Celebrity Activists

The celebrity activist crowd is shocked, shocked that their feet are being held to the fire, that they are being made to suffer the consequences of taking their overwhelmingly unpopular stands. Welcome to the real world people, a world of personal responsibility where actions can generate reactions. The beautiful ones recoil in horror as individuals and private institutions move to disassociate themselves from anti-war rhetoric. Luckily, that does not shut down the pop icons, they just proceed to reel out more rope with which to hang themselves. Regarding Susan Sarandon and her new play (TelegraphUK) : She would not take the play to the Middle East. “I do work for Unicef but I don’t know if I want to go to the Middle East. It’s so violent and I’ve got a family.” Well shit Suzy, we’re all safe here, so let the human meat grinder keep running, after all, they’re only Arabs and Zionists, right? As for her partner, (WNBC) : (Tim) Robbins reportedly threatened Washington Post reporter Lloyd Grove for interviewing Sarandon’s mother, saying “if you ever write about my family again, I will (bleeping) find you and I will (bleeping) hurt you.” Freedom of the press and speech are wonderful things, unless they are wielded against the extreme left, in which case they prompt threats of physical violence. Since I have now written about Tim Robbins and his family, maybe I am on his potential hit list. I should be so lucky.

BRAINS ARE NOT ISSUED WITH RANK

Allow me to post this outstanding piece from a good friend, Jim Nalepa:

BRAINS ARE NOT ISSUED WITH RANK As a West Point graduate, I can assure that we took our military history seriously. Most graduates remember the lessons of “The History of the Military Art” others have obviously forgotten. Most Americans would not recall the significance of the date, April 9th as they watched the statue of Saddam Hussein topple in Baghdad and his Ambassador to the United Nations declare “The game is over”. One hundred and thirty eight years ago, on April the 9th, 1865 at Appomattox Courthouse, Robert E Lee, West Point Class of 1829, surrendered to Ulysses S. Grant, West Point Class of 1843 to end the bloodiest war in our nations history, the Civil War. There are significant historical lessons to be derived in contrasting Operation Iraqi Freedom and our own Civil War as well as a comparison of West Point generals in both. The motto of the United States Military Academy is “Duty, Honor, and Country.” Unfortunately, a few generals (all West Point graduates) have become “armchair analysts” for whom it seems their motto could be “Demagoguery, Hubris, and Contempt.” More specifically, I speak of General Eric Shinseki, the irrelevant Army Chief of Staff (West Point 1965); General (ret.) Barry McCaffrey, former Clinton Drug Czar (West Point 1964); and General (ret.) Wesley Clark (West Point 1966), former NATO Commander and aspiring Democrat Party presidential or vice presidential nominee. All of these men, through public pontification damned the strategy of this war. General Shinseki called for hundreds of thousands more troops to get the job done. General McCaffrey, only four days into active general combat, wrote a contemptuous article in the Wall Street Journal predicting doom and a protracted conflict. General Wesley Clark joined in the anti-American chorus on CNN to question, erroneously, why supply lines had stretched so thin? Why all this wailing and teeth gnashing from men who heretofore proved themselves valiant in combat as junior officers in Viet Nam and the first Gulf War? The George McClellan syndrome fits all too well. Gen. George B. McClellan (West Point 1846), commanded the Union Army in the early days of the Civil War. A pompous man, who held Abraham Lincoln in utter contempt, built an army of well over 150,000 men and embarked on a campaign to capture Richmond and bring a swift end to the southern rebellion. To historians, this is known as the Peninsular Campaign, one of the greatest failures in the annals of American military history. Faced by a confederate force of barely 40,000 soldiers, McClellan hesitated, begged for more troops, worried about long supply lines and basically attacked piecemeal until he deluded himself into believing that the rebels held superior numbers on the field of battle. Had McClellan, with a vastly superior force, struck decisively toward Richmond, (as we did at Baghdad), the Civil War conceivably would have been brought to a swift modafinilsmart conclusion, saving millions of lives, both soldiers and civilians. McClellan, after being relieved of command and sent on his way, eventually became the Democrat Party nominee for President in 1864 and was soundly defeated by Lincoln. Generals Clark, McCaffrey and Shinseki are nothing more than the heirs of the McClellan legacy, political generals, who have forgotten our motto for their own self-aggrandizement. Where were these three when their patron, Bill Clinton, decimated the U.S. Army in the 1990’s, almost halving our forces for the sake of the phony “peace dividend.”? This unilateral disarmament gave our enemies hope and portrayed us as both militarily and politically weak. Why weren’t their voices heard as brave men (Black Hawk Down) were sacrificed in Somalia because Clinton and his Secretary of Defense, Les Aspin, wouldn’t authorize the use of armor forces which the field commanders earnestly had sought? As we know now that our failure in Somalia was the impetus for Bin Laden’s “9-11” attack. Simple, these three were being politically correct, behaving as the military hating administration told them to, and putting on their second, third and fourth stars. Some basic questions to each of them: General McCaffrey, how did the last “war” you fought, the war on drugs, go on your watch? General Shinseki, isn’t it great to know that all you will be remembered for is giving the army black berets made in France? General Clark, will continued political correctness really get you the Democrat party nomination for President or even Vice President? If not you could succeed Chirac in France. The conduct of these men while our troops are under fire is nothing more than reprehensible and, fortunately, stands in stark contrast to General Franks, who conceived and now commands what by any measure has been a brilliant Iraqi campaign. While not a West Point graduate, General Franks is surrounded by graduates of the military academy, who have loyally supported him and the Iraqi Freedom campaign from day one. Men such as LTG John Abizaid (West Point1973); Gen. Frank’s chief deputy, Col. David Perkins, Commander of the 2nd Brigade, Third Infantry Division, the first unit into Baghdad (West Point 1980); and Capt. James Adamouski (West Point 1995), killed in combat. When this great victory is finally assessed, those are the men who are the heirs of Grant, Patton and Schwarzkopf. As to the modern McClellan’s? Just like the Iraqi regime, it’s the dustbin of history for them. Jim Nalepa Mr. Nalepa is a 1978 graduate of the United States Military Academy at West Point. During active service he was assigned to the 2nd Brigade, Third Infantry Division, in Germany and the 82nd Airborne Division. He is a veteran of the Grenada Rescue mission in 1983. Mr. Nalepa, who runs an exclusive Executive Search firm, is a frequent guest on military and foreign affairs in the Chicago area, with many appearances on the highly rated WTTW program “Chicago Tonight”

