Playing politics is nothing new in Washington. In fact, it is something that we've come to expect from both political parties. And I guess there are a few things that get done that way when nothing else will work. But there are some issues where politics should be set aside and doing the right thing should be paramount.
A story appeared yesterday saying that some Republican congressmen have threatened to pull their support of war funding unless President Bush backs off on the illegal immigration bill. Somebody please tell me that they were misquoted; that this was just a big misunderstanding. Surely they're not planning to withdraw funding for our troops in harm's way simply to gain leverage in the debate over the amnesty legislation.
Now don't misunderstand me; I am wholly opposed to this bill that would grant legal status to immigrants who are here illegally. I think I've made that clear in some of my earlier columns. If we're going to do this, why don't we just pronounce all other lawbreakers in our country innocent, as well? Drug dealers, you get a free pass. Prostitutes, you're in the clear. Bank robbers, just keep the money. After all, you risked your life to pull off your illegal undertaking, and you should be rewarded for your bravery. Besides, you did it to help your family.
Our lawmakers in Washington wouldn't dare decriminalize 99% of all criminal activity in this country (well, most of them wouldn't). So why do many feel, along with our President, that illegal immigration is the one crime that's not really a crime? Are they afraid of being labeled a racist or a bigot? With all due respect to our national leaders, this has nothing to do with race or bigotry. It's a matter of what is right and what is wrong (not to mention the national security implications behind it all). With immigration, as with everything else, there is a right way and a wrong way to do things. We shouldn't be rewarding these lawbreakers who are doing things the wrong way.
Having said all of that, I must admit, however, that I don't think this issue is worth sacrificing support for our troops. If the only way this bill can be defeated is by using our troops as pawns in the political process, then the cost is too high. What will be next?
Today we've conveyed to the president our intention of withholding funds for orphaned children in this country. Unless he votes with us, we're cutting off money for the kids. Maybe next time he'll think twice before he supports some legislation that we don't agree with.
Absurd? Not much more so than threatening to hold our troops hostage in a political power play. It's just as wrong when the Republicans do it as it is when the Democrats do it. And all who would participate in such a thing should be ashamed.
You don't have to read much of what I write to get a sense of which way I lean politically. More often than not, I agree with the Republicans. But I'm not going to walk in lockstep with everything they say when my conscience would dictate another direction. I'm deeply disappointed with our president over his support of this amnesty bill. I'm equally disappointed with those Republican congressmen who have shown a willingness to play politics with our troops in harm's way.
Let's just pray that this bill will be defeated without having to use our fighting men and women as tools in the political process. They deserve much better.
Tuesday, June 26, 2007
Tuesday, June 19, 2007
A Lott To Think About
With the presidential election coming up next year, it’s time to start figuring out which candidate most deserves your vote. And the only way to do that, obviously, is by tuning in to Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity to see which candidate they are supporting. We average Americans are clearly not smart enough to make an important decision like that on our own. No, we must listen to talk radio and then follow their particular marching orders without any reservations. It’s so nice not to have to think for ourselves. We just incline our ears toward the radio and process the information like robots that can do nothing but follow their master’s instructions.
Let’s face it; the average American is dumb as a brick. OK, I don’t actually believe that, but that’s what Mississippi Senator Trent Lott seems to believe. He gives the impression that the powerful talk radio hosts are controlling people’s thoughts and actions, so much so that he wants something done about it. Last week, Senator Lott said, “Talk radio is running America. We have to deal with that problem.”
His implication? That Americans aren’t smart enough to make up their own minds, and talk radio is essentially running the country by methodically brainwashing the masses. Therefore, something must be done immediately to deprogram the indoctrinated multitudes and stop talk radio from further taking over America.
Maybe I read too much into Senator Lott’s comments, but it sounds eerily similar to the recent cries from the left to bring back the Fairness Doctrine. I guess when Air America (a liberal talk radio network) proved to be a miserable failure; they had to find some other way to stem the tide of right-wing voices that are so prominent on the airwaves. Should the Fairness Doctrine be revived, it will have a chilling effect on free speech in this country. Talk radio programs would be forced off the air because they don’t meet a certain politically correct standard. Conservative talk radio would become a thing of the past and liberal talk radio would, well, nothing would really change since there’s never actually been a truly successful liberal talk show on the radio.
