It Wasn’t Racism in Toledo; It was a Thugfest

Lou Ratajski is 86 years old. Last Saturday Lou lost everything he had when mobs looted and burned his little neighborhood tavern in the LaGrange neighborhood of Toledo, Ohio. The media blamed it on a race riot. It wasn’t – it was a thugfest, an orgy of gang violence and thievery.

Lou owned Jim and Lou’s Sportsmans Club, the building that was broken into, looted and then set on fire by hordes of gang members and other criminals as millions of shocked viewers across the nation watched on their television screens.

Suhkdev Singh Khalsa owns the convenience store at an American Petroleum gas station in Toledo. Out-of-control mobs wrecked and looted his store, causing about $170,000 in damages and losses.

Thomas Frisch, 76, told reporters that a large group of men destroyed the exterior of a gas station next to his home of 30 years.

“A whole big gang started to come in here,” he told CNN. “Next thing you know, they’re jumping on the car. Then they overturned it. Then they started on the building, breaking windows, ripping the bars off.”

Despite what the media are claiming, none of what happened had anything to do with racism and everything to do with criminality.

This incident, which grew out of a planned march by 14 neo-Nazi members of the absurd National Socialist Movement of Roanoke, Va., played right into the hands of a liberal national media intent on exacerbating the whole race issue whenever an opportunity to do so arises.

Given a permit to stage a march through the mixed-race neighborhood, the tiny band of neo-Nazis was confronted by some 300 local protesters and 70 outsiders representing everything from anti-war activism to anarchy. Among them was also a contingent of skinheads.

When the protesters began throwing bottles and rocks at the neo-Nazis, Police Chief Mike Navarre instructed the neo-Nazis to return to their cars and leave Toledo. That should have ended the near-riot, but it didn’t. The mob then turned on the police, hurling rocks and bottles at them.

Mayor Jack Ford, Toledo’s first African-American mayor, took a bullhorn and confronted the mob, which included a man standing a few feet away and menacingly wearing a black ski mask with a revolver stuck in his waistband. He tried to calm the mob, which continued to pelt him and the police.

Ford blamed the rioting on gangs that took advantage of a volatile situation. ”It’s exactly what they wanted,” Ford told reporters, adding that they were mostly “gang members who had real or imagined grievances and took it as an opportunity to speak in their own way.

“I am disappointed that some folks who clearly are not strong citizens to begin with took this opportunity to make this statement,” Ford said. “I was chagrined that there were obvious mothers and children in the crowd with them. Several intimated that they had guns.”

That’s putting it mildly. These were not simply weak citizens, they were the dregs of society doing what they do best, preying upon innocent members of both the black and white communities.

When the neo-Nazis left without marching, why did some blacks pillage their own part of town? If it was a matter of race hatred, why didn’t they invade a totally white neighborhood to vent their so-called anger?

What you had were the dregs of both sides looking for an excuse to do bad things, neo-Nazis on one side, gang-bangers on the other. One side wanted to create a racial backlash, and the other side wanted to loot their own neighborhood.

The media portray the incident as a race issue when it was simply a matter of bad people doing bad things. There are bad people who are white and there are bad people who are black. Not every bad thing involving the races that happens is an issue of race. In the case of Toledo, it was a case of out-of-control thuggery – the scum rising to the top.

©2005 Mike Reagan. If you’re not a paying subscriber to our service, you must contact us to print or web post this column. Mike’s column is distributed exclusively by: Cagle Cartoons, Inc. Cari Dawson Bartley email Cari@cagle.com, (800) 696-7561

Whose Side Are We On?

If you listen to what we conservatives were saying about John Roberts or Judge Pickering or any of the other judicial nominees who were being blocked by the Democrat filibusters – or other methods of killing a presidential nomination to the federal bench – the argument we were making was that the president won the election and by virtue of that victory has the right to appoint judges of his own choosing.

It was the conservative battle cry that the president’s nominees had the right to go through the process and be voted on by the full Senate. We jumped all over the liberal Democrats on this issue, insisting that the president had the right to pick the judges he wants on the federal bench.

Now, all of sudden, because the president didn’t call us personally and get our permission, we wise pundits are now suddenly acting the way the liberals did with Roberts and others, demanding that he reveal how Harriet Miers will vote and what she thinks about just about everything. That’s exactly what we condemned the liberals for demanding. We are in a snit because he didn’t call us and consult with us about his choice. In short, we are adopting a double standard and you can’t have it both ways.