To digress. . .

On a purely entertaining note, (and since Lex may appreciate the tunes), check out radioparadise . I tune in during the day on a stream, excellent playlist, no commercials, much more relaxing than CNBC drivel.

It is not the banal rantings. . .

It is not the banal rantings of commentators on editorial pages which bothers me. It is the provision of the mass media platform to the jackasses, combined with everyman’s inability to effectively respond, which sets me spinning. I refer to this editorial gem which Andrew Greeley recently published in one of our local rags. I will not admit to the number of responsorial letters to the editor that I have submitted in my life, lest one of you try to have me committed for an obsessive personality disorder. I believe that most letters are selected for publication on the basis of “writing quality which will not threaten employment of anyone on the editorial board.”

Greeley writes, “Because the U.S. military never seems to learn from its mistakes, it would appear that we are once again deep in the Big Muddy.” On the contrary, it looks as if the U.S. military has graduated with honors. He sarcastically berates the Defense Department for dismissing CIA reports which do not buttress the war argument, and cites the Brookings Institution on casualty estimates in the tens of thousands. I find liberals usually refer to the CIA as a shadowy, evil entity, unless of course they can find support for their viewpoint, and Brookings stated, just five days after Greeley’s article, that “The attacks on Basra and Baghdad showed creativity and a fine sense of timing” and “it has indeed been a very good plan.” He then states, “What happens when you want to liberate a country that does not want to be liberated?” I do not feel that even merits a response. Finally, Greeley says that “one hears responsible people in nice restaurants returning to the theme of their predecessors 35 years ago: ”Let’s kill them all!” Well, I feel fortunate to not be dining in the same establishments the good Father apparently frequents, for I have not heard this sentiment expressed by anyone that I know.

The Chicago Sun-Times did not deem to print my letter in response to Andrew Greeley. Maybe they feel that attacking a priest’s views is just too controversial for the op-ed page. And so I publish my thoughts here, my outlet, in the hope that they will fall upon thoughtful ears.

It would be comical, if it were not so pathetic. . .

It would be comical, if it were not so pathetic, to observe the educated idiots from the finance and legal segments of state governments, as they attempt to deal with tobacco. Recently, a downstate Illinois court awarded a large judgement to a plaintiff against Phillip Morris. But the real stinger here was that to appeal the finding, the court ruled that PM had to post a $12 billion bond, which was cheered by our brilliant States Attorney, Lisa Madigan. PM responded that they would face bankruptcy, which the mental pygmies zolpidemsleep then derided as nonsense, until PM said they would miss their next payment in the tobacco settlement. It then occured to everyone, particularly municipal bondholders, that the states, as a result of the tobacco settlements, were de facto owners of the very companies that they claim are killing their constituents. Unfortunately, they have figured all that filthy lucre into their flagging budgets. For my buck, this is more entertaining than most of what Hollywood churns out. BTW, there is a good editorial about this in today’s Wall Street Journal.