Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
Michelle Malkin :: Townhall.com Columnist
Sally Field Doesn't Speak for Me
by Michelle Malkin
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Do you feel the leaked information from a global warming alarmist organization is meaningful?



Like actress Sally Field, I am a mom. Unlike Sally Field, I do not live in La-La Land. We breathe a different brand of oxygen. We hold diametrically opposed worldviews. We have nothing in common but stretch marks.

Contrary to tongue-tied Sally's incoherent Primetime Emmy Awards diatribe, childbearing and childrearing experiences do not bond all women in a universal sorority of non-confrontation. There are sheep moms. There are lion moms. We know which kind Sally Field is.

"If mothers ruled the, ruled the world, there would be no god-damned wars in the first place," Field bleated. In the Gidget Guide to Parenting, mothers are appeasers and hand-holders. Our maternal instincts supposedly lead us to shun fights and coddle bullies instead of disciplining them.

There would be "no god-damned wars," Silly Sally, because we'd all be conquered chattel if Field Diplomacy "ruled the world."

Motherhood and peace-making are not synonymous. Motherhood requires ferocity, the will and resolve to protect one's own children at all costs, and a life-long commitment to sacrifice for a family's betterment and survival. Conflict avoidance is incompatible with good mothering.

On the playground of life, Sally Field is the mom who looks the other way when the brat on the elementary school slide pushes your son to the ground or throws dirt in your daughter's face.

She's the mom who holds her tongue at the mall when thugs spew profanities and make crude gestures in front of her brood. She's the mom who tells her child never to point out when a teacher gets her facts wrong.

She's the mom who buys her teenager beer, condoms and a hotel room on prom night, because she'd rather give in than assert her parental authority and do battle.

She's the mom whose minivan sports insipid bumper stickers preaching non-intervention at all costs: "Peace is patriotic." "War is not the answer." "It Will Be a Great Day When Our Schools Get All the Money They Need and the Air Force Has to Hold a Bake Sale to Buy a Bomber."

Hollywood can afford to indulge Sally Field's inarticulate naivete. America cannot. And the very moms that Sally Field claims to speak for know it.

This weekend, I met dozens of military mothers in Washington, D.C., who fervently oppose the Sally Field/Cindy Sheehan model of maternal submission and immediate surrender. They were among several thousand grass-roots activists who turned out for the "Gathering of Eagles" counter-demonstration on the National Mall.

Deborah Johns, mother of William, a Marine who has served three tours of duty in Iraq, condemned the Left's demonization of Gen. David Petraeus and urged Congress to oppose a precipitous withdrawal from Iraq. "Cindy Sheehan doesn't speak for me," Johns said. "She has never spoken for me. And she will never speak for me. . . . We are not going to let the domestic enemies at home defeat us like they did" during the Vietnam War.

Debbie Lee, mother of Mark, the first Navy SEAL killed in Iraq, rejected the anti-war movement's infantilization of the troops. She was galled at the George Soros-funded ANSWER "die-in" usurping the names and legacies of those who have died serving in Iraq. Describing her son's heroism and her support of the counterinsurgency efforts in Iraq, she said: "You can't 'take' someone's life who gives it . . . and Mark willingly gave his life. . . . God redeployed Mark to heaven."

In Sally World, these mothers and their sons are helpless victims. In Sally World, self-defense is for "war-mongers." In Sally World, you can pretend that the bloodthirsty mothers who strap al Qaeda suicide bomb vests on their toddlers and sit them down in front of the television to watch the Jew-hating Hamas Mickey Mouse don't exist. In Sally World, you need only to embrace our enemies, "imagine" peace and rub your Emmy Award like a magic lamp as you wish global jihad away.

In the real world, not all women think with their wombs instead of their brains. In the real world, you can't just give evil a "time-out." Sally Field fancies herself the mother of all spokesmothers. To which I say, in my most maternally combative tone: Speak for your own bleepin' self, sister.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Michelle Malkin makes news and waves with a unique combination of investigative journalism and incisive commentary. She is the author of Unhinged: Exposing Liberals Gone Wild .

Be the first to read Michelle Malkin's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

©Creators Syndicate
Spartan Tatoos and Nitpicking
Noticed that some Marines were getting tattooed an old Spartan saying wrong. The actual quote is, "Come home with (or carrying) your shield or on it." Personally if you want to make a connection to the Spartan 300 at Thermoplylae why not get the most famous military epitaph ever, "Go tell the Spartans, stranger passing by, that here according to Spartan law we lie." Another sweet tattoo would be King Leonidas comment to Persian generals telling him to lay down his arms. His answer was "Come and get them." The modern monument to Thermopylae bears both these quotes although the scene of the battle is far from the ocean now and hard to picture.
Feanor M.A. History/Ancient Greece

Sally Speaks for more People than You.
SALLY FIELD SPEAKS FOR FAR MORE PEOPLE THAN YOU DO.

...

This war is not about a lioness protecting its cubs. It's about retaliation for an oil deal gone wrong. You're in media, you do the research: Georgie Bush Junior had already
stated his intention to go after Osama Bin Laden long before the events of 9-11 (which for him was manna from heaven); it gave him a feasible excuse to start spilling innocent blood.

To use your own analogy: It's school yard bullies throwing sand in each other’s faces, except that the cost is in human lives-—roughly 3/4 million so far.

...

In Sally-world self-defence is locking your doors and windows, and maybe using an improvised weapon against an intruder.

In Michelle-world self-defence is driving your SUV through the neighbor’s bedroom wall, and splattering the place with pig-hunting rifles.

You want some discipline in the world? Then go get Georgie Bush Junior, lay him over your knee and give him the thrashing that Barbara never did. Put the bully back in his place.

...

The "united" States of America is not the world’s police force. It does not by any means have the right to barge into another country flailing its own weapons of mass destruction all over the place whilst screaming "You will have democracy, whether you want it or not!!!"

...

Sally tries to be a dove of peace, while Michelle strives to be a bomb-laden loon.