Because the president didn’t pick someone from the list of names we wanted we are going to stir up a big fuss and question his judgment.

When the Democrats wanted Judge Roberts to spill his guts about every hot issue that might come before the Supreme Court we cried foul and called for the application of the Ginsberg rule – insisting that he did not have to answer these questions.

Now, with the nomination of Harriet Miers, it’s as if there is no such thing as a Ginsberg Rule. We want to know everything – especially how she feels about abortion. Why are they asking merely that, but not about how she feels about eminent domain or affirmative action or gay marriage or any other hot button issue certain to come before the court? Don’t they matter?

Harriet Miers can’t talk about any of those things, and they know it. After all, that’s what they told the Democrats when they tried to get Judge Roberts and other nominees to violate the Ginsberg Rule.

I understand why my fellow conservatives are upset. Many conservative pundits wanted the president to pick a nominee who had been in the trenches, fighting to transform the federal judiciary from the left-wing activist court it has become into what the Founding Fathers originally created – one that looks at the Constitution as it was meant by them to be read, and not as some wacko liberal judges want it to mean.

It’s been a bloody fight and the liberals have had everything their own way for decades, writing laws instead of interpreting them in the light of the Constitution. Now that the American people have reared up and fought back and taken the high ground and victory is within our grasp, the president turns his back on the valiant conservative warriors who have fought the good fight, and chooses a nominee who hasn’t been in the front lines.

President Bush, however, has made his choice and he is entitled to have it proceed through the orderly Senate confirmation process. Harriet Miers has the right to be heard. I agree with two of the most valiant veteran conservative warriors who, though desperately dissatisfied by the president’s choice, agree that Harriet Miers is entitled to her day in court.

The liberal mainstream media have salivated over the dissension in GOP ranks and they have done everything possible to play up the family fight among Republicans. Thus when Pat Buchanan and Paul Weyrich voiced their disapproval of the Miers nomination, this was presented to the public as all-out opposition. The fact is that although both men told NewsMax.com they are very unhappy with what the president has done, they are willing to be fair and wait and see how well she acquits herself during the Senate hearings. If she does well, she’ll win their backing. That, however, has been ignored by the media, whose motto here is “let’s you and him fight.”

©2005 Mike Reagan. If you’re not a paying subscriber to our service, you must contact us to print or web post this column. Mike’s column is distributed exclusively by: Cagle Cartoons, Inc. Cari Dawson Bartley email Cari@cagle.com, (800) 696-7561

Farrakhan Ignores the Real Racists

Minister Louis Farrakhan is attacking former Reagan administration Education Secretary William Bennett’s misconstrued comments on aborting unborn black babies while turning his back on what amounts to the ongoing genocide being practiced against blacks.

As reported in NewsMax.com, Farrakhan’s “Millions More Movement,” said Tuesday it was planning to “issue a response to the racist comments of … Bennett who proposed genocide, or ‘aborting all Black Babies,’ as a remedy to America’s crime problem.”

That’s an outright falsehood, and Farrakhan knows it. Bennett never advocated any such thing. In fact after explaining the idea as an example of faulty reasoning, he condemned the very idea, suggesting that it “would be an impossible, ridiculous, and morally reprehensible thing to do, but your crime rate would go down.”

Attacking Bill Bennett for something he did not do is bad enough, but ignoring a lethal threat to the black community is nothing short of an outrage. Unborn black babies are being aborted, not to reduce crime but to reduce the size of America’s black population. That’s the real crime but you won’t hear a word about it from Louis Farrakhan.

While Min. Louis is ranting and raging at Bennett about 1450 black babies are being butchered in their mother’s wombs every single day. Moreover, since Roe v. Wade legalized abortion, some 14 million unborn black babies have been victims of abortion. Yet Louis Farrakhan has been mute about this holocaust against his own people.

Instead, he prates about creating “a better world for ourselves, our children, grandchildren and great grandchildren,” without noting he’s really talking about only those who survive to emerge from their mothers’ wombs.

Says Clenard Childress Jr., director of the Northeast Chapter of the Life Education And Resource Network (LEARN) “For every five African-American women who get pregnant, three have an abortion.” Speaking to the Cybercast News Service he added. “This is a horrific injustice to women, and it’s decimating our communities.”

He quotes a number of disturbing statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: “– Since 1973, more than twice as many blacks have died from abortion than from heart disease, cancer, accidents, violent crimes and AIDS combined; Blacks make up about 12 percent of the population in the United States but account for 32 percent of the abortions; and about 1,450 black infants are aborted every day in this country.”

