I Am So Confused . . . Would Someone Please Explain?
By Debbie Daniel (05/06/04)
I know good and well not to start a column like this – but what the heck – these liberals are having a heyday at the expense of our country’s security, so just like John Kerry says . . . “Bring it on . . . Baby!” (I added the “baby” part).
As horrific as it was to hear the news of torture and abuse to Iraqi prisoners, wasn’t it the same kind of abuse John Kerry admitted to committing on the Vietnamese thirty years ago? What am I missing?
It seems like I heard him say things like: “personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam.”
Not that John Kerry doing these criminal acts alongside his buddies made it right . . . but after hearing almost the same report this weekend, I must say, I am confused.
The only difference . . . John Kerry didn’t have the still shots or videos, he just laid it all out to the U.S. Congress in as graphic detail as possible. He can certainly be attributed for creating the myth of the American soldier as a monster.
In the early 1970s, Kerry once denounced the United States of America as “the real criminal” in the Vietnam War. He condemned the entire country, according to the Baltimore Sun.
Hey folks, that’s you and me . . . did you cut someone’s ears off? I didn’t. And I’m not a criminal, Mr. Kerry. But I guess you needed to blame someone, so . . . okay Johnny, if it makes you feel better.
The Sun also revisited other anti-war comments by Kerry: “I committed the same kinds of atrocities as thousands of others,” he told the newspaper.
So when we throw these soldiers in prison, who committed these abusive atrocities against prisoners at the Abu Ghraib prison near Baghdad, maybe we ought to throw Mr. Kerry in there with them.
So, can you see why I’m confused? Which is it? Is it right for Kerry, but wrong for these soldiers?
And now to more questions, but on a much lighter note. Why is Jim McDermott acting so high and mighty that he can’t say “Under God” while leading a session of Congress in the Pledge of Allegiance? He blamed his childhood . . . “I learned it the other way as a boy.” Well, bless his heart . . . how old is he now; and how many times has he said the pledge with “Under God” since then?
He can certainly say, “So help me God” in taking the oath of the Senate; so where does he get off picking and choosing when he will, or when he won’t make reference to “God.”
Sounds confusing to me!
And if you’re starting to be concerned about my state of mind, I have more. I’m appalled at how we expect the average American to understand what in the world our Congressional leaders are doing in Washington.
And to think they give themselves an automatic pay raise every year. They’ve had six raises totaling $24,500 since January of 1998. And no one calls them on it. It just “happens” on its own. They would have to vote against it to stop it.
While many of us have been hurt by the economy since 9/11, the Congress has had an average pay raise of $4,333 a year. Not only is that hard to understand . . . it’s deplorable.
It’s amazing to me we don’t have a 21st Century uprising. I’ve never seen such hypocrisy.
The 9/11 Commission was so emphatic about their responsibility to get to the core of this grave event in our nation’s history. Why, they’ve made just about every person having anything to do with this administration, or the last, come forward and testify to the grueling interrogation of this intimidating group.
They convinced all of us that this is probably the most important commission ever assembled for such a serious matter as the deaths of 3,000 Americans. It is they who will determine whether our comrades were killed by the inattentiveness of George Bush or the hate of Osama bin Laden.
But it was Bob Kerry and Lee Hamilton, two commission members, who seemed to be inattentive. They walked out while the President of the United States was testifying. Something more important must have come up.
Well, so much for the seriousness of this commission. I’m confused again.
Thirty years ago the case of Roe v. Wade brought about the freedom for women everywhere to choose death or life for their unborn baby. So, why in the world did 850,000 women converge on Washington, D.C., April 25, 2004, to announce to the world that they wanted George W. Bush out of their uteruses.
I’ve never seen one man have so much power. George Bush against 850,000 women . . . that’s really confusing. Are they afraid of him? I think the man is actually a bit outnumbered dear ladies, but yet you fear him.
It’s like the story in the Bible of young David against the Giant Goliath. You know what happens when God is on your side. If you don’t, you will soon.
And it makes me wonder if it isn’t God himself who is having such a powerful influence on these women; because it seems they are constantly fighting against “something,” and George Bush is the easy target.
Could it be the Almighty God? In Psalms 139:13-14 the Bible says, “For you have formed my inward parts. You covered me in my mother’s womb. I will praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made.”
Those words say it all. And to think they believe it’s George Bush trying to convict their hearts. No! It’s the word of God that’s convicting.
Ladies, I don’t think you should, but go on with your rallies, because I’m still confused as to why you even meet. The law’s on your side . . . remember? Why are you afraid?
Inasmuch as you believe it’s just a “blob of tissue,” that’s an argument only you and God above will have to discuss.
Personally, I believe the choice should start in the bedroom when you “choose” to have your moment of pleasure. But, it’s easier to get rid of that “innocuous tissue” than to deny yourself any sexual indulgence, huh?
Confusing? No! Disturbing? Yes!
I understand that more soldiers died in a training exercise during World War II than have died in a year’s fighting in Iraq.
And it seems that even though almost all of our nation’s leadership believed there were weapons of mass destruction, it was George Bush’s responsibility to know whether or not the information was right.
Very confusing . . . .
I question the former First Lady (Hillary Clinton) usurping a sitting President’s authority by saying his stubbornness and arrogance are breathtaking . . . that he is de-stabilizing the Middle East.
Hillary’s words may not be measured as a U.S. Senator, but her legacy as a former first lady is certainly in question. You would think she’d know better, but Bush-bashing takes precedence.
One quick question: “If it was Japan that attacked us at Pearl Harbor in 1941, why were we in a state of war with Germany four days later?” Now doesn’t that give you pause?
I’m really confused, but don’t mind me, I’m just searching for some answers.
(Printer friendly version) Email: Debbie Daniel