...

In Sally-world we all preach love and peace and try to get on and when agreement can't be reached, we politely agree to disagree.

...

Here’s a couple of bumper stickers for you:

"For your favorite fascist drivel, tune into channel OFF, and learn to think for yourself."

"Dont blame me for Bush. I voted with the majority--TWICE!"

Grow up Michele
While I think highly of Michelle Malkin she still is very young and needs to grow up.
Once in a while Michelle embarrasses herself with her unthinking youthful arrogance!

Sally Field was speaking from the heart
and Michelle knows how many people have been murdered in this horrible war.
Did this war have to happen?

Many people know this WAR is the result of the elite
wanting more power and profits-now why doesn't Michelle discuss that?
If Terrorism is the real problem
WHY ON EARTH ARE OUR BORDERS WIDE OPEN?
Grow up Michelle and get your head out of the clouds.

Out-of-control judges
I wrote:

"... The court abrogated unto itself the power of one of the other branches; we unfortunately have moved so far from the concept of separation of powers that the other branches do not defend their powers when the court usurps them."

sentido wrote:
"This is my primary complaint regarding the current state of our government. Judge Bork called it a judicial coup d'etat, and I am compelled to agree."

I thought I'd end on this note. I don't think I can add anything further. I can only agree. The constitution provides a remedy for malfeasant judges, but unfortunately I haven't seen anyone with the political courage to attempt to impeach a judge in my lifetime.

Remedy?
I wrote:

"Did you settle the question of remedy yet?"

sentido wrote:

'Not much to settle. The "intent of the voter" standard had been the gold standard for a hundred years ...'

Sorry. I should have been clearer. There are so many posts to wade through, and quite frankly I stopped reading after the first 200 or so. I meant the question of remedy as it relates to our constitutional rights and your examples of Johnny Walker Lindh and Jose Padilla.

Reagan
sentido wrote:

'...Sally Field merely restated what Ronald Reagan said a generation ago: "History teaches that war begins when governments believe the price of aggression is cheap." ...'

I wrote:
'If you believe that Reagan was saying the same thing then you clearly don't understand what Reagan was saying.

Hint: "Peace through strength."'

sentido wrote:

"Speaking softly, and carrying a big stick. You don't mess around with a 380-lb. lineman, because of what he is capable of doing to you. This is the soul of detente.

You don't have to [act] like a bully to defend yourself. "

I'm sorry, but this is absolutely backwards, and is in line with the current liberal re-writes of what Reagan stood for and how he governed. Reagan ended the policy of detente. His position was that MAD was insanity and his stated position was the defeat of the Soviet Union. He was not saying that if one's military was large enough it would deter aggression. He was saying that only the reliable threat of an aggressive response would deter aggression. This is a perfect assessment of the situation in the 1970s, when non-response to Soviet aggression around the world left the Soviets confident enough to engage in their first direct, non-proxy invasion of another state in over 20 years. Reagan began to respond to the Soviet proxies around the world. His message was that threats must be engaged and not appeased; appeasement is what cheapens the price of aggression.

Over the top and out of bounds
I wrote:

"Ann Coulter's left-wing counterpart would be Maureen Dowd, who gets a New York Times column."

sentido wrote:

"If Maureen Dowd is close to the edge, Coulter is a freakin' base-jumper. There's no one who compares to the Coultergeist on the Left who gets air time, with the possible exception of Al Sharpton."

We'll never come to agreement on that score, I'm afraid. I believe Maureen Dowd is every inch as snarky as Ann Coulter, and about half as substantive. She is also, being a liberal, far more celebrated in major media circles.

Actually, having read many references to Bush as Hitler, Cheney as Darth Vader, etc. from the left my opinion is that Ann is the only high-profile conservative writer who routinely uses the debating tactics of the left and that this is what actually drives them nuts. They recognize arguments made with invective and name-calling when it comes from someone else.

citations and arguments
I wrote:

"...Oh, and please (and I include all parties when I say this,) stop throwing up links and expecting others to research your own arguments for you ..."

sentido wrote:

"I'd love to, save for the fact that comments are limited to 2,000 characters, and presentation of a thorough case for judicial overreaching, by way of example, requires many times that."

I feel your pain, but unfortunately we're all laboring under the same restriction. I don't entirely disagree with the decision to impose that limit. This is, after, a comments section and not any one of our personal blogs. The scope of the discussion is going to be, by its very nature, somewhat limited.

The Horse, the Wolf, and the Man
Sentido I won't take space here to copy your version of the tale Azimov retold. If you know anything about American History you know that Abraham Lincoln, who I consider one of our greatest presidents, blatantly violated Constitutional rights during the Civil War. After the war, the legislature reasserted itself bringin charges against Andrew Johnson. Grant, a great general but a weak President followed Johnson. The power of the Presidency was greatly weakened until Grover Cleveland who restored some presidential power, but it wasn't until Teddy Roosevelt, a Democrat in Republican clothing, that the Presidency really began a resurgence. And of course Teddy's Cousin, Franklin again blatantly violated the Constitution during a time of extreme national crisis. By the way, Roosevelt the Second's administration was littered with Communists, most notably Alger Hiss. But that's beside the point. I personally don't regard the Patriot Act as anywhere near as impinging on Constitutional Rights as the very necessary actions taken by either Lincoln or FDR during times of national crisis.

Sentido writes
"Harvard University law professor Alan Dershowitz asserted that 'the decision in the Florida election case may be ranked as the single most corrupt decision in Supreme Court history, because it is the only one that I know of where the majority justices decided as they did because of the personal identity and political affiliation of the litigants. This was cheating, and a violation of the judicial oath.'

In fact, Justice Thomas' wife was given a job vetting candidates for the new Bush Administration -- an obvious conflict of interest, as there might not have been a Bush Administration, if not for his vote."

I wouldn't expect Mr. Dershowitz to say anything else since he is a flaming liberal. Whatever Conservative actions the Court takes I have no doubt he would find a way to criticize it.