So why is the conservative senior senator from Mississippi coming out now and attacking talk radio? Well, he’s unhappy with how the industry has framed the debate over the illegal immigration bill. Senator Lott, for reasons unknown, is a big supporter of this amnesty plan. And he seems to think that talk radio, that massive entity that is “running the country,” is having a direct effect on how Americans feel about this bill.
Memo to Senator Lott:
I lived in Mississippi for four years. I even voted for you while I was living there. You’re a good man. You’ve been a good senator. I haven’t always agreed with you on everything, but for the most part I think you’re a stand-up guy. So please know my heart when I break the following news to you:
I DON’T NEED RUSH LIMBAUGH AND SEAN HANNITY TO TELL ME HOW I SHOULD FEEL ABOUT A BILL THAT GIVES LEGAL STATUS TO PEOPLE WHO ARE HERE ILLEGALLY! I DON’T NEED NEAL BOORTZ AND MICHAEL SAVAGE TO EXPLAIN TO ME THE PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH PUTTING THESE ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS ON A PATH TO CITIZENSHIP! I’M PERFECTLY CAPABLE OF THINKING FOR MYSELF AND FORMING A PERSONAL OPINION WITHOUT THE VOICES OF LAURA INGRAHAM OR MARK LEVIN TELLING ME WHAT TO BELIEVE!
There, I’ve said it. Sorry for shouting, but you know how worked up we talk radio listeners can get sometimes. Please senator, if you think something needs to be done about talk radio, don’t join forces with Teddy Kennedy to do it. In fact, don’t do anything. Leave it alone. Talk radio isn’t running this country, and the American people aren’t nearly as uninformed as you elites in Washington seem to think we are.
Respectfully,
Shane Lambert
P.S. Have a nice day!
Anybody think I’ll hear back from him?
Let’s face it; the average American is dumb as a brick. OK, I don’t actually believe that, but that’s what Mississippi Senator Trent Lott seems to believe. He gives the impression that the powerful talk radio hosts are controlling people’s thoughts and actions, so much so that he wants something done about it. Last week, Senator Lott said, “Talk radio is running America. We have to deal with that problem.”
His implication? That Americans aren’t smart enough to make up their own minds, and talk radio is essentially running the country by methodically brainwashing the masses. Therefore, something must be done immediately to deprogram the indoctrinated multitudes and stop talk radio from further taking over America.
Maybe I read too much into Senator Lott’s comments, but it sounds eerily similar to the recent cries from the left to bring back the Fairness Doctrine. I guess when Air America (a liberal talk radio network) proved to be a miserable failure; they had to find some other way to stem the tide of right-wing voices that are so prominent on the airwaves. Should the Fairness Doctrine be revived, it will have a chilling effect on free speech in this country. Talk radio programs would be forced off the air because they don’t meet a certain politically correct standard. Conservative talk radio would become a thing of the past and liberal talk radio would, well, nothing would really change since there’s never actually been a truly successful liberal talk show on the radio.
So why is the conservative senior senator from Mississippi coming out now and attacking talk radio? Well, he’s unhappy with how the industry has framed the debate over the illegal immigration bill. Senator Lott, for reasons unknown, is a big supporter of this amnesty plan. And he seems to think that talk radio, that massive entity that is “running the country,” is having a direct effect on how Americans feel about this bill.
Memo to Senator Lott:
I lived in Mississippi for four years. I even voted for you while I was living there. You’re a good man. You’ve been a good senator. I haven’t always agreed with you on everything, but for the most part I think you’re a stand-up guy. So please know my heart when I break the following news to you:
I DON’T NEED RUSH LIMBAUGH AND SEAN HANNITY TO TELL ME HOW I SHOULD FEEL ABOUT A BILL THAT GIVES LEGAL STATUS TO PEOPLE WHO ARE HERE ILLEGALLY! I DON’T NEED NEAL BOORTZ AND MICHAEL SAVAGE TO EXPLAIN TO ME THE PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH PUTTING THESE ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS ON A PATH TO CITIZENSHIP! I’M PERFECTLY CAPABLE OF THINKING FOR MYSELF AND FORMING A PERSONAL OPINION WITHOUT THE VOICES OF LAURA INGRAHAM OR MARK LEVIN TELLING ME WHAT TO BELIEVE!