This is no accident, but largely the work of the nation’s largest arm of the abortion industry, Planned Parenthood, Inc., founded by Margaret Sanger, a eugenicist in the mold of Adolf Hitler who believed that eliminating blacks would purify the nation.

Rev. Richard Welch, then president of Human Life International in Front Royal, Va., once said, “Having sprung from the racist dreams of a woman determined to apply abortion and contraception to eugenics and ethnic cleansing, Planned Parenthood remains true to the same strategy today.”

“There is no way to escape the implications,” argued William L. Davis, a black financial analyst quoted by Professor George Grant in his book “Grand Illusions,” “When an organization has a history of racism, when its literature is openly racist, when its goals are self-consciously racial, and when its programs invariably revolve around race, it doesn’t take an expert to realize that the organization is indeed racist.”

Abortion is the number-one killer of blacks in America,” says Rev. Johnny Hunter of LEARN. “We’re losing our people at the rate of 1,452 a day. That’s just pure genocide. There’s no other word for it. [Sanger’s] influence and the whole mindset that Planned Parenthood has brought into the black community … say it’s okay to destroy your people. We bought into the lie; we bought into the propaganda.”

According to Grant: “During the 1980s when Planned Parenthood shifted its focus from community-based clinics to school-based clinics, it again targeted inner-city minority neighborhoods. Of the more than 100 school-based clinics that have opened nationwide [in the 1980s], none has been at substantially all-white schools,” he added. “None has been at suburban middle-class schools. All have been at black, minority or ethnic schools.”

Check it out, Min. Farrakhan. There’s a racist holocaust going on right under your nose and Bill Bennett has nothing to do with it.

©2005 Mike Reagan. If you’re not a paying subscriber to our service, you must contact us to print or web post this column. Mike’s column is distributed exclusively by: Cagle Cartoons, Inc. Cari Dawson Bartley email Cari@cagle.com, (800) 696-7561

Stop The Spending – Stop it Now

On Monday, January 21, 1985, during his second inaugural address, my father – President Ronald Reagan – gave the nation some very sound advice when he said, “We must act now to protect future generations from government’s desire to spend its citizens’ money and tax them into servitude when the bills come due. Let us make it unconstitutional for the Federal Government to spend more than the Federal Government takes in.”

Tragically we did not take that advice, and the United States government continues on a wild spending spree the likes of which has never before been seen in the nation.

What appalls me is the failure of George W. Bush and the Republican leadership in Congress – both proudly bearing the mantle of conservatism – to curb this obsession with squandering not only the money of today’s taxpayers, but that of future generations who will be saddled with the monstrous debts they have imposed.

This orgy of spending has to be stopped, and stopped now. If the Republican Party is to survive, it must reassert its traditional role as the guardian of the public treasury and the sworn foe of unrestrained government spending.

While the president and his allies in the GOP leadership on the Hill have been turning a deaf ear to the demands of rank and file Republicans – in and out of Congress – a growing coalition of Republican Senators and House members is charting a path towards restoring fiscal responsibility. And they are beginning to have an effect.

As Bob Novak has reported, on Monday night a group of GOP Senators led by Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., killed a measure that was drafted in secret under bipartisan auspices and in which its sponsors sought to sneak through a bill sending $9 billion into state Medicaid programs under the pretext of hurricane relief.

Now $9 billion is peanuts at a time when figures like $300 billion are tossed around for hurricane relief as if they were confetti, but it’s start, and a signal that a growing number of GOP legislators are saying they’ve had enough and are not going to take it anymore.

The other night Sen. George Allen, R-Va., told me that he and Congressman James Talent, R-Mo., are proposing a constitutional amendment giving the president the power of a line-item veto. This is an idea whose time has come – my father saw that power as one way to restrain the spending impulses of pork-obsessed members of Congress.

The whole deficit business goes back to 1974 with the Budget Impoundment Act of 1974, which took away the authority of the president to impound funds appropriated by Congress that he believes, if spent, would result in a budget deficit.

Since that time the president has been prevented from doing anything to curb wasteful pork-laden spending measures except vetoing complete bills, which in most cases proves to be impractical.

In most cases, therefore, no matter how frugal a president might be, he’s almost powerless when it comes to putting the reins on congressional spending. So clearly something needs to be done.