Sentido, do you actually believe that Thomas would have voted the other way if his wife had not done what you allege?

If Thomas had not voted the way he did then the Democrats would have stolen the election. Remember in Broward County I think it was, the Dems tried to keep Republican representatives away from vote recounts. The idea of examing ballots to see how people might have voted was rediculous in the first place. Bush won in Florida, get over it.

No Malkin...
She speaks for mothers who LOVE their children.

Gray Ghost
and Richard Jaeckel as the coward who bugs out during the artillery barrage in the forest, and James Arness as the trooper who gets shot at the railroad because he doesn't keep moving the operating rod on his M1 so it doesn't freeze in the cold. And that French starlet who cut the slices off a loaf of bread while holding it between, uh against her chest. And Fernando Lamas as Chili. "How can they miss, they have Chili as an aiming stake" I didn't understand that remark until several years later when i was Army myself. Denise Darcel, that was the girls's name.

This is why we love Michelle
How is it that the women seem to have more cohones than the men these days? Or has it always been like that?

Ok 2
sentido wrote:

'...Harvard University law professor Alan Dershowitz asserted that "the decision in the Florida election case may be ranked as the single most corrupt decision in Supreme Court history, because it is the only one that I know of where the majority justices decided as they did because of the personal identity and political affiliation of the litigants. ...'

Well, that's Dershowitz's opinion, based on his own wishes for his own preferred outcome. Unfortunately, in the age of judicial overreach, there was no good remedy. The proper thing, the REPUBLICAN (as in the form of government) response to the situation would have been for the Florida legislature to recognize it's constitutional authority and prerogative and tell the Florida Supreme Court to go fly a kite. The court abrogated unto itself the power of one of the other branches; we unfortunately have moved so far from the concept of separation of powers that the other branches do not defend their powers when the court usurps them.

That is, of course, my opinion.


Did you settle the question of remedy yet? Quite frankly, I don't have time to read through all of the posts.

Oh, and please (and I include all parties when I say this,) stop throwing up links and expecting others to research your own arguments for you. If you're going to provide a proof, explain it yourself and provide the link as a source for corroboration. Don't just throw up a link as your argument.

Thanks.

Ok, I'm a latecomer
sentido

sentido wrote:

'...Sally Field merely restated what Ronald Reagan said a generation ago: "History teaches that war begins when governments believe the price of aggression is cheap." ...'

If you believe that Reagan was saying the same thing then you clearly don't understand what Reagan was saying.

Hint: "Peace through strength."

sentido wrote:
'...As for invective, if any Kossack were to bust off a Coulter-esque screed -- even a left-wing one -- he or she would be thrown off in rather short order. Annthrax is over-the-top; her left-wing counterpart wouldn't last long. ...'

Ann Coulter's left-wing counterpart would be Maureen Dowd, who gets a New York Times column. Would Kos throw Dowd off?

sentido wrote:

'...As for the Geneva conventions, we are signatories and as such, bound to obey them to the letter. ...'

The Geneva conventions make clear distinctions between lawful and unlawful combatants for the express purpose of providing an incentive for signatories to adhere to the rules of war that they establish. Unlawful combatants are excluded from its protections for this very reason.

Sentido, you raped me
Sentido,

you raped me but failed convincing that I felt good and am satisfied.

Now I can't help but do late-term abortion by cutting off the heads of unborn but already survivable hydra you impregnated me with.

After that I should find an attractive tattooed neutro-man and offer him my hand, heart, and my right to marry h[er]im.

Good bye.

Be a good libertine Republican, please.

And, sure, two typos more for applause
It should be this:
1. "through your mouth (which serves you for much worse substance than fire)."
2. http://www.PoemsAndReflectionsConstantineIvanov.com

Sorry. Sentido tired me out.

Sorry, not 'who' but 'how'
Sorry for a typo, not 'who' but 'how' your 'privacy right' works:

Sentido, to your I honestly don't know
Sentido, don't disappoint me:
you wrote:
"The burning of a flag is political expression."
Again - perversion! Damn! It's not 'expression', it's the ACTION.
You are burning the Flag not as an Indian fakir, through your mouth (it serves you for much worse substance that fire). You SET the Flag on fire, meaning you intentionally prepare fire, maybe, gas, or something else. It's a set of actions to perform an ACTION.

It's like as if I say: Sentido, I'll kill you!
This is a political EXPRESSION. The First Amendment works.
I am actually killing you (just tell me what weapon do you prefer! I would choose for you a heavy axe)- it's a political (in this particular case) ACTION. The First Amendment void.

It's your friends street smarties-lefty lawyers perverted the First Amendment.
Don't you understand that? Do you have any idea what HONOR and CONSCIENCE mean?

You wrote:
"the only rights and freedoms you libs so annoyingly screech about are, ... rights to mock the natural institution of marriage (called homosexual marriage); ... rights to burn own flag and call treason 'patriotism' and thus avoid prosecution."

I say:
you conveniently omitted the right I mentioned in this sentence:
the right to cut off heads of unborn but already survivable babies directly in wombs [of mostly sex-over-addicted unmarried damsels] that you conveniently call 'pro-choice.'

Decent people would pass a law obligating every single citizen of the USA to watch a movie about late-term abortion. Did you watch? I did.
Take a look at my web site - you'll find real images who your 'privacy right' works:
JulCon@PoemsAndReflectionsConstantineIvanov.com.

Then, hopefully, it will be less mad gals.

But you call this kind of killing 'right of privacy'. I like such a privacy.
Why then not all killers are excused?

Sentido, to encourage in your progress..
Sentido The Great,

Freedom of Speech?

Students of the Columbia University assaulted the Chairman of Minutemen (no punishment at all) but invited Ahmadinejad;
students of many other Universities assaulted Republicans speakers (no punishment at all.)

al-Sharp Ton raised his racist voice – Imus lost his job.

Cactie O'Dunnart was evacuating cisterns of feces on Republicans several years in row; she was finally fired only due to the fact that the rate of the show went below any basement.

