funding for abortions in some cases?” with “… if that [is] the status of the law, then I would, yes.”

That is the status of the law. What could be clearer?

Klein implies that every Republican candidate has a duty to appear to be as conservative as the most conservative Republican, or nearly so, even if that candidate has to lie.

As for Klein’s claim that “it would mean that the government would have to provide poor people with access to firearms,” one can only wonder where his editors were today. The right is to keep and bear arms, not to have access to arms.
— Carolyn Carson

Great article Mr. Klein. Rudy sure managed to receive a lot of coverage on this one. As long as he wasn’t promoting abortion, he was still viable. Now, it looks like he’s jumped the shark. So, Lisa Fabrizio, Ken Shreve, et al., I’m off the Rudy band wagon, and on board for Fred, even though he hasn’t formally announced, though now, it looks like he will, which is a big difference from where we were several weeks ago. After all, we can’t really support someone for POTUS who isn’t actually running, can we (Newt comes to mind)? IMHO, Rudy had the most potential of the three, Rudy, McCain, and Romney, until this fiasco. Now, Fred better run, or we might as well not have a candidate if we intend to put the wood to Hillary.

Just a side note, Dick Morris mentioned in one of his recent articles he wrote for NewsMax that it would be Hillary/Obama. I believed this from the very beginning of Obama’s candidacy, even maybe that the Clintons were behind his effort. So, just in case Morris is right, and Fred loses, I’m getting my bags packed for Australia.
— Mike Showalter
Austin, Texas

Since Giuliani seems to think a constitutional right warrants public funding, I’m wondering, at what point in his prospective presidency would enact the program to ensure that everyone who wants a firearm has one?

Unfortunates for Giuliani, a constitutional right does not require dunning the public to support my desires. The major problem with the idiotic left (and Giuliani is a full fledged member) is they think we have to fund everyone’s desires so they can exercise their rights, or that we must establish some sort of Federal/State/Local government charity. The Constitution, actually, allows exactly the opposite.

It has generally been agreed that Roe v. Wade was a decision that was created out of whole cloth. It was anti-constitutional in its effect and intent. If “America’s Mayor” wants to get the Republican nod, he’d better clean up his act, or reassume the label that actually describes him — Democrat.
— Richard Hardison

Friends, we are now starting to see the deconstruction of the Rudy Giuliani’s candidacy. And as time moves closer to the actual primaries, “America’s mayor” is going to have to explain more and more his liberal social positions. And as he tries to square the circles of illegal immigration, gun control, and abortion, Rudy will be hung by his own words — just like he was on the issue of government funding of abortions.

Perhaps the best scenarios for Giuliani to win the presidency are 1) via a third party or 2) a GOP primary filled with so many conservatives that the vote will be fragmented. As neither of these seem feasible, look for Rudy to settle for VP nomination or a high cabinet post.
— Peter Skurkiss
Stow, Ohio

I think he was blind-sided and yet again by the annoying media, no more so than Dana Bash, a typical radical liberal.

Unfortunately, it those in the media that care about abortion, more than any other topic, including the war on terror, which in these days is why we are going to elect a leader who will stand strong against our enemies.

The media is all to happy to point out to conservatives that Giuliani is pro-choice; and that is because they want his “base” not support him.

Can you believe what they would be saying if this was a democrat who was pro-life; they wouldn’t nag this person time and time again but celebrate this persons’ view.

My opinion, is that Giuliani has a broad support among all parties, and it’s driving the media crazy.
— Jean Sember
Hawthorne, New Jersey

From the standpoint of Mayor Rudy winning a GOP primary, this may be a large mistake. From the standpoint of the life, times, and doings of Mayor Rudy, it should be no great revelation.

Mayor Rudy may, in fact, have been a good Mayor of New York City. He may have beliefs in harmony with conservatives regarding prosecution of criminals, fiscal discipline, and general foreign policy.

He is decidedly 180 degrees out of phase with conservatives from the standpoint of abortion, gun control laws, gay rights issues, border control and illegal alien amnesty, growth of government issues, and to some extent entitlements.

Rudy may be a good President, or he may not. He might be able to beat Hillary, or not. There is one thing that is sure, certain, and incontrovertibly true, Rudy is NOT a conservative. He has never been a conservative. He never will be a conservative. Vote as you wish. Advocate for the candidate of your choice. Just don’t try to seriously tell me that I, a conservative first and foremost, should back Mayor Rudy’s quest for his own holy grail.
— Ken Shreve

Giuliani’s recent statements were not a gaffe of blunder, in the sense of erroneously saying something he doesn’t believe. The statements were simply Giuliani making clear his position and intentions.

