Have Brains?

by Bob Parks

Call it opposition research or sadomasochism: sometimes I enjoy listening to or reading the opinions of the left. Now while I’d admit it can sometimes be quite annoying, it can also be entertaining. Especially because some of these people are convinced they are the informed, the enlightened, the morally superior, and yet at times so out of it.

The Blind Leading The Blind

On the liberal blog “TPMCafe”, I found this gem….

“Jan 27, 2006 -- 08:53:56 PM EST

“On this morning’s Today Show, Katie Couric falsely claimed that Democrats took money from Jack Abramoff. Howard Dean tried to set her straight, but she stuck to the right-wing talking points.

COURIC: Hey, wait a second. Democrats took — Democrats took money from Abramoff too, Mr. Dean.

DEAN: That is absolutely false. That did not happen. Not one dime of money from Jack Abramoff went to any Democrat at any time.

“You know what, Dean is absolutely right. Not one Democrat took money from Jack Abramoff. Never! Abramoff is squarely a Republican lobbyist who traded favors with Republicans for cash. The sad part is that Dean has no credibility. When he goes on national television and actually makes true statements trying to discredit false loudmouth conservative talking points from makeshift journalists, nobody pays attention to him and Dean convinces no one of anything different. He speaks hot air that mainstream America doesn’t want to hear.”

Well, if Fox News is Satan’s First Choice for News and Katie Couric is reciting right-wing talking points, where is this writer getting his or her information? The person states “Not one Democrat took money from Jack Abramoff. Never!” If that is the case, I’m going to commit slander.

According to Investors Business Daily, “Forty of 45 Democratic senators have received money from Jack Abramoff, his associates and Indian tribe clients.” Here’s IBD’s “Top Ten:

• John Kerry, Massachusetts, $98,550

• Byron Dorgan, North Dakota, $79,300

• Patty Murray, Washington, $78,991

• Harry Reid, Nevada, $68,941

• Tom Harkin, Iowa, $45,750

• Joe Lieberman, Connecticut, $29,830

• Chuck Schumer, New York, $29,500

• Mary Landrieu, Louisiana, $28,000

• Max Baucus, Montana, $22,500

• Maria Cantwell, Washington, $21,765

Source: campaignfinanceanalysisproject.com

If the left-wing reader is correct, I should be very shortly hearing from attorneys representing the above mentioned senators. I’ll keep you informed….

I’ve said, much to the chagrin of partisans on my side, Republicans caught sipping from the trough should be locked up if they knowingly broke the law. It’s hard enough to point out Democrat wrongdoing when our own side does shady stuff as well.

But to say “Abramoff is squarely a Republican lobbyist” is another example of the blind ignorance of some on the left.

“Do you really think Katie Couric and Matt Lauer did anything more than look at the incorrect headlines on cnn.com (or, more likely, drudge.com) and accepted the "Dems took money, too" myth?”

Just keep thinking that way….

I Dowd It

Some have speculated the left forgave Bill Clinton and his many instances of malfeasance because he was a more charming liar after the fact. Case in point, this protective quote by New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd on Keith Olbermann's January 26 Countdown on MSNBC, adrip of Clinton’s gift of lying:

"No, they're two entirely different things because when Bill Clinton would deceive, he would throw in a semantic clue that let you know he was deceiving. 'I did not have sexual relations with that woman.’ We knew what he meant by that. You know, 'I did not,' about dope, 'I didn't break the laws of this country.’ So it was sort of poignant and endearing. He would let you know he was lying, and then the right wing would come down so hard on him and overpunish him.”

I’m sorry, but has ol’ girl gone crazy? She continued:

“And Bush, with Iraq, said that we, even if it turned out not to be true, the reasons we went to war, it was right because millions of Iraqis would be liberated. But you cannot, you know, do things that start with a lie, and they just lead to trouble down the road."

So as long as you lie later and not sooner, you’re okay in Maureen Dowd’s book. Of course, she was referring to the weapons of mass destruction in Saddam’s custody that are “missing” to this day and was President Bush’s main rationale for going to war.

I always thought the WMD were in Syria and wrote so years ago….

Timing Was Everything

The left uses, in their reasoning to attack President Bush, the Downing Street Memo. I, in turn, will cite the Nayuf Letters. What are the Nayuf letters, you may ask? Good question, as the mainstream media were/are ignorant as to their existence or overlooking them because had they acknowledged them when they were written, they would have blown John Kerry’s presidential campaign tirades out of the water.

In a January 2004 letter to the Dutch newspaper “De Telegraaf,” Syrian journalist Nizar Nayuf, who defected from Syria to Western Europe, said that he knows the three sites where Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction are kept.

In one letter, Nayuf wrote:

“We received confirmations that the Iraqi weapons, which were moved to Syria by the help of General Zoul-Himla Chalich, are now hidden in three places inside Syria:

First place: a tunnel dug in the mountain close to the Al-Baïdah village, which is roughly two kilometers from Misyaf village. This place is under the 489 Safety cipher Documents' office control.

Second place: the factory of the Air Armed Forces in the village of Tal Sinan, between the town of Hama and Salamiyyah. This factory is under the Air Force control.

Third place: the location of Shinsar, 40 kilometers south of Homs, two kilometers east of the Homs - Damascus road. There are underground tunnels there, controlled by Brigade 661 of the armed air Forces. It is a Brigade of air Patrol. The tunnels are several tens of meters deep.