I personally tried to post my comments on Libs sites. Rejected, simply: I click 'Submit' and ZILCH.
Meanwhile, feces from the left keep falling.

On the other hand, there is NO ONE CASE when Democrat speakers were mistreated in any way.
No one Lib has been rejected on forums, even you (kidding), unless a comment consists only from obscenities (way to often by lefties.)

All these disgraceful events were caused, organized, and performed by so much lefties that they made a circuit around the Globe and became by their methods ultra-right in Nazi sense of word.

You Libs adore yelling about privacy and you, Sentido, are not an exception.
Well. Then why are you Democrat?
Democrats stay on the platform of government regulation of everything and everybody.
The Democratic dream is to nationalize everything; to control production industries; insurance industries; entertainment industries, press, education, and so forth. Democratic idol Hillary proposed a Socialist Health plan and failed; now she proposed another one, under different name, and again, government doesn't disappear in her plan, rather opposite.
On every single sneeze we have a special law.
But...
Rapists of few-year-old girls get six month.

I could continue endlessly.
Yes, I can acknowledge, there are some cases 'not kosher' from Rep side, too.
But just compare. Be honest.

Hopefully, you can be honest, at least during your sleep time.

Sentido, progress again
Sentido The Great, you show progress again.
A few more steps and we can become friends. Well, almost.

You wrote:
"Activism on either side of the aisle is corrosive to the rule of law, and should never be countenanced."

Yes, Sentido, yes.
This is exactly what I was dying to hear from you.

One effort more, please:
Tell me were you found 'right bench activism.' Please don't raise examples from Age of Reptiles.

OK, even if you find one, count the 'Wrong* bench activism' honestly.

* Wrong as opposed to Right.

Sentido, you cause tooth pain
Sentido The Great,

you cause nightmarish tooth pain.

I couldn't even imagine such a great 'compote' of pompous stupidity, demagogy, dogmatism, and romantic Messianizm can exist.

Your problem is that separate excerpts from different sources blended in your damaged grey matter and with your full incompatibility with any kind of logic constituted a very poisonous substance that drastically affected your stomach walls.

I give up. De mortuis aut nihil aut bene (even I disagree.)

Oh, btw, surprise! I am not...guess who? not Stalinist, neither outside nor inside. Nihil.
But you are not ready yet to understand.
Poor over-brainwashed kid.

WoodButcher, to your collection
WoodButcher, to your collection:

Q. Why women are not allowed to the Army?
A. Because given an order "Lie down!" they lie down on their back.

Now I am sure this is about Hollywood.

Women and Combat
I remember a professor of mine said that he didn't think women should be allowed to serve in combat because they were far too vicious and would not respect the rules fo warfare.

DJF, thanks
DJF,

you are so right about 'judicial tyranny.'

It seems, Sentido doesn't understand or doesn't want to understand what a great perversion those loony judges-activists caused to the Constitution and the entire judicial system.

My uncle who was recently nominated "New Saint Martyr Cyprian" (See http://www.fond.ru/book/book7/7-14.htm) was one of victims of the similar 'judicial tyranny' of Commies: he spent his last years in GULAG.

The Constitution
"Article 125 of the former Soviet Union's 1936 Constitution purported to guarantee Soviet citizens' freedom of speech. But as Stalin's law courts never enforced those rights, if you ever dared to speak freely on public issues of the day, you were sent to the gulag in one of Andrei Vyshinsky's infamous show trials. Stalin's judges were knowing accomplices to this judicial travesty, never failing to find the facts Vyshinsky needed to hear.

If the courts are at liberty to refuse to enforce them at their leisure, the Bill of Rights has all the value of toilet paper."

Exactly, sentido, which is why there is a separation of powers built into the U.S. Constition. Which is why the real damage that Bill Clinton did during his presidency was to appoint leftist judges who have no problem taking over the powers of the legislature. The result is a growing movement towards judicial tyranny. That is why a strict interpretation of the Constitution is so damn necessary for the Bill of Rights to be preserved.

By the way, you didn't answer my question. Are you a trial lawyer?

Only for Sentido, Franklin-lover
Sentido The Great, you love Franklin.
I love him, too.
He loved you, too.
Enjoy:
"A countryman between two lawyers is like a fish between two cats."

"A good conscience is a continual Christmas."

"A learned blockhead is a greater blockhead than an ignorant one."

"All who think cannot but see there is a sanction like that of religion which binds us in partnership in the serious work of the world."

"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do."

"Being ignorant is not so much a shame, as being unwilling to learn."

"By failing to prepare, you are preparing to fail."

"Either write something worth reading or do something worth writing."

"Experience is a dear teacher, but fools will learn at no other."

"Honesty is the best policy."

From now on, you may want to start quoting a phrase I created specially for you:

Those who don't have own thoughts, often use somebody else's.
Those who have own thoughts, use somebody else's only if it precisely matches his or her own ones.

Now, to help you understand who I am.
My grandfather fought against Bolsheviks in Kolchak's Army; then he spent many years in Soviet prisons. I am very proud of him.
My father fought against Nazis as well as all my male relatives.
I did not become as prominent dissident as Natan Sharansky (Bush's Hero) but I started the same activities 10 years before him, in 1957.

You have theoretical information about totalitarianism (well, I generously stretch supposing that.)
I have both - theoretical and practical. Therefore, all you say about it sounds so childish, so 'libertiny,' so damn Demmy...
Sorry, I promised not to curse...

Say your Polish friend 'hello' together with Jeszcze Polska nie zginela....
Tell him I translated "Letter to mother" by Yesenin into Polish in early 1960th.



Sentido, Franklin, of course, was not..
Sentido The Great wrote:
"A smarter person said, "They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security."

Now, if you're going to call Ben Franklin a romantic idiot...."

Of course, not, Him - not, Sentido The Great.

Hopefully, you don't pretend to be on the same level as Benjamin:
you still can't read: "an essential liberty." Repeat: "essential."

