Saturday, May 05, 2007

The Bulletin's Ladyman Doesn't Know A Damn Thing About The Liberal Media

One of the small consolations that I can take now with the current liberal media and liberal small-wigs like The Bulletin's Publisher and Editor Mike Ladyman is that they cannot control what historians write in the future.

Did you know that
President Harry Truman had an approval rating of 22-23% near the end of his Presidency. He had his problems as well as the Korean Conflict, which was considered unpopular back then as well. And now they have an aircraft carrier named after him -- the HST.

Dick Morris has written about categorizing presidents into four tiers:
First Tier - Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Wilson, & FDR.
Second Tier - Teddy Roosevelt, Truman & Ronald Reagan.
Third - Kennedy, Johnson, GHW Bush.
Fourth - Every other uneventful President, including Clinton.

Clinton had asked Morris about what it took to be considered first tier and Morris told Clinton that he would never be regarded as first tier because he never won a war. Of course we all know that Clinton's legacy will always revolved around oral sex and Monica.

While reading
Ladyman's bunk "Everybody's Talking: How the Media has Dropped the Ball When it Comes to Bush" it was like I was reading an old edition of the communist Pravda newspaper. As one who has been in a communist country, I've seen the empty shelves in person, and the next thing you know Ladyman will be tauting how the Cuban healthcare system can run rings around our own Texas Medical Center.

Ladyman ever said one positive thing about the United States? No doubt one the first things he must have thought after he learned about the 9/11 attacks, "damn, now Bush's approval numbers are going to skyrocket." You see with liberals -- everything, and I mean everything -- is seen through a political prism.

I remember back in the days before Nelson Mandela was released from prison. Liberal Democrats were oozing about spreading democracy around the world. My God, since 9/11 the United States has liberated tens of millions from dictatorial rule and since it was a Republican Presidents administration that accomplished the feat liberals have been dead quiet on the subject. And that goes for a plethora of topics such as the economy, high tax revenues coming in due to tax cuts, etc.

Can you imagine how the liberal media would be dumbfoundingly falling over themselves to praise a President Gore or Kerry for the same actions that President Bush has taken. Again, there goes that political prism.

Ladyman would have you believe that we should have never gone into Iraq because as he says "Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11. Enough said." Look, if Bush would have appeased Saddam, the Iraqi dictator would be well on his way, if not already have nuclear weapons. And get this, if Bush would not have gone into Iraq, those same liberals and Ladyman would be demanding in their tripe-ridden post that action against Iraq be taken. See, President Bush, can do no right when it comes to liberals. If Bush came out and said that man was completely responsible for global warming, the liberal press would go out and find the rightful information on the true cause, our lifegiver -- the Sun.

Now what would you rather have: a dead Saddam, or an alive Saddam of whom Mrs. Bill Clinton said in 2003 in a speech to Code Pink on disarming Saddam, "I have absolutely no belief that he will" disarm. She went on to say in the same speech, "if he were serious about disarming, he would have been much more forthcoming. I ended up voting for the resolution after carefully reviewing the information, intelligence that I had available, talking with people whose opinions I trusted, tried to discount the political or other factors that I didn't believe should be in any way a part of this decision. I would love to agree with you, but I can't based on my own understanding and assessment of the situation."

Of course now Mrs. Bill Clinton is singing a new tune in 2007 to appease the George Soros leftist crowd, but she had the same intelligence as all our Allies had back in 2003, and WMDs don't just disappear into Syria, oops, I mean into the Iraqi desert with some coordination where American soldiers can't find them.

Ladyman has to be the most depressed castrati in Montgomery County. He blames the liberal media for failing to have President Bush impeached for his war crimes. The "Bush administration lies and distortions went unchallenged or were actively promoted." I honestly believe that if Ladyman would come across information of a al-Qaeda terrorist plot to attack the Conroe Wal-Mart on a crowded Saturday, going to the FBI or Conroe Police would be the farthest thing from his mind, and Mike instead would be ready for exclusive news reporting with camera in hand, and e-mails to Al-Jazeera and CNN ready to go to show the blood and gore pictures, just as they willingly show video of American soldiers being sniped.

Toyko Rose Ladyman is definitely frustrated over the liberal medias "inability to determine just why this disastrous war was ever launched." Again, a total inability to connect with the truth on Mike's part. I mean, does this guy have any friends? Does he smile or laugh?