There, I’ve said it. Sorry for shouting, but you know how worked up we talk radio listeners can get sometimes. Please senator, if you think something needs to be done about talk radio, don’t join forces with Teddy Kennedy to do it. In fact, don’t do anything. Leave it alone. Talk radio isn’t running this country, and the American people aren’t nearly as uninformed as you elites in Washington seem to think we are.
Respectfully,
Shane Lambert
P.S. Have a nice day!
Anybody think I’ll hear back from him?
Tuesday, June 12, 2007
The More Things Change...
“I have come to the conclusion that one useless man is called a disgrace, that two are called a law firm, and that three or more become a congress.” That is how Peter Stone and Sherman Edwards, through the character of John Adams, begin their somewhat historical play 1776. Every time I’ve watched the movie version of this Broadway classic, Adams’ words have always conjured up images of our senators and representatives in Washington D.C. And although that may appropriately describe some of our national leaders, I’ve now come to recognize that these words more accurately describe our state congressional delegation in Montgomery.
Why is it that, for the most part, when the state of Alabama makes national headlines, the news is usually embarrassing? Although I realize my home state has had a lot of black marks in its history, I have maintained a steadfast belief that we have largely put our past transgressions behind us and are moving forward. Many people who come to visit Alabama for the first time are amazed that there are no more police dogs attacking African Americans, no more bus burnings, and no more chants of “segregation forever.” They are even more surprised to discover that most people in Alabama actually have all of their teeth and are more than able to form coherent, intelligent sentences and engage in thoughtful conversation. What they find, in other words, is a state and people whose reality is far-removed from universal perception.
But then there are national headlines like this one from last week: “Fistfight breaks out on floor of Alabama Senate.” And to top it all off, the whole thing was captured on video and has been played via television and the Internet for the whole world to see. So once again, the stereotypical image of Alabama as being a backwards-thinking state made up of backwards-thinking people continues to be perpetuated. And that, my friends, is a shame.
What needs to happen is a good old fashioned “throw the bums out” housecleaning in Montgomery. We need a state congressional delegation that can accomplish more in a legislative session than just giving themselves a 61% pay raise (which is about all they’ve accomplished recently). We need leaders, on both sides of the aisle, that will represent the interests of the state of Alabama as well as they represent the interests of their own districts. And we need legislators who will not bow down to the powerful special interest groups in our state. Our current congressional leaders (there’s an oxymoron if there ever was one) have become a joke in their own state, and the time has come for a new direction in Montgomery.
The state of Alabama, fortunately, has moved past it’s dark and disturbing past. From the rocket scientists who call Huntsville home to the world-class medical professionals in Birmingham to the players in the Shakespeare Festival in Montgomery, our state has much to be proud of. Alabamians are not, as we are often portrayed, a bunch of back-woods rednecks (well, most of us aren’t). There are a lot of good old country folks here, but that doesn’t make us ignorant. Just because we like to eat pinto beans and corn bread doesn’t mean we are a third world country. We have clung to all the things that were good about our past while discarding those things that were abominable.
Alabama has come a long way in the past fifty years. Too bad our state legislature hasn’t.
Why is it that, for the most part, when the state of Alabama makes national headlines, the news is usually embarrassing? Although I realize my home state has had a lot of black marks in its history, I have maintained a steadfast belief that we have largely put our past transgressions behind us and are moving forward. Many people who come to visit Alabama for the first time are amazed that there are no more police dogs attacking African Americans, no more bus burnings, and no more chants of “segregation forever.” They are even more surprised to discover that most people in Alabama actually have all of their teeth and are more than able to form coherent, intelligent sentences and engage in thoughtful conversation. What they find, in other words, is a state and people whose reality is far-removed from universal perception.
But then there are national headlines like this one from last week: “Fistfight breaks out on floor of Alabama Senate.” And to top it all off, the whole thing was captured on video and has been played via television and the Internet for the whole world to see. So once again, the stereotypical image of Alabama as being a backwards-thinking state made up of backwards-thinking people continues to be perpetuated. And that, my friends, is a shame.