What essential have you personally lost?
Oh, God forbid, don't tell me about Padilla and Walker...

Sentido, to finalize
There is neither totalitarianism no rise thereof here.

Unless, of course, you discard the fact of elections, the fact of existence of acting political parties, the fact of local laws besides of federal laws, and many other things only copmpletely blind or completely innocent in terms of education person can object.

Don't listen to your Commie professors - they are Commies. With all consequences.
Ask your Polish friend what totalitarianism in fact is, not just what it means theoretically.

As for rights...
the only rights and freedoms you libs so annoyingly screech about are, as I was able to determine, rights to cut off heads of unborn but already survivable babies directly in wombs of sex-addicted unmarried damsels(aka pro-choice); rights to remove 10 Commandments from the public sight but replace with Muslim symbols; rights to mock the natural institution of marriage (called homosexual marriage); rights to educate my grandchildren of first grade in andraserasty and using of condoms instead of letters, math, history, ethics and culture; rights to burn own flag and call treason 'patriotism' and thus avoid prosecution.

If I missed something, remind me...

But if you insist that such set of rights and liberties is not designed to destroy today's America, you are lying.

The Flying Nun Hits The Ground
THE FLYING NUN HITS THE GROUND:
SYBIL TAKES OVER

BY LISA RICHARDS
September 21, 2007

I never watch awards shows. They’re nothing more than fashion show spectacles for the beautiful people to be seen and fawned over as they pretend to be oh so humbled for receiving an award for acting. I would rather watch Keith Olbermann, and that’s saying something since his show is how I punish my dog if the dog does naughty-naughty—I make the dog listen to Keith for an hour versus O’Reilly whom my dog loves.

Of late, awards shows have turned into United Nations free-for-alls for the 60’s generation has-beens who missed out on protest marches because mommy made them act on TV. Now the pampered snots who never got to be Jane Fonda have decided the Emmys and Oscars are a fabulous place to play Jane on a tank. And Sally Field has become the next walking foot-in-mouth-disease to accept an award with an anti-war statement that sounded like one of Sybil’s personalities on crack.

According to Field, if all the mothers on earth were in control of the world there would never be war. So claimed the off-balance actress to an audience of wanna’ be foreign policy strategists who think RPG stands for Really Pricey Gucci. I think Sybil’s liberal side needs an RPG in the rear...

For rest of column visit my blog


copyright 2007 Lisa Richards
http://www.lisa-richards.com
E-mail: lisa-richards@lisa-richards.com























One question for Ms. Fields:
How exactly would you propose to deal with those mama's in the middle east who encourage their kids to strap bombs on themselves?

Just wondering.

Sentido, bravo! You make progress
Sentido The Great wrote:

"The Constitution doesn't recognize a class of persons known as "terrorists."

It took [only] two days for you to finally acknowledge the point I've been trying so fervently to inject into whatever is inside of your skull.

It's called progress. Congrats.

But then you immediately do this:
"As such, you have to deal with the fact that even they have rights."

No, Sentido The Great, it only means that the Fathers even in a nightmare could not have envisioned the level of danger terrorists impose.
Otherwise, as smart people (unlike those who pretend to be smarter), our Fathers would have created an Amendment immediately.

Since it didn't happen, smart people should create new laws (bills, orders, etc.) to be applicable to the new phenomenon. Not apply inapplicable laws.

This is exactly what smart people did: a Patriot Act.

But not smart but over-romantic (to avoid insults) people kept insisting that inapplicable laws should be applied.

Two days to accept what I told you from the beginning (Constitution). Congrats once again.

How many days to accept a non-perverted logic?
Of course, if you don't secretly dream about full destruction of the USA by terrorists...

Sentido, senti por favor
You wrote:
"As one of my friends who emigrated from Communist Poland put it"

There are different Polish people. There are different Russians, Jews, and so forth.

I saw Brighton Beach inhabitants with Soviet Flags and Stalin's Portraits, too.
Russian newspapers in the USA are full of the same garbage.
Do they care about America? No, they care about welfare and foodstamps and vote for everybody who promises anything 'free' like Health Plan or cheese in a mouse-trap.

I clearly manifested what I don't like:
Communism; Fascism; Islamism; Islamo-Fascism.

Consequently, anybody and everybody who defends any of those 4 phenomena including anything and everything that constitutes, supports, collaborates and acts in any other way on behalf of them are my personal enemies.

Whatever your Polish friend says.

Constantine you are making me cry
i'm laughing so hard. How many times do I have to tell you to stop using logic with libs, especially those that atre the product of leftie law school. Just give them a hug and if that doesn't work call them names and type in all caps.

Ouch, overfeeding us Americans with, wit
Ouch, overfeeding us Americans with, with, with...

Sorry, overfeeding us with
Mea culpa, Sentido The Great, should be
"All outrageous things our courts and judges and lawyers are overfeeding us Americans are based..."

Sentido, this is conclusion
Sentido The Great wrote:

"Why does Constantine want us to rip up the BoR? Why does Constantine hate America?"

Again, Sentido The Great, you failed understanding:

I don't hate America: I came legally and intentionally to the USA escaping from my former Communist country.

By saying 'I hate America' you prove that under the Ocean, it has been a long hole drilled down to the center of the Earth to accommodate your IQ level.

I really hate what creatures like you want to do to my America.

I am definitely for the BoR.
I am definitely against misuse of the BoR.
I am definitely against of perversion of the BoR.

All outrageous things our courts and judges and lawyers are overfeeding us Americans are based on and caused by perversion of the BoR. At least, too many of them.

But it is a different discussion, and I'll do everything possible to miss you on behalf of less pathetic but more logical opponents.



sentido, do you fall into
the ambulance chaser category of lawyer?

Sorry if I offend sentido and other attorneys who may be posting here but ambulance chasing attorneys form a key component of the high cost of health care in the U.S.