Congressman Mike Pence, R-Ind., and Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz, have been leading a move to find ways to offset the $200 or $300 billion now planned for hurricane relief. They and their GOP allies on the Hill are recommending holding back certain programs – such as the prescription drug plan – for a year, and diverting the tons of pork in the recently-enacted, pork-heavy federal highway bill to cover the cost of the relief programs.

Tragically, for daring to advance this sensible alternative to loading up the federal budget deficit, Pence was taken to the woodshed by the House GOP leadership. But the growing sentiment among rank-and-file members of Congress will not be quashed, and the leadership – like it or not – will have to fall in line.

If they don’t, you can bet that the Republican Party is going to lose control of Congress next year, and with Democrats in power government spending will go through the roof.

©2005 Mike Reagan. If you’re not a paying subscriber to our service, you must contact us to print or web post this column. Mike’s column is distributed exclusively by: Cagle Cartoons, Inc. Cari Dawson Bartley email Cari@cagle.com, (800) 696-7561

The Real Clinton Legacy: Chinese Condoms

No matter how hard the media try to rehabilitate Bill Clinton – the man who brought shame and dishonor to the presidency – he seems unable to shed the chronic misbehavior that marked his White House years, sullied his image, got him impeached and destroyed forever his hopes for any kind of legacy worth remembering.

What he did this past weekend, during seemingly endless TV appearances where he attacked President Bush, showed once again why he deserves to be held in contempt instead of being fawned over by a subservient media and the Democrat party, both ever anxious to pay homage to him no matter how low he sinks.

The media’s slavishly obsequious behavior during his widely-publicized “save the world conference” in New York last week was typified by a female Italian reporter who was overheard saying that Monica Lewinski- whose groveling was of a different, more basic form – was “lucky,” a remark on par with a similar gushing by one of her American sisters who once expressed the same sentiment in earthier terms, saying she would have been more than happy to perform the same lurid services for Bill Clinton that Miss Lewinski provided.

Some of the more honest journalists did admit that Clinton’s attacks on President Bush were off-limits, pointing out the fact that former presidents simply do not criticize their successors. It’s just not done. Unfortunately, they failed to add that Clinton’s criticism was also completely off base, like much of what he says.

The whole incident reminded me of one of my father’s finest moments when on the day of his inauguration in 1983, just minutes after learning that the American hostages in Iran had been freed, he sent former President Carter to greet the hostages and even gave him the use of Air Force One for his mission.

Dad had no reason beyond his great compassion and decency to treat the man he had defeated after a bruising campaign – where his opponent had viciously attacked him – with such a great and generous gesture. And from that moment on he never once spoke ill of Jimmy Carter nor did Jimmy Carter speak ill of him during his eight years in the White House.

Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter may have been worlds apart in their politics, but they shared one similarity – they were both gentlemen. It’s something that could never be said about Bill Clinton, now appropriately memorialized by the Chinese by having a line of condoms named after him. Our media and his fellow Democrats may not have his number, but the rest of the world does. Clinton’s condoms – what a legacy!

Clinton’s activities last weekend showed once again, that like his Democrat colleagues, he cannot stop wanting to run this country and run the world while he’s at it. The man’s overwhelming hunger for the spotlight marks everything he says and does.

He cannot bring himself to leave center stage and slip into the background. Nor can his fellow Democrat Chuck Schumer; when he sees a microphone the area between him and the mike becomes a hazardous place to be. Get near either of them and you could be trampled to death as they race to get in front of the TV camera.

Clinton’s ingratitude to the president who honored him once again by pairing him with his father to raise funds for the victims of Hurricane Katrina simply boggles the mind. At the very first opportunity he turned on the man who went out of his way to twice honor him with a prestigious assignment.

Chanting the Democrat party’s favorite mantra about the need to raise taxes so they can spend more of the people’s money on their pet spending schemes, Bill Clinton proved oblivious to the simple fact that the president’s tax-cutting policies have given the United States the fastest growing economy in the world. His obsession with tax increases would plunge the U.S. into the recession that he left behind when he and his wife slipped away from the White House with a few national treasures in their trunks. We hoped then that he was gone. He wasn’t.

Will he never go away?

©2005 Mike Reagan. If you’re not a paying subscriber to our service, you must contact us to print or web post this column. Mike’s column is distributed exclusively by: Cagle Cartoons, Inc. Cari Dawson Bartley email Cari@cagle.com, (800) 696-7561

A Memorial to Political Correctness

On September 11, 2001 nearly 3,000 people died when terrorists attacked the twin towers of New York’s World Trade Center. Now the survivors are being attacked by people carrying the banner of political correctness.