What needs to happen is a good old fashioned “throw the bums out” housecleaning in Montgomery. We need a state congressional delegation that can accomplish more in a legislative session than just giving themselves a 61% pay raise (which is about all they’ve accomplished recently). We need leaders, on both sides of the aisle, that will represent the interests of the state of Alabama as well as they represent the interests of their own districts. And we need legislators who will not bow down to the powerful special interest groups in our state. Our current congressional leaders (there’s an oxymoron if there ever was one) have become a joke in their own state, and the time has come for a new direction in Montgomery.
The state of Alabama, fortunately, has moved past it’s dark and disturbing past. From the rocket scientists who call Huntsville home to the world-class medical professionals in Birmingham to the players in the Shakespeare Festival in Montgomery, our state has much to be proud of. Alabamians are not, as we are often portrayed, a bunch of back-woods rednecks (well, most of us aren’t). There are a lot of good old country folks here, but that doesn’t make us ignorant. Just because we like to eat pinto beans and corn bread doesn’t mean we are a third world country. We have clung to all the things that were good about our past while discarding those things that were abominable.
Alabama has come a long way in the past fifty years. Too bad our state legislature hasn’t.
Tuesday, June 5, 2007
Blame It All On Bush
When is good news really bad news? Answer: When you’re a liberal and the good news is concerning a victory in the war on terror. The last thing the Democrats want to hear about as they are gearing up for next year’s presidential election is that our country may be actually doing something right. And when there is the slightest hint of good news, the left-wing playbook calls for an all-out assault on President Bush.
Last week’s news about a thwarted terrorist plot to blow up the jet fuel pipeline at JFK airport should have been acknowledged by Democrats as a victory in the war on terror. That, however, might make George Bush look good, which in turn might make Republicans look good, which in turn might lead to the Democrats losing next year’s presidential election. So the only recourse they have is to blame the whole thing on President Bush and his “misguided” war in Iraq. In other words, they continue to blame America first.
Sunday morning on ABC’s This Week, Congressman Jack Murtha was asked about the terrorist plot. His response:
Our presence in Iraq, our occupation of Iraq, gives (the terrorists) the inspiration…I'm absolutely convinced that this is the kind of thing that inspires these people to take on the United States…Our presence in Iraq is inspiring them to recruit people all over the world. So this is the problem that we have.
ABC’s George Stephanopoulos did have the presence of mind to mention to the congressman that, “We did have 9-11 before we went into Iraq” (not bad for a former Clinton advisor). Murtha’s response was, “Yeah, we had 9-11, but that came from Afghanistan.” So that means that a terrorist attack from Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan can be blamed on the terrorists, but a terrorist plot that came from Al-Qaeda in Iraq is obviously the fault of George Bush. Does anybody other than me find that reasoning absolutely ludicrous?
Democrats act as if Muslim extremists in Iraq had a deep love and appreciation for the United States before we ever went to war. I hate to break it to them, but we were hated just as ferociously when Bill Clinton was president as we are now with President Bush. And these guys who plotted this latest threat weren’t even in Iraq; they were operating right here in the land of the free.
Speaking of that, shouldn’t this be a signal to President Bush that his support of an amnesty program for illegal immigrants is not a great idea? Do we really want to give provisional legal status to a group of people who are, by definition, here illegally? Should it be the policy of this great country to reward those who break our laws? Will that ever be a good idea? Sorry to keep asking questions; inquiring minds want to know. But, I digress.
Senator Barack Obama was asked about the terrorist plot during Sunday night’s Democratic debate. His response:
But the fact of the matter is that we live in a more dangerous world, not a less dangerous world, partly as a consequence of this president's actions. Primarily because of this war in Iraq, a war that I think should have never been authorized or waged. What we've seen is a distraction from the battle to deal with Al-Qaeda, but in Afghanistan. We have created an entire new recruitment network in Iraq.
Once again, the liberals are convinced that fundamentalist Muslims in Iraq were at one time totally at peace with America’s place in the world. They would have us believe that it was only after Operation Iraqi Freedom that terrorists were recruited and trained in Iraq. Murtha, Obama and other liberals believe we should be ashamed of ourselves for defending freedom and trying to prevent more terrorist attacks on our soil. I wouldn’t be surprised if they sought to charge President Bush with treason for having instigated this latest terrorist plot.
So where do we go from here? The Democrats first need to understand that you can’t deal with a problem by pretending that it doesn’t exist. The city where I live, for instance, has seen a steady increase in violent crime in recent years. Should our law enforcement officials work aggressively to arrest the offenders and prevent more offenses in the future, or should they take a hands-off approach for fear that we might incite more violence if we make the criminals mad? For me, that’s a no-brainer. But then again, I’m not a liberal, so my brain works a little bit differently.