Malpractice insurance for OB-GYNs, for example, cost them $300,000 a year. Although other specialties may not pay as much, they still pay a great deal. Who ultimately bears the cost of that insurance? That would be the paying consumers of medical services.

It is interesting to note that the Society of Ambulance Chasers, a.k.a the Trial Lawyers Association, have opposed Republican candidates
who favor placing ceilings on settlements.

I have heard that trial lawyers take a large cut of such settlements, which makes their assertions regarding greedy pharmaceutical companies etc. seem rather hypocritical. If true then we the paying medical consumers are being forced to pad the bank accounts of these scoundrels .Ultimately it is we who bear the cost of this outrageous practice.

Sentido, are you a trial lawyer? Do you fear that your right to soak the public in legal settlements is being threatened by Republicans such as Bush etc?

Sentido, it's Contra Contra Constatnine6
Sentido The Great wrote:

"you would recall the internment of Japanese-Americans in WWII. Jose Padilla is a reminder that it can happen here; it is incumbent upon us to ensure that it never happens here."

Firstly, as usual, it was not the answer you should have given, it's usual Libs distraction. But OK.

The Second and the Third Geneva Conventions allowed detaining 'belligerent armed forces and equipment.'

Massive presence of Japanese on the US territory during the war Japan started gave neither time no resources to provide all Japanese with standard law procedure; due to exceptional situation that critically endangered the very existence of the USA, the Democratic Government led by Democrat President FDR (Sentido, please don't mix with Manhattan highway) decide to isolate potential enemies.
Historical note for History-lover Sentido The Great:
Japanese are very loyal to their compatriots. In particular, in situations like WWII.

Thus, if there will be as many rabid Islamists like Padilla here during a similar war, they all MUST be detained.
If you say as you say:"it is incumbent upon us to ensure that it never happens here,"
I don't have enough words to describe what you are.

Should I say that Internment camps for Japanese in Canada and the USA during World War II
had nothing in common with Soviet and Nazis concentration camps of death?
Oh heck, you are not capable of understanding...

Sentido, it's Contra Contra Constantine4
Sentido The Great wrote:

"it is exactly necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right."

I say:

As usual, you lawyers are great in perverting everything.
Did Theodor Roosevelt say a word that presidents should be cursed, name called?
Or you as usual don't distinguish between constructive blaming and cursing?

Then your IQ is really not only below the Ocean level but also below even Howard Stern.

Btw, didn't Theodor advise you to 'praise [the President] when he does right'?
I didn't hear from you anything, Your Selectivesty...


Sentido, to your 'aside'...
Sentido THe Great, you wrote:
"Unless your grammar is perfect, and you are sic'ing them all, you probably shouldn't nitpick like that."

Hm-m-m... As far as I remember, English is not my Mother tongue. What about you?

But as I said, if you don't like my English, let me talk to you in your native language or talk to me in my native language on the same level as I do in English, OK?
Lawyers should be grammar errors-free, right?

I also don't check spelling...before I post.

Sentido, it's Contra Contra Constantine4
Sentido The Great, you wrote:

1. "We've always had international terrorists. Irgun. Sinn Fein. George W. Bush."

2. "Committing a terrorist act is a crime."

3. "What you fail to perceive is that YOU are potentially "a terrorist."

4. "Dred Scott"

5. "Let's also say that I collar you on the street, accusing you of terrorist activity ('cuz someone has stolen your identity), and throw you in the bowels of a Halliburton prison."

6. "When you get that, you will get what we are all on about."
*********************************
1. Sentido The Great, how long ago did you visit your psychopathologist?
As far as I remember, we are still in the USA, not in Palestine 1931-1948 (Irgun); not in Ireland (Sinn Féin).
As for George W. Bush, you are again breaking the law you so 'fervently' (and falsely) defend: you forgot presumption of innocence - innocent until proven guilty. Who proved, you?
It seems, your IQ is below the Ocean level.

2. Dead wrong.

3. Usual lefty garbage.

4. As far as I remember, we are in 21st Century, not in 1850th. Many laws were changed since.
Your theorization would have won "Emmy" for 'One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest.'
Doctors, doctors immediately. Call 911.

5. I didn't hear yet anything about Muslim Terrorists of Russian descent. Thus, I am not worry much about my stolen identity from your point of view...
As for 'Halliburton prison', you Sentido The Great are pathetic, which is explainable (see above):
any prison should be and were built by a construction company. Your 'Hulliburton prison' should make me shake more than San Francisco State Prison?
At least, in 'Hulliburton prison' you will be not raped by andraserasts.

6. Great sentence. Glue to your mirror.

Addendum to Contra Contra Constantine 3
Sentido The Great, you wrote:
"Even the guilty have rights."

Quite stupid sentence.

Firstly, not 'even' but ALL 'the guilty...'

Secondly, these rights are different. For instance, some have rights to be executed. Successfully.

Thirdly, you are again talking about terrorists as if they are simply criminals. And consequently, you want to apply criminal law to non-criminals.

Thus, we should start all over. Too boring. Thank you.

Sentido, it's Contra Contera Constantin3
It will be short.
you wrote:
"If we defend civil liberties, and the ACLU defends civil liberties, we must be with the ACLU???"

I say:
First, who 'we'? We Sentido The Great?

Secondly, since Sentido The Great adores historical parallels His Majesty has no clue about, I dare say that SA and SS, or NKVD and OGPU were also separate organizations who pursued the same goals.

In short: ACLU, being established by Communists and individuals very close to Communists, has explicitly proven its 'anti-American Imperialism' bias in recent defending firstly those who are a threat to the today's USA policies.

Some exceptions can't overturn the fact of extreme 'selectiveness' of the ACLU on behalf of (...you can start over again.)

In Oliver North case, ACLU helped the Appeals Court to find that witnesses in his trial might have been affected by his congressional testimony, which he's got a limited immunity of. That's why all charges were dismissed.

But again, some exceptions don't change the pro-Communist nature of the ACLU.