Where you would expect to find a memorial filled with artifacts of the tragedy designed to bring to life the memories of 9/11 you will instead find a shrine to political correctness and an expiation of liberal guilt. When it opens in 2010, most of the so-called International Freedom Center will be devoted to a series of cringing mea culpas for America’s alleged mistreatment of slaves and Native Americans and prisoners in Abu Ghraib, along with the tragedy of Soviet gulags and the Third Reich’s Holocaust.

Debra Burlingame sits on the board of directors of the World Trade Center Memorial Foundation. She is also the sister of Charles F. “Chic” Burlingame III, pilot of American Airlines Flight 77, which crashed into the Pentagon on 9/11. She wrote in The Wall Street Journal in June that visitors to Ground Zero will “want a vantage point that allows them to take in the sheer scope of the destruction, to see the footage and the photographs and hear the personal stories of unbearable heartbreak and unimaginable courage. They will want the memorial to take them back to who they were on that brutal September morning.

“Instead, they will get a memorial that stubbornly refuses to acknowledge the yearning to return to that day. Rather than a respectful tribute to our individual and collective loss, they will get a slanted history lesson, a didactic lecture on the meaning of liberty in a post-9/11 world. They will be served up a heaping foreign policy discussion over the greater meaning of Abu Ghraib and what it portends for the country and the rest of the world.

“While the International Freedom Center is getting 300,000 square feet of space to teach visitors how to think about liberty, the actual Memorial Center on the opposite corner of the site will get a meager 50,000 square feet to exhibit its 9/11 artifacts, all out of sight and underground.” Debra added that there is simply no room for most of the cherished artifacts salvaged from Ground Zero. “But the International Freedom Center will have ample space to present us with exhibits about Chinese dissidents and Chilean refugees.”

This outrage is the work of a collection of far-left crazies, including the anti-American ACLU, who are dishonoring the memory of those who died and their survivors in order to promote their corrupt agendas. They want us to acknowledge our alleged guilt for what happened to Native Americans and slaves even though not a single one of us ever killed a Native American or mistreated a slave, much less ever owned one.

I don’t go to Pearl Harbor to read how Native Americans or slaves or victims of the Holocaust suffered, or silly reasons why the Japanese were justified in attacking us. I go there to honor fallen Americans who died while serving our country.

If we allow these whacked-out liberals to get away with this we will deserve the scorn of every American who loves this country and honors those who gave their lives in its service.

This is an outrage, but you don’t hear about it in the mainstream media. CBS, NBC and ABC are too busy trying to pin the results of a national disaster in New Orleans on the president to tell the American people what is going on at Ground Zero. The protests of the survivors of those who perished on 9/11 go unheard.

I’ll give the final words to Debra Burlingame: “The people who visit Ground Zero in five years will come because they want to pay their respects at the place where heroes died. They will come because they want to remember what they saw that day, because they want a personal connection, to touch the place that touched them, the place that rallied the nation and changed their lives forever. I would wager that, if given a choice, they would rather walk through that dusty hangar at JFK Airport where 1,000 World Trade Center artifacts are stored than be herded through the International Freedom Center’s multi-million-dollar insult.

“Ground Zero has been stolen, right from under our noses. How do we get it back?”

©2005 Mike Reagan. If you’re not a paying subscriber to our service, you must contact us to print or web post this column. Mike’s column is distributed exclusively by: Cagle Cartoons, Inc. Cari Dawson Bartley email Cari@cagle.com, (800) 696-7561

Will Somebody Say Thank You?

Turn on TV, read the local newspaper or listen to your local radio station and all you are going to hear, see and read are accounts of people knee-deep in playing the blame game. What you don’t hear is anybody saying “thank you.”

From the safety of France, Pierce Brosnan took the time to tell the world: “This man called President Bush has a lot to answer for. I don’t know if this man is really taking care of America. This government has been shameful.” Instead of lifting a finger to help Katrina’s victims, this was the make-believe 007’s response to the tragedy.

Hollywood celebrity Sean Penn raced to New Orleans with his leaky boat in what became a Keystone Kops effort to rescue flood-stranded victims. He failed, but the cameras were there to record for posterity his gallantry in coming to their aid. Having lost that photo op, he launched into his usual leftist rhetoric to castigate the president, accusing the administration of criminal negligence, while his boat’s engine sputtered to a stop.