Another thing the Democrats need to do is stop playing partisan politics with national security. When there is genuinely good news in relation to the fight against terrorism, it shouldn’t be seen as an opportunity to attack the president and Republicans. Isn’t this at least one issue where we can all stand side-by-side, knowing that we are united for the defense of our country in spite of other areas where we vehemently disagree? It should be, and I believe it can be. But as long as winning elections is the most important thing, the sad truth is that it never will be.
Last week’s news about a thwarted terrorist plot to blow up the jet fuel pipeline at JFK airport should have been acknowledged by Democrats as a victory in the war on terror. That, however, might make George Bush look good, which in turn might make Republicans look good, which in turn might lead to the Democrats losing next year’s presidential election. So the only recourse they have is to blame the whole thing on President Bush and his “misguided” war in Iraq. In other words, they continue to blame America first.
Sunday morning on ABC’s This Week, Congressman Jack Murtha was asked about the terrorist plot. His response:
Our presence in Iraq, our occupation of Iraq, gives (the terrorists) the inspiration…I'm absolutely convinced that this is the kind of thing that inspires these people to take on the United States…Our presence in Iraq is inspiring them to recruit people all over the world. So this is the problem that we have.
ABC’s George Stephanopoulos did have the presence of mind to mention to the congressman that, “We did have 9-11 before we went into Iraq” (not bad for a former Clinton advisor). Murtha’s response was, “Yeah, we had 9-11, but that came from Afghanistan.” So that means that a terrorist attack from Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan can be blamed on the terrorists, but a terrorist plot that came from Al-Qaeda in Iraq is obviously the fault of George Bush. Does anybody other than me find that reasoning absolutely ludicrous?
Democrats act as if Muslim extremists in Iraq had a deep love and appreciation for the United States before we ever went to war. I hate to break it to them, but we were hated just as ferociously when Bill Clinton was president as we are now with President Bush. And these guys who plotted this latest threat weren’t even in Iraq; they were operating right here in the land of the free.
Speaking of that, shouldn’t this be a signal to President Bush that his support of an amnesty program for illegal immigrants is not a great idea? Do we really want to give provisional legal status to a group of people who are, by definition, here illegally? Should it be the policy of this great country to reward those who break our laws? Will that ever be a good idea? Sorry to keep asking questions; inquiring minds want to know. But, I digress.
Senator Barack Obama was asked about the terrorist plot during Sunday night’s Democratic debate. His response:
But the fact of the matter is that we live in a more dangerous world, not a less dangerous world, partly as a consequence of this president's actions. Primarily because of this war in Iraq, a war that I think should have never been authorized or waged. What we've seen is a distraction from the battle to deal with Al-Qaeda, but in Afghanistan. We have created an entire new recruitment network in Iraq.
Once again, the liberals are convinced that fundamentalist Muslims in Iraq were at one time totally at peace with America’s place in the world. They would have us believe that it was only after Operation Iraqi Freedom that terrorists were recruited and trained in Iraq. Murtha, Obama and other liberals believe we should be ashamed of ourselves for defending freedom and trying to prevent more terrorist attacks on our soil. I wouldn’t be surprised if they sought to charge President Bush with treason for having instigated this latest terrorist plot.
So where do we go from here? The Democrats first need to understand that you can’t deal with a problem by pretending that it doesn’t exist. The city where I live, for instance, has seen a steady increase in violent crime in recent years. Should our law enforcement officials work aggressively to arrest the offenders and prevent more offenses in the future, or should they take a hands-off approach for fear that we might incite more violence if we make the criminals mad? For me, that’s a no-brainer. But then again, I’m not a liberal, so my brain works a little bit differently.
Another thing the Democrats need to do is stop playing partisan politics with national security. When there is genuinely good news in relation to the fight against terrorism, it shouldn’t be seen as an opportunity to attack the president and Republicans. Isn’t this at least one issue where we can all stand side-by-side, knowing that we are united for the defense of our country in spite of other areas where we vehemently disagree? It should be, and I believe it can be. But as long as winning elections is the most important thing, the sad truth is that it never will be.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)