He wants to reach into your wallet to pay for your neighbor’s abortion. It’s that simple.
— Byron Keith

I feel some sympathy for these candidates trapped by years-old sound bites. I’ve changed my mind so many times — and particularly in the last ten years — that I’d hate to find myself sitting in the hot seat, trying to square what I said in 1987 with something I said in 1997 and something else again in 2007…
— Robert Nowall
Cape Coral, Florida

You’re advocating we elect another Bill Clinton who had to stick his finger in the air before he made any decisions. Giuliani’s appeal is precisely his honesty.
— A conservative Christian from New York

ARE WE ALONE?
Re: Tom Bethell’s The Anxious Search: Are We Alone?:

Tom Bethell’s essays are always a treat, but I have a slightly different take on why secularists yearn to meet an extraterrestrial. Like the beliefs of the ancient Greek Stoics, secularism is a grim philosophy; hope and joy are scarce commodities within their belief system and extraterrestrials would be like gods or, at the least, angels — they could provide the answers that lead to hope.

Consider the fact secularists believe they come from nothing, live a few brief decades and then return to nothing. Even their beloved creation myth, the theory of evolution, casts scorn on their philosophy. According to evolution, the “fittest” in “survival of the fittest” are those who produce the most children; there is no other definition of “fitness” according to evolutionary biologists. And who nowadays produces the most children? Why it’s those misguided religious folks, not the culturally advanced and sophisticated secularists.

Charles Darwin, in his book The Descent of Man, thought that material progress and intellectual achievements represented biological “fitness” and he naturally placed Caucasians, particularly Northern Europeans, at the pinnacle of the evolutionary ladder. But, 150 years later, the secular societies of Northern Europe are rapidly on their way to cultural and genetic extinction. And, if you pride yourself on your ability to recognize truth no matter how unpleasant, realizing you and your fellow secularists are being voted off the evolutionary island is not a happy thought. Being considered the least “fit” to genetically survive is an unacknowledged but heavy blow to the ego.

If they have the technical ability to visit here or even to contact us, it’s assumed extraterrestrials are intellectually superior beings. Certainly they would know of other civilizations in the vast cosmos. Just the fact of their existence would acknowledge the truth of the secularists’ belief system. ET’s would certainly be secular in their outlook and would confirm the eventual triumph of scientific rationalism over religious superstition, or so it would seem. Although they totally deny it, the eternal questions of why are we here and where do we come from are also important to secularists and there is the hope that extraterrestrials with their advanced scientific knowledge possess the answers.
— Patrick Skurka
San Ramon, California

Perhaps Carl Sagan wasn’t mistaken, but we simply haven’t seen “them” yet?

Has it ever occurred to those who’d deny the possibilities of outer-space beings or visitors that, in their technology-advanced sphere, they may have perfected invisibility, ‘n we simply haven’t seen them yet?

Despite the Dobsons and biblical types, rest assured, my options are open.

Wide open, even.
— Geoff Brandt

Perhaps it’s better not to find extraterrestrials. Were we to do so, leftists would work overtime to subject America to alien control.
— David Govett
Davis, California

In the words of Lucy Van Pelt, or at least as close as I can remember them, “If there were intelligent life out there, it would surely have contacted me.”
— Robert Nowall
Cape Coral, Florida

POLITICALLY CORRECT
Re: Peter Hannaford’s Harry Reid’s Banana Peel:

Let’s hope your column is correct. Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Chuckie Schumer, et al. give me a gigantic case of heartburn every time I see one of their dyspeptic faces on television. In earlier times in this country, a mere 60 years or so ago, they would have been run out of Washington as traitors. Today, they preen before the cameras, spouting their claptrap for all to hear.

If they really are stupid enough to pass a bill defunding the Iraq war, the election of 2008 will determine for me whether this country is really worth defending anymore. I’m a retired naval officer, who is currently wondering if this country still has the ‘right stuff’.
— R. Goodson
Vero Beach, Florida

I hope Peter Hannaford is correct that Reid and ilk will wind up on their worthless keisters not just because they are such loathsome and disgusting creatures but for the future of Western civilization their philosophy must be rejected but I wonder. In retrospect the Republicans surprising and overwhelming takeover of Congress in ’94 while it was the right and honorable thing for the country may have in the long run hurt the future of the West. Up till then the Democrats while definitely left wing and anti American values in its total makeup still seemed to support Western values at the end of the day even if it was often a close call. After ’94 the extreme part of the party and the media were just so angry that their birthright control of Congress had been taken away from them the Levins, Kennedys, Kerrys etc. blew off any pretense of supporting constitutional procedures, traditions, and means of obtaining power or that is regaining it. Since then their reason for existing is to oppose Bush and our government even if it means contradicting themselves over and over again on positions and demonizing Bush and any idea of American values. Regaining power and the perks is now the only thing that matters to Democrats and their allies in the media who are more often than not former members of prior Democratic administrations.
— Jack Wheatley

Last Nov I was very much against the way the war was being fought. So if I had been asked if I was happy with the way it was going I would have said NO, but that did not mean I would want to cut and run. I just did not think enough was being done to win, now it looks like more is being done and I am happier.