At a Labor Day rally, with his AFL-CIO union collapsing all around him, John Sweeney assured his members that what he alleged was the government’s slow response was a sign of hostility to workers. No kidding, he actually said that.

Can you just picture George Bush waking up in the morning and saying to Laura: “The hell with those workers. We’re not going to send help to New Orleans because we hate ‘em.”

As these bozos were collectively venting their liberal spleen at the president, huge caravans of trucks carry thousands of tons of food and water and clothing and other vital supplies were pouring into New Orleans from as far away as California and New York. Army and National Guard troops were arriving by the thousands, all sent under orders from the president. Did it occur to any of his critics to take a moment out to say “thank you” to George Bush?

Harry Connick Jr., a native resident of New Orleans, was there, but unlike his fellow celebrities he wasn’t spending his time making political speeches. Instead, he was in his boat – which didn’t leak – surrounded by toxic water and rescuing those mostly black folks trapped by the flood. Has anybody said “thank you” to Harry Connick Jr.?

From almost the moment the 17th Street dike broke, members of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers have been laboring day and night to repair the breech and stop any more of the lake waters from gushing into the streets of New Orleans – a job they have now completed. Has anybody said “thank you” to these dedicated and weary men? Not that I’ve heard.

All across the nation the left-wing wackos are squinting to find something they can complain about and blame on the president for alleged failures in the massive federal effort to cope with the worst natural disaster in American history. They can’t bring themselves to admit that a lot of good things are being done by the federal government and the horde of good people who are pitching in to help their fellow Americans. If they did they might have to say “thank you,” a phrase they don’t seem to have in their vocabularies.

When my wife asks me to vacuum the house, I inevitably miss a spot. She doesn’t jump all over me because I messed up, but, understanding what klutzes husbands are when it comes to domestic chores, she simply thanks me.

These liberal scoundrels don’t have it in them to thank those police, firemen, National Guardsmen, regular army soldiers, relief workers from FEMA and the Red Cross and all the others and the people in the Bush administration whose efforts are above and far beyond the call of duty.

They are too busy looking for the motes in the administration’s eyes to see the huge planks in their own.

All together now, let’s hear it: “Thank you President Bush, thank you Harry Connick Jr., thank you police and firemen and National Guardsmen and members of the Red Cross and Salvation Army and all you other heroes.”

©2005 Mike Reagan. If you’re not a paying subscriber to our service, you must contact us to print or web post this column. Mike’s column is distributed exclusively by: Cagle Cartoons, Inc. Cari Dawson Bartley email Cari@cagle.com, (800) 696-7561

The Blame Game

By now you’ve probably heard about the lunatic comments of Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the Cindy Sheehan of the environmental movement, who blamed Hurricane Katrina on President Bush and Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour for not buying into the global warming hype, and not signing up for the thoroughly-discredited Kyoto Treaty.

RFK is not alone in his delusions. In Europe the president is being castigated for not falling in line with all those Old World socialists eager to use the alleged warming of the world climate to create a new world order organized along the lines laid down by Karl Marx.

Their cynicism and political opportunism has drawn the scorn of the widely-acclaimed British social anthropologist Benny Peiser, a fellow of the Royal Astronomical Society whose research focuses on the effects of environmental change and catastrophic events on contemporary thought and societal evolution.

Here’s what he just wrote about the attacks on President Bush by the global warming fanatics:

“Notwithstanding continuing rescue and support efforts, the calamity has triggered a rather opportunistic and cynical reaction by opponents of the current U.S. Administration. In an eerie development that echoes the political exploitation of the Indian Ocean tsunami disaster last December, environmental campaigners, Green journalists and European officials are blaming (once again) the U.S. and its people for the devastation caused by Hurricane Katrina. Instead of supporting the rescue efforts, demagogues are using the human tragedy in a futile attempt to score points. At a time of utter desolation and misfortune, propagandists in high office and parts of the media are abandoning America and its victims for purely political goals.”

What he said next should endear him to every American: “Europeans in particular, who have been rescued and liberated from themselves by the U.S. no less than three times in the course of the 20th century, should feel ashamed for kicking a friend and ally when he is down. Let me re-assure our American friends and colleagues that this pitiless mind-set of environmental activists is not representative for the vast majority of Europeans who are following the heartbreaking events with great concern and empathy.”

Nobody could have said it better. I hope Germany’s environmental minister Jürgen Trittin was listening. He blames George Bush for hurricane Katrina despite the fact that that statistics don’t show a particularly increase in the frequency of hurricanes in the U.S. in the last decades.

