home > archive > 2006 > this article

Search this site Search WWW
Readers seize Enter Stage Right

Write today!Got a bone to pick with us? Did we get something really wrong? Did we get something right? Need to vent?

Then write a letter to ESR for publication! Names withheld by request and all letters are subject to editing for length, clarity or language. Letters from anywhere on the political spectrum are welcome and will be printed. Please state whether you wish your name to appear with the email.

Send your hate-filled vitriol or love-filled praise to editor@enterstageright.com

RE: Good news from the Battleground Poll by Bruce Walker (October 16, 2006)

Thank you for this article. Amidst all the hyperventilation about this year's election, as Dr. Henry Lee said during the OJ trial, "Something wrong." Some things weren't adding up to me, to wit:

1) Only two short years ago, President Bush won with about 52% percent of the vote, while Kerry won with about 48%. I would wager that many, many people voted for Kerry because they hated Bush, but I seriously doubt many people voted for Bush because they hated Kerry. Which suggest to me that of the two, the more conservative side had more solid support than the liberal side. If people really wanted the liberal candidate, they had one. But they didn't take it - why?

2) While certainly downplayed in the media, the economy is pretty dang good. Someone has to be working, if about 95% of Americans are. Someone has to be propelling the stock market to new heights (and yes, Mr. Democratic Talking Head - Wall Street isn't Main Street - Main Street supports Wall Street, considering how many average Americans are in the market.) someone has to be pushing consumer confidence up. Someone has to happy their taxes are lower. So I am to believe, that with a good economy, voters are suddenly going to vote to turn it off?

3) I've noticed about politics that everyone loves to trash "politicians" - but in the end, it tends to be that they don't mind their own guy so much - it's the other guy that they want gone. And if political scandal was that effective, why didn't the Duke Cunningham seat go to a Democrat? Why did Ray Nagin get reelected?

4) So far, NO Democrat has explained to me how my being unhappy or disappointed in some things that Bush et al have done is going to suddenly make me be for things like national health care, higher taxes, a tepid response to terrorism. and granting illegal aliens voting status. Do they really believe that because Mark Foley was a jerk, I'm suddenly going to embrace Nancy Pelosi as Speaker, and an end to my tax cuts?

5) I am very leery of most polls. Polls are nothing more than emotionally based points in time. I don't trust who conducts the poll, I don't trust how the sample is gather and of whom it consists, and I don't trust how questions are written. I don't trust that people who answer polls are telling the truth. I don't trust the conclusion the polls arrive at, for example: A common poll question is, "Do you think the country is headed in the right direction?" Well, I'd have to answer no - however, Democrats take that to mean that I want it going in their direction, which I do not.

6) Am I to believe there are no Democrats whose seats are in danger? That only the contested races are those where the GOP is being challenged? That while some GOP seats may be lost, none will be offset by any GOP wins?

My larger point is, of course, that we know the media is agenda driven and prone to bias. We know they are trying to create an impression to discourage certain voters from voting (namely, conservative GOP voters who are traditionally better at voting than the "Vote or Die" crowd). And we have the so-called "new media" with millions of listeners, to encourage us. (If America really wanted Air America's message, it would seem that their filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection is an odd public endorsement.)

The fat lady may be warming up. I just wouldn't be so sure yet she's going to be warbling for our side.

Pamela Tucker
Maumee Ohio

web posted October 16, 2006

Re: Clint Eastwood's Flags of Our Fathers

Before you read the synopsis in Variety, just imagine what an old, newly self- found sensitive hand-wringer like ole Clint would do with a World War II movie. Especially, after so one- sided a view on euthanasia with a trendy boxing butch movie that is so close to our hearts and interest.

I would have to see this Oscar barnburner once in order to ever think about seeing it twice.

Keep fresh in your mind Hollywood's view of wars, from MASH 's anti-Korean War hippie TV, to Saving Private Ryan's shaky and blithering leader, to Mel's screwy last second breakdown in We Were Soldiers, and absolutely ‘everything' in between.

Then read the synopsis and find out how predictably wise and sensitive Eastwood is.

Certainly, in the sequel Eastwood and Spielberg have waiting to cash in on... the war seen from the Japanese side, we can expect to explore the fact the Japanese soldiers (of the times), were ‘just like us' and despised war and evil as much as we actually do.

There is two problems with retro wars no one in Hollywood actually took part in because they were commie cool cowards cozing (how's that for alliteration) up to the worst enemy going into some three hundred years now..... the sons and branches of Marx.

They weren't there anymore than I was, and secondly they take anecdotal individual related experiences and paint militaries with a broad brush.

Despite the horrors many went through, how many soldiers would have not done what they had to do and die for, if necessary? Wars are fought when evil raises its ugly head and has to be responded to. Yes, Hollywood and modern news media, evil does exist ( in varied forms) and destroys ‘goodness' though equally...... you know little of that.

If my father and three wounded uncles from the beaches of Europe had some deep great albatross hanging round their necks, they certainly didn't exhibit it in any form to me, nor did they brag, especially when a childless uncle gave me his medals simply because I took an interest in them.

Were all soldiers in Vietnam hand-wringers and ashamed of what they tried to accomplish, handicapped by Hollywood, communist academia, and socialist media?

Are all soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan hand-wringers and ashamed of what they are accomplishing.

Clint... just retire instead of trying to keep up with Opraist trend on a different curve from most of us.

Paul Gordon
Pickering, Ontario, Canada



Site Map

Email ESR

Musings - ESR's blog




1996-2020, Enter Stage Right and/or its creators. All rights reserved.

You've seen the banner, now order the gear!
Visit ESR's anti-gun control gear web site for T-shirts, mugs and mousepads!