The weapons were transported in large wooden cases and barrels, under the supervision of the General Zoul-Himla Chalich and the son of his brother Assef, who works at Al-Bachaer company.

The company is owned by the Assad family and has offices in Beirut, Damascus and Baghdad.

This company also undertook the illegal Iraqi oil importation in Syria, and supplied weapons to Saddam. I will try to send you all the new information as I get.

Take care and be safe."

And there was a second letter…

"I have sent you another chart of the positions which tells where the weapons which were sent from Iraq into Syria, are hidden. Because the preceding chart that I sent you earlier is not clear.

Until now, the authorities in Syria did not worry of what was being published by the Dutch television news about this subject.

New information: The weapons were evacuated by the means of ambulances. Mohammed Mansoura also took part in the operation.

There are other serious, detailed pieces of information concerning the money of Saddam being moved into Syria and into Lebanon and those who took part in moving it - Syrians and Lebanese. Also there are more details about the assassination of the General Moustapha Tajer which took place last summer.

Take care of yourself."

Using liberal rationale, it’s not the existence of evidence, but the seriousness of the charge here. If WMD are in Syria, and we know they were moved during the ramp-up to the war, then could one squeeze in the possibility that George W. Bush may have been right about Saddam? Maybe all the domestic and international intelligence that said Hussein had WMD were right all along?

Maybe the mainstream media decided to ignore award-winning journalist Nayuf, because to pursue his claims may damage the Kerry campaign, and we couldn’t have that, right?

Like Kerry needed the help….

EcoNuts

Ayn Rand Institute senior fellow Dr. Onkar Ghate wrote a rather confusing piece on Eco-terrorists. After reading it, I wasn’t sure if he warned against them or admired them.

“The good news: a federal grand jury in Eugene, Oregon, has indicted 11 people on charges that they committed acts of domestic terrorism on behalf of the Earth Liberation Front and the Animal Liberation Front. Moreover, now one of the FBI's "highest domestic terrorism priorities," according to director Robert S. Mueller III, is to prosecute people who commit crimes "in the name of animal rights or the environment.”

Eco-terrorists are hit-and-run punks who believe it’s okay to destroy laboratories, developments, Hummer dealers and whatever else they deem a threat to Mother Nature. These are liberals at their most extreme, and potentially, most lethal.

This is what happens when liberal college professors have unfettered access to young skulls full of mush and teach these kids how to do their dirty work for them. These professors are no better than the Islamic terrorists who tell teenagers to blow themselves up in markets and crowded buses.

But here is where Ghate blurs his own line:

“Nevertheless, it remains worrisome that we still dismiss such terrorists as deranged individuals who pervert the ideology of environmentalism. Even more worrisome is that few of us intellectually grasp, and then rise to defend, the irreplaceable values under attack by environmental terrorists. Their targets are not, fundamentally, a particular ski resort, logging company, meatpacking center or medical research project, but what these represent: human technology, human progress, human life.”

He writes it’s “worrisome” that we are all too stupid to see the wisdom in these Eco-terrorists and fail to defend them? So in other words, if you don’t get your way, blow shit up. Be Captain Planet!

What is truly worrisome is that academia is cranking out more of these Eco-terrorists every day, and soon they will kill someone, the liberals will justify it, and it will escalate with the given notoriety they will all receive

Swann Dive

As most of you may have already heard about it, I won’t spend a lot of time on the specifics.

Former world champion Pittsburgh Steelers receiver Lynn Swann is running for the Republican gubernatorial nomination in his home state of Pennsylvania. His chief opponent’s campaign manager last week said Swann was “the rich white guy in the race.” Swann is black, and the campaign manager who was recently hired to breathe life into the opponent’s campaign was fired within hours after the gaffe.

But why again do opponents play that race card when dealing with black Republicans time after time after time?

Let me offer this hypothesis….

Most black Republicans are shunned in their own community, and usually end up running successfully in mostly-white districts. Many black Democrats spend most of their time calling every white person out there a racist and another cause of black blight. Most black conservative candidates run on optimism, while most black Democrats run on despair and payback.

In order for a black candidate to win a statewide or national office, it only stands to reason they would need the white vote to win. Making cracker comments and calling whites racists at every turn and calling for “uprisings” is not good strategy. With that, Maxine Waters will never be a United States Senator. John Conyers will never become a United States Senator, and neither will Major Owens or Sheila Jackson Lee.

Carol Mosley Braun was a relative unknown when she became a US Senator. She opened her mouth and became a one-term US Senator; something that’s very hard to do. Barrack Obama also flew low under the radar prior to his being elected to the Senate. But most black Democrats, who are still at war with The Man, are relegated to serving the hood. Not that it’s a bad thing, but as far as moving on up, the chances are slim.

Black Republicans are thereby a threat; a threat that breeds jealousy. When that jealousy leads to racial slurs, the media blows them off as family feuding not worthy of censure. Since most liberals hail Democrat blacks as civil rights champions, calling black Republicans slurs to them is almost worthy of a cheer.

So as black conservatives win and publicly portray black people other than Jesse Jackson-Al Sharpton fringe, Democrats see their urban base slowly being eaten away.

Lynn Swann had more to watch out for “going over the middle” than he will in this gubernatorial race. It’s good to be a Black Republican. Maybe one day, it’ll be a television special…!

Need a producer…?

Discuss This Article

Bob Parks is a former Republican congressional candidate (California 24th District), Navy veteran, single father, member/writer for the National Advisory Council of Project 21, and is a Staff Writer for the New Media Alliance, Inc.