According to Herr Trittin, President Bush has neglected environmental protection and shut his eyes “to the economic and human damage that natural catastrophes like Katrina inflict on his country and the world’s economy.”

He and his Econut pals should listen to Professor Kerry Emanuel of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who told Britain’s The Independent: “I don’t think you can put this down to global warming.”

Dr. William Gray, a Colorado State University meteorologist, considered one of the fathers of modern tropical cyclone science, says worldwide weather records were too inadequate for a thorough examination of trends. “The people who have a bias in favor of the argument that humans are making the globe warmer will push any data that suggests humans are making hurricanes worse, but it just isn’t so. These are natural cycles,” he told the New York Times.

In a 2001 paper in Science, by Stanley Goldenberg of the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Association (NOAA), it was explained that the Atlantic goes through decades-long stretches where it creates extra hurricanes while there are equally long lulls where the number of hurricanes is low.

Over recent decades we have been in a lull period. According to Professor John Molinari, of Albany’s State University of New York: “We were way below normal levels for hurricanes in the 1970s, ’80s, and ’90s.” Now he says it appears that Goldenberg and his colleagues were right, and that the east coast of the United States is in a period of increased hurricane activity that could last 20 years or more.”

And George Bush has nothing to do with that. It’s all Mother Nature’s fault.

©2005 Mike Reagan. If you’re not a paying subscriber to our service, you must contact us to print or web post this column. Mike’s column is distributed exclusively by: Cagle Cartoons, Inc. Cari Dawson Bartley email Cari@cagle.com, (800) 696-7561

Who Does Cindy Really Hate?

Sigmund Freud had a concept he called “projection, which has been defined as a defense where the ego deals with unacceptable impulses and/or terrifying anxieties by attributing them to someone in the external world.

In many ways I think that explains the behavior of the media’s current patron saint, Cindy Sheehan, whose hate rhetoric aimed at President Bush is really meant for someone else who she can’t admit even to herself is her real target. To do so would represent one of those “unacceptable impulses” Dr. Freud was talking about.

In this case it could well be that Cindy Sheehan is projecting her rage at George Bush when the one she really despises is her late son Casey, who died as a hero in Iraq, precisely because he did die a hero in Iraq.

The more I listen to Cindy Sheehan and consider her past actions and her past words, it occurs to me she has always been a liberal, she’s always been anti-military, and she’s always been anti-Republican. It appears that she raised Casey in such an environment, yet despite that what does he do? He not only joins the military engaged in a war she bitterly opposes, but to add insult to injury when his enlistment runs out, he re-enlists although he knew that by so doing it meant he would be sent to Iraq where a war his mother despises is being fought.

Think about that. What Casey did was to reject not by words but by deeds his mother’s most closely-held beliefs.

Then, to make matter worse in her eyes, this son volunteers to go on a dangerous mission even his superiors warned him against, and dies as a result. Casey Sheehan’s sergeant asked for volunteers. Sheehan had just returned from Mass. After Sheehan volunteered once, the sergeant asked Sheehan again if he wanted to go on the mission. According to many reports (and according to his own mother) Casey responded, “Where my chief goes, I go.”

He went, and it cost him his life. You can almost hear her saying to his spirit, “How dare you spurn me and turn your back on me? How dare you go join the military, and then how dare you volunteer to fight against the innocent Iraqi freedom fighters and get yourself killed?”

Casey Sheehan’s heroic action has embittered Cindy Sheehan. And her actions have embittered her family who bitterly resent her exploitation of her son’s heroic death in behalf of her political extremism. Here’s what they wrote to Matt Drudge:

“The Sheehan Family lost our beloved Casey in the Iraq War and we have been silently, respectfully grieving. We do not agree with the political motivations and publicity tactics of Cindy Sheehan. She now appears to be promoting her own personal agenda and notoriety at the expense of her son’s good name and reputation. The rest of the Sheehan Family supports the troops, our country, and our president, silently, with prayer and respect.”

Cindy Sheehan says she wants to ask the president, “Why did you kill my son?” She knows that George Bush did not kill her son. The butchers she supports with her far-out liberal activism killed Casey Sheehan and that activism is now resulting in the deaths of other young Americans because she is giving aid and comfort to our enemies and encouraging them to persist in their terrorism, giving them hope that if her views prevail the U.S. will lose its will and pull out. And so the fight goes on, and more Casey Sheehans die as a result.