The Democrat party has got it all wrong and are looking at MSM polls that ask the questions so they get the answers they want. You cannot do a YES or NO answer on the war. I don’t think you can trust the Democrat party to protect America.
— Elaine Kyle

I cannot even begin to tell you how dismayed I am with this taxpaying visit of General Pelosi. It is in my book a treasonous act and should be punished. It is playing right in the hands of our enemies and I honestly do not understand why she is doing this. Well I do understand: the democrats in congress have been undermining this President from the beginning.

I know that I am not alone in this and that there are millions of people out there on both sides of the aisle, who agree with me.

My question to you is, can we as the people, file charges against the Speaker of the House? I am bloody serious with this. I have the feeling that, we as the people, have been abused over and over by dishonest politicians in DC and this got to stop!
— Regina Jaegermann

GET WELL WISHES
Re: Jay D. Homnick’s Oil the President’s Men:

The World Trade Towers were an excellent target for terrorist attack long before the previous two administrations of President’s Clinton and Bush. When the 9-11 men saw that they could injure the American Eagle with its own birds, because the USA was and still is weak toward international brutality, all they needed was a little luck.

President Bush’s failure to rebuild the Trade Towers (for future attack targeting), or his inability to immediately rescue New Orleans, a city built on dangerous, poverty stricken sands, in love with the security of casinos and political might, rather than building proper dikes, have little to do with the $3-$4 gas. Gas prices are a result of our dependence on energy from people who hate what we sometimes think we are, free and liberally open to others, and who found a spectacular way to increase the size of their coffers by having stooges blow up a national symbol.

The shame of this country does not lie in oil profits as much as it lies in the timid souls, sheltered by their constitutional shields, who criticize without respite the men and women making daily the life and death decisions for our nation. I will continue to place my trust in the idea of freedom for all men, even at the small expense of my paying the free world’s lowest price for gas.

I will give Mr. Homnick the benefit of doubt that he had some bad chicken before he wrote this unamusing and wrong-headed article. I am hopeful that he gets better soon.
— Duane Davis
Zimmerman, Minnesota

I’m afraid Jay is right. President Bush has been a disaster for the conservative movement and our nation. It’s not only oil prices but his blunders in Iraq that have cost us. He tried to be the nice guy, the consensus builder, when in actuality, he was hiding his own incompetence to address the problems facing us. Yeah, the stock market is rising , some people are making money, yet Europe is outstripping us in that respect now. The worst part is that the democrats are worse than him, so this nation has no one that can pull us out of this and restore this nation to what it was even 6 years ago. I’ve defended Bush and the Republicans in the local rag but it’s getting harder and harder to do so. The radicals are wrong and in full howl but when you have no ammunition to fend off the barbarian hordes, you get overrun. Like Rome being sacked by the Vandals, thanks to Bush, we might face the same consequences.
— Pete Chagnon

I TOLD YOU
Re: Edmund Dantes’s letter (under “It Won’t Be Pretty”) in Reader Mail’s Pelosi Wins Recount:

Hate to sound like that proverbial “broken record,” but I again marvel at the insight, lucidity and candor of your illustrative letter-writers, Mr. Dantes among them.

So often they transcend what your columnists offer, especially those who suffer from intolerant zealotry and terminal tunnel-vision.
Good stuff.
— frost

BACK TO THE SOURCE
Re: Ben Stein’s Terror in Our Midst:

A big thank you to Ben Stein for “Terror in Our Midst.” These data are easy to track but aren’t tracked. Makes me wonder if the liberals care about the ‘hoods their policies have created.
— Dale Brethower

THE SONG IN MY HEART
Re: Patrick O’Hannigan’s Carolina on My Mind:

In Patrick O’Hannigan’s article “Carolina on My Mind,” he quotes a line from a unnamed song by Front Range. Would it be possible for Mr. O’Hannigan to identify the name of the song? Thank you.
— Sam Samuels

Patrick O’Hannigan:
Mr. Samuels is inquiring about the Front Range song, “Absence Makes the Heart Grow Fonder.”