You have to be in denial to say that "Congress rolled over and gave Bush authorization to go to war." We all knew, those of us in the real world, that this war is going to be different from any other war the United States had ever fought. Ladyman's reliving of the glory days of Vietnam activism are far different from today. Appeasement will not bring "peace for our time" such as Neville Chamberlain thought following the Munich Agreement.

How the hell do you appease an enemy whose only item at the peace table calls for all American infidels (those "without faith") to be slaughtered.

For instance, al-Qaeda hates all homosexuals. If the United States appeased them and gave them all American homosexuals, once the last homosexual was killed, they would come back to the table and demand "give us all your feminists." OK, we give them all American feminists. Hmm, maybe al-Qaeda does have a point?

Then the Supreme Court would have to get involved and define who is "one without faith." Definitely the Madalyn Murray O'Hair atheist types would have to go, the wacko enviromentalists would have to go, and the vast majority of liberals. All would be slaughtered for appeasement.

Of course that was tongue-in-cheek, but my point is that American liberalism is bent that they can't see the forest for the trees. Al-Qaeda literally wants to die to kill us, and when that first terrorists nuke hits, even you might be singing a different tune. We can hope.

I've seen war, young kids torn apart and killed, and I tell you we ought to be grateful that only 3,000 Americans have been killed. Hell, during World War II, it was common to lose many times that during major engagements.

I'm tired of liberal Democrats and their selective outrage when it comes to American deaths in the War on Terror. Christ, we have 7,000 Americans that die each year because pharmacist misread doctors shoddy handwriting. Should we withdraw doctors from their offices? We have tens of thousands that die in auto accidents each year. Should we go back to horse and buggy? And I won't even go into how the Democrats have aborted themselves into supporting illegal immigration.

I challenge your patriotism Mike Ladyman. You were obviously offended when Fox newscasters "sported American flag pins" during broadcast. No sir, they weren't "cheerleading for Bush administration policies," they were reporting the damn news and being American.

"It seems like the 9/11 attacks not only killed almost 3,000 Americans, but also killed the mainstream media's ability to challenge the administration." Your pathetic Ladyman. As I said before, liberals look through that political prism before they think anything else.

Walter Cronkite's "we are mired in stalemate" broadcast in late Feb. 1968 killed the Vietnam War in one newscast. This time, it has taken today's liberal media over three years of negative coverage, and still the War on Terror is not dead.

Ladyman, if there is anyone "bordering on treason" in reference to your views on Iraq and non-support of my country, it is you. Man, if we could bring back the Sedition Act of 1918 signed by DEMOCRAT President Wilson, I would have had your ass turned into the government long ago.

Thankfully Ladyman recognizes the "meteoric success" of Conservative media. He even spelled Rush Lmbaugh's and Ann Coultr's names correctly. Of course Mike won't mention the dismal failure of Air America Radio even after it was heavily promoted by the liberal media as an alternative to Conservative Talk Radio. No, he just uneventfully remarks "most of those bucks are on the right, not the left."

Ladyman never defines US failure in Iraq. Look, it took the US thirteen years to OK our own Constitution, it only took the Iraqi's three. They've held successful elections multiple times, yet Jimmy Carter still has to go to Africa to oversee elections. They have a working government that's trying its hardest, all the while putting up with daily violence equivalent to one day of our Virginia Tech Massacre. The Iraqi's are a free people free of a ruthless dictator, and as one who has seen a country start up overnight, I can tell you that all problems will not be solved overnight, in three, four, five, or even ten years. But I can tell you, it will get better -- even in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"One more reason for the media's Iraq failure," and Ladyman it is not "the Bush administration," it is not even "the mainstream media" themselves. It is the fault of stupid Americans like you Mike Ladyman. Americans who refuse to believe in the greatness of America. Americans like yourself who have that "can't do" spirit. Americans who fall for the liberal line hook, line, and sinker, just as the Hitler Youth were loyal to the death for Hitler. Your guilt overides you each day because you believe the United States has so much and the World has so little, and that it is not fair in your book. Meanwhile you overlook the transgressions of dictators and revel with jealousy at the power they command.

Going back to my small consolations that I take with the liberal media and liberals like Mike Ladyman about the unborn historians of the future. President Bush, at the end of his term, may have approval ratings similiar to that of President Truman's 22-23%, but you can be damned sure that Bush will be at least a Second Tier President, if not First Tier, that he had his problems as well as the War on Terror, which was considered unpopular back then. And that they will have an aircraft carrier named after him -- the GWB.