And she says of her son, “He died for oil. He died to make your friends,” Bush’s friends, “richer. He died to expand American imperialism in the Middle East.”

How dare he?

Cindy Sheehan doesn’t need to talk to the president. A talk with a therapist would be more appropriate.

©2005 Mike Reagan. If you’re not a paying subscriber to our service, you must contact us to print or web post this column. Mike’s column is distributed exclusively by: Cagle Cartoons, Inc. Cari Dawson Bartley email Cari@cagle.com, (800) 696-7561

The Chickens Come Home To Roost

Back on May 21, 2004 in a column “Send out the Clowns,” I wrote about the. 9/11 Commission, warning that “It’s time to shut this farce down and send its members back into their well-earned obscurity.”

Recent events proved I was right about this sorry collection of showboating has-beens who had just devoted most of their hearings in New York to attacking such 9/11 heroes as Rudy Giuliani and his police and fire commissioners.

I specifically mentioned Democrat Commissioner Jamie Gorelick, who I wrote should have been a witness forced to explain how as former Attorney General Janet Reno’s deputy she had helped cripple the intelligence community, instead of a being a commission member.

With the recent exposure of the Clinton administration’s refusal to accept and act on information concerning 9/11 terrorist Mohammed Atta and three of his fellow hijackers – information that if acted upon might well have prevented 9/11 and saved 3000 innocent lives lost in that outrage – the recent disgraceful performance of the 9/11 Commission is plain for all to see.

Now a memo written long before 9/11 by then-Manhattan U.S. Attorney Mary Jo White, a Clinton appointee, has been obtained by the New York Post. In it White pleaded in vain with Deputy Attorney General Gorelick to tear down the wall between intelligence and prosecutors, a wall the Post noted went beyond legal requirements.

According to the Post’s Washington Bureau Chief Deborah Orin, White’s team foresaw, years in advance, that the Clinton-era wall would make it tougher to stop mass murder.

“This is not an area where it is safe or prudent to build unnecessary walls or to compartmentalize our knowledge of any possible players, plans or activities,” wrote White. “The single biggest mistake we can make in attempting to combat terrorism is to insulate the criminal side of the house from the intelligence side of the house, unless such insulation is absolutely necessary. Excessive conservatism . . . can have deadly results.”

The memo was ignored. Orin then turns her keen eye on the 9/11 Commission, which was charged with tracing the failure to stop 9/11 and got White’s stunning memo and several related documents – “and deep-sixed all of them.

“The commission’s report skips lightly over the wall in three brief pages (out of 567). It makes no mention at all of White’s passionate and prescient warnings. Yet warnings that went ignored are just what the commission was supposed to examine.”

Concluded Orin, “So it’s hard to avoid the conclusion that the commission ignored White’s memo because it was a potential embarrassment to the woman to whom it was addressed: commission member Jamie Gorelick.”

This whole matter unearthed by Rep. Curt Weldon, R-Penn., is a bombshell but you’d never know it from reading the mainstream media – or rather not reading it since the mainstream media is all but ignoring it, or even worse, distorting the facts.

According to Rep. Weldon members of Able Danger, a special intelligence investigative group, were kept out of the 9/11 Commission investigation and ignored in their final report. A member of the group told the Washington Times that despite having briefed commission staff members on two occasions about the Mohamed Atta-led terrorist cell and telling them of a lockdown of information between the Defense Department and the FBI, they were ignored.

Accusations that commission staffers were briefed on the Able Danger operation but ignored the information in the final report came from Rep. Weldon, who said potential political fallout was one reason he was given for the information not being turned over to the FBI.

“How could a top-secret operation against al-Qaeda not be mentioned in the 9/11 document?” Weldon said. “It’s outrageous. It looks like someone at the staff level decided not to pursue that information.”

This is a major scandal. Had it occurred under the Bush administration the media would be in an uproar and Democrats would be screaming for the president’s scalp. But since it happened because the Clinton administration failed to act, the media is all but ignoring it. I guess it doesn’t bother the media that 3000 innocent people died as a result of the Clinton administration’s failures. Instead they prefer to concentrate on the ranting and ravings of poor Cindy Sheehan.

©2005 Mike Reagan. If you’re not a paying subscriber to our service, you must contact us to print or web post this column. Mike’s column is distributed exclusively by: Cagle Cartoons, Inc. Cari Dawson Bartley email Cari@cagle.com, (800) 696-7561