Lenin said he loves children (but had only one out of wedlock.)
Hitler initiated production of the cheapest Volks Wagen (VW).
Stalin initiated construction of the first Soviet 'sky-scrapper.'
Does all this give a reason to love those murderers?

Don't dive into historical excursions unless you know to swim out, Sentido The Great.

Sentido, it's Contra Contra Constantine2
you wrote:
"If you can call me a Communist, I can call you what you are: a neo-Nazi."

I say: Sentido, you prove you are very bad lawyer. See, "I can call you," you say; but you insist "you are: a neo-Nazi."
Understand the difference? calling and being...
I can call you whatever I want, following the First Amendment. You can't sue me for a false accusation since it's not 'accusation' per se. It's name calling.
But you allow yourself a false accusation.

You are really very, very, very, very (x times) bad lawyer.
And stupid, too. It's not accusation, it's a scientific diagnosis.

Sentido, it's Contra Contra Constantine1
you wrote:
"I'm talking about the men we trained to be baby-killers:

I say: I presume, you mean our military, just like MoveOn.org, Murtha, and Kerry, right?
Sure, you are now a part of dregs.

you wrote:
"But I suppose that the only way you can debate is to be intentionally obtuse."

I say: as usual, you avoid giving an answer; instead, you emanate usual Libs garbage.

you wrote:
"Con: "I didn’t get from you any explicit affirmation that you are not a Commie by membership or by affiliation or by inclination or by sympathy with.
“Words matter”?
---------------------------------------------
Of course, it presumes that the other guy is actually listening and/or reading."

I say: as usual, you avoid giving an explicit answer; instead, you emanate usual Libs garbage.

Sentido, you are a super-intellect
sorry, browser problem cut the post. This is it:

Sentido, you are a super-intellect
You wrote:
"The imperial invasion of Iraq is more akin to the Nazis' invasion of Poland."
Yes, if you equate the USA with Nazi Germany;
if you equate Democratic Poland of 1939 with Saddam's Iraq of 2003;
if you equate Hitler's goal to conquer the world with Bush's goal to get rid of Saddam and help establishing Democracy in Iraq,
then you are right.
Ouch!
You know, Sentido, I am afraid you are not even smallpox, you are plague.
You said "Why Constantine hates America?"
You are really a piece of work:
I hate not America, I hate what you can and intent to do to my America where I came to after I escaped the Communist country.

Sentido, you are a super-intellect
You wrote:
"The imperial invasion of Iraq is more akin to the Nazis' invasion of Poland."

Yes, if you equate the USA with Nazi Germany;
if you equate Democratic Poland of 1939 with Saddam's Iraq of 2003;
if you equate Hitler's goal to conquer the world with Bush's goal to get rid of Saddam and help establishing Democracy in Iraq,
then you are absolutely right.
Ouch!

Sentido, you are a super-intellect
You wrote:
"The imperial invasion of Iraq is more akin to the Nazis' invasion of Poland."
Yes, if you equate the USA with Nazi Germany; if you equate Democratic Poland of 1939 with Saddam's Iraq of 2003; if you equate Hitler's goal to conquer the world with Bush's goal to get rid of Saddam and help establishing Democracy in Ira

Sentido, are you really intelligent?
I wrote:
"...fighting against the war when it is already running is treacherous to the own country."

You wrote:
"And you would have said what to the man who tried to assassinate Adolf Hitler?"

Did you read "treacherous to the own country"?
Yes, Claus von Stauffenberg became a traitor of the Hitler Germany (Claus' OWN COUNTRY.)
The lieutenant-colonel's goal is a different issue. But since, for sure, Sentido will immediately call me 'Nazi' or 'fascist', I dare remind my intelligent opponent that Stauffenberg did not fight for peace; he has been accepted to the plot to overthrow Hitler in order to conclude an agreement with the Western Allies in order to prevent the Soviet Army invasion of Germany.
Since the plot failed, 5,000 participants became automatically 'traitors' to Hitler Germany and as such were either executed or imprisoned.

Any somewhat educated lawyer with more than on straight brain convolution would refrain from comparing Stauffenberg with American peaceniks and Hitler Germany with the USA.

But indeed, it needs at least two not absolutely straight brain convolutions, I know...

Lawyer joke from
Western New York-true story. Five freshly graduated law students went out to celebrate and decided to walk across, what they thought, was a frozen span on the Buffalo canal. The ice broke and all five fell in and perished. While very tragic some smart alecks thought "it was a good start" to ridding the world of lawyers. Sorry, sentido, this is true.
May I ask why you libs insist on resorting to name calling, why is that? I have asked that question but none of the libs answer. Perhaps you people don't even realize that you are doing it??

Since when did I ever say I had love...
sentido, since when did I say you that you said you love Hugo Chavez?

I haven't read all your posts sentido. Unlike some attorneys, a poor low intellect working class slob such as I has little time for that. But I have read some of them, and the ones I find most interesting are those in which you have said your rights are violated. You have been challenged on that assertion and have evaded the challenge, and not very skillfully which makes me wonder about your competence as a lawyer. But facts are facts and I am certain that your rights have not been violated as you say they have, otherwise you would have answered the challenge.

There is an old joke you have no doubt heard. The first part is a question, "how do you know when a lawyer is lying? You probably already know the standard answer. But an additional answer would be "when her/his fingers are typing on a keyboard.

Being against a war before it starts...
To conclude (?) this Sally Field session:

Fighting for peace before a war starts is reasonable and noble;
fighting against the war when it is already running is treacherous to the own country.

For those who don't want to remember how this war started, watch this:
http://www.bercasio.com/movies/dems-wmd-before-iraq.wmv

*****************
A short reminder:

After 5 years of the WWII (in 1944), there were almost 3 times more military on both German and Soviet sides than at its beginning in 1939.

There were more unsuccessful (for defenders) combats in 1944 than in 1941.

There were many Generals who failed on both sides.

There were a lot more killed people on both sides than in the first years. And death harvested MILLIONS, not thousands.

There were a lot more spent resources in 1944-45 than in 1939-1942.

But there was the WILL to win. And steadfastness. And determination. And courage. And spirit.

And we won.

Drivellers never win.

DJF, I do agree...
DJF, I do agree: I could include a lot more Socialist and Muslim countries where there are many "routinely imprisoned critics and opponents, often without legitimate grounds" (citation from Sentido) and Venezuela, Argentina, Peru, of course, among them.

My point, though, was that despite fervent attempts to prove that our government is infringing upon civil rights of Americans, Sentido failed to produce even one case of his own civil rights infringed.

When I asked him to do so, he managed to raise the case of Padilla as if it proves his point.

To my personal opinion, nothing could be more stinky than Sentido's attempts to scorch our government under pathetic and hypocritical pretension to be loyal to the Constitution.
Such a B.S.

stinger missiles
"I'm all for private possession of Stinger missiles."

Sentido, stingers would be ok, but what I really need are rocket propelled grenades. Maybe with your socialist connections you could help me get my hands on some of those. Saint Fidel undoubtedly has some, and Hugo probably has more than he actually needs. Can you set me up? I might need those RPGs for remediation of my violated rights....after Hillary establishes her police state.

Constantine wrote
"Please, enumerate countries...The USSR, Russia (under Putin), Germany (under Hitler), Spain (under Franco), Portugal (under Salazar), East Germany, China, Cuba, Mongolia, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, N. Korea, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary, Albania, Yugoslavia, Angola…"

Constantine, you forgot Venezuela where Hugo Chavez took it upon himself to change the law so that anyone who criticizes him goes to prison.

And don't forget Abimael Guzman, a most murderous socialist responsible for the murders of thousands of innocents in Peru, and who would have turned Peru into a living hell if he had been able to gain control of it.

What were you doing when.....
they turned Mrs. Greenvald into soap Sally?

Ms. Field (for the dopes who can't get her name right) what will your son be doing when they turn you into a lamp shade?

viruddh writes: Thursday, September, 20, 2007 9:41 PM
"Actually, I don't like YOU, Miss Malkin"

You dumb 5X5X5 elementary canal, if your still in the second grade just pull her pigails.

What were you doing when.....
they turned Mrs. Greenvald into soap Sally?

Ms. Field (for the dopes who can't get her name right) what will your son be doing when they turn you into a lamp shade?

viruddh writes: Thursday, September, 20, 2007 9:41 PM
"Actually, I don't like YOU, Miss Malkin"

You dumb 5X5X5 elementary canal, if your still in the second grade just pull her pigails.

This is the first I have heard anything
about the Emmys (except that Steven Colbert did
not get one) or about the Sally Fields' statement.

Hmmm. If it is Hollywood, it must be awful.

Actually, I don't like YOU, Miss Malkin, at all,
so perhaps I would have liked what Sally did and
said, since you claim to have absolutely nothing
in common with her.


Hey Jude, you forgot my successful kids
You wrote:
1. "...I can assure her that more moms in the USA and around the world share Sally Field's sentiments...
2. "about this tragic, unnecessary war (totally based on lies)...
3. "I have raised three successful lovely adult daughters and...
4. "they and their husbands all agree with me that this war is a tragedy perpetrated by Bush, Cheney and their lunatic supporters in the right-wing media.
5. "You make a fool of yourself once again, Ms. Malkin."

1. How did you count? Is your "statistics" provable? In particular, 'around the world'... Such impudence...
2. Kool-Aid drinker? Watch this: http://www.bercasio.com/movies/dems-wmd-before-iraq.wmv 2 times a day - before breakfast and after supper. Might help.
3. Was it you who educated them?
4. Kool-Aid drinker? Watch this: http://www.bercasio.com/movies/dems-wmd-before-iraq.wmv 2 times a day - before breakfast and after supper.
5. Usual liberals' boorishness...

Sally Field
Your story on Sally Field is sensational reading.It's amazing how somebody takes it upon themselves to represent an entire gender.Field was clearly wrong in her unsolicited view.I have to admit I use to love The Flying Nun and Gidget.I still love Sally for her sincerity,which is something void in Tinsel town.She had a bad night and she was wrong,so just let it go.Sally Field has the same positive connotation in her time as Sandra Bulluck currently enjoys.I wonder what Burt Reynolds was thinking when Sally spoke.

Michelle your a talented newscaster who has learned the ropes from your mentor Bill O'Reilly very well.I think you an O'Reilly should be nominated for an emmy.You guys are great actors.You guys go home laughing every day after you pretend your dead serious about your interview.Unfortunately,neither you or O'reilly are real.One vote for Malkin and O'Reilly.The enveloe please.


Do not miss the Oprah show this Friday.This show will be a very unique show.You might also want to check out Kelly Clarkson and Reba on Larrry King tonight.You have to admire a powerful lady like Reba,who is trying to lead a young 25 year old back to glory,after trying to challenge the music industry, doing it her way.It just goes to show you that a 52 year old and a 25 year old can work together,if they try.




Hey Sentido, you gave me logic ground...
In response to my multiple requests, you Sentido gave me just ONE case of your personal civil rights infringement by the government - Jose Padilla.

I re-asked you several times; then you gave me Padilla and Walker.
Thus, I've got completely confused.

First, when you answered the first time, I understood: you are Padilla; Padilla is you. Well, it could happen, I thought.

But then, when you have mentioned Walker also, I thought: what a heck, Sentido is Walker? Or Padilla? Or both?

But you still refute your own statement about unfairness of our government:
by giving you a possibility squandering your wisdom on the Internet, our government has shown more mercy to terrorists than to officials who tried not to help FBI prosecuting Republicans for crimes they didn't commit...

Sic transit gloria mundi...

More of Us Moms Agree with Sally
Michelle Malkin proves again her ignorance and nastiness in this piece. I can assure her that more moms in the USA and around the world share Sally Field's sentiments about this tragic, unnecessary war (totally based on lies) than with Malkin's worldview. I have raised three successful lovely adult daughter