Don't shoot the messenger.
http://www.commongroundcommonsense.org/for...t&CODE=00&f=228
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=17829
Your Apology Is Not Accepted, Mr. Kerry
by Rabbi Aryeh Spero
Posted Nov 02, 2006
How “smart!” An evasive, half-hearted apology on a website. How brave! How very un-soldier-like.
Apologies aside, Sen. John Kerry (D.-Mass.) has been “outed.” In the world of John Kerry and other leading liberal Democrats in the Northeast, the military is for those who are not smart. After all, smart people become lawyers, investment bankers, journalists or professors. That there are Americans both smart and patriotic who wish to serve their country via the military is something alien to those whose life is devoted to service of self and personal ambition.
That among the regular citizens there are people who use their brains to defend the country is incomprehensible to those who see brain-power application only for dissent and agitation against American society.
Kerry’s statement reflects much more than what he and elitist liberals today believe about the military. It expresses their overall view of Southerners, religious people, Midwesterners, and those from modest families here in the East most likely to volunteer for military service.
This is no longer your father’s Democrat Party. While much of the rank-and-file of the party remain union members and those who keep a family tradition of voting Democrat, the leaders who now set the tone of the party are hard-core, affluent leftists. These leftists are not your old-fashioned by-gone Communists from the poor, teeming neighborhoods of urban America. These are immensely wealthy egoists intent on controlling and social-engineering our society.
The elitists dwelling on the coasts who ridicule the military are convinced they are brainier than the average American, and long ago pledged their allegiance to transnationalism over Americanism. There is no war they would support if its purpose solely benefited America. Only wars of transnational concern or those for the rights of politically correct groups are, for them, justifiable. Battling for the globe is noble, not, however, for America.
What else can one expect from those whose self-hood and fraternity are linked not with Columbus and Lansing but Paris, Geneva and Stockholm? After all, these are the people who care more about terrorist rights and the Hague than the safety of Americans on Main Street, U.S.A.
The Kerrys, Clintons, Deans, Kennedys, Soros’ and Peter Lewis’ share none of the social values with ordinary Democrats. In fact, most of the elitists leading the Democrat Party today do not in their daily life have anything in common with those still voting for them -- they don’t frequent regular eating establishments, their children attend toney private schools, and they would be horrified if their daughter married the son of a machinist in Pontiac, Mich.
They “loathe” the military because they, themselves, can’t do what the soldier does. They lack the soldier’s courage. They are uneasy about that which is brought about through brawn. They lack the grace of one able to acknowledge traits found in others, not found in themselves. These are courageous-less people who are incapable of bucking the latest fashion, trend, and the approval of European “sophisticates.” For them, courage and being “smart” means valuing and understanding the positions of America’s enemies more than the beliefs of our own country.
We’ve come a long way since military service was admired by all. It was valued so back in World War II because, then, everyone had a family member in uniform. Today’s better-than-thou-liberal rarely has a child or brother or cousin or friend in our voluntary army. Knowing no one in it, they no longer identify with it. “Our people” don’t go into the Army. For them, soldiers are simply statistics and not real flesh and blood. In their cocooned life, none of them live with the anguish and heart-pounding fear of those answering the door wondering if the messengers have come announcing the battlefield death of the person who is their life.
They disdain the military, also, because military victory works against their aspiration of themselves deciding our country’s fate through their vocations: “negotiation” and “understanding.” They despise the military since it replaces our need for them.
Why do liberals seem to have so little gratitude or sense of indebtedness to those who serve in the military, to those who defend our freedom? Obviously, feeling so superior to the rest of us, there is no place in their heart for gratitude for those they view as beneath them. They are snobs -- so far removed from what American people are.
No, it’s not about the Iraq war. It’s not even about apology. It’s about your liberal elitists, stupid! And that’s why we cannot vote for you and the Democrat Party wherein you reside.
Rabbi Spero is a radio talk show host, a pulpit rabbi, and president of Caucus for America. He can be reached at www.caucusforamerica.com.
Full Version: Your Apology is Not Accepted, Mr. Kerry
Common Ground Common Sense > National & International News > Op-Ed Articles from the Mainstream Media > Op-Ed Articles from the Mainstream Media Archive
QUOTE
They “loathe” the military because they, themselves, can’t do what the soldier does. They lack the soldier’s courage.
Did he forget Kerry volunteered and served in Viet Nam?
QUOTE
After all, these are the people who care more about terrorist rights and the Hague than the safety of Americans on Main Street, U.S.A.
Sounds like he drinks allot of Bush Kool-Aid.
How about this for weird?
Rabbi Aryeh Spero was a senior adviser to Republican Presidential candidate Patrick J. Buchanan back in '99...
http://www.buchanan.org/pma-99-0517-spero.html
Now Buchanan is one of the most anti-war conservatives out there. I think the Rabbis agreement with Pat on "His American-first views on foreign policy, trade and American civilization are entirely consistent" may have changed a bit...
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadA...le.asp?ID=19122
The Multiculturalists' Anti-Anti-Terror War Rabbi Aryeh Spero
Rabbi Aryeh Spero was a senior adviser to Republican Presidential candidate Patrick J. Buchanan back in '99...
http://www.buchanan.org/pma-99-0517-spero.html
QUOTE
MCLEAN, Va.---Rabbi Aryeh Spero of New York and Ohio has been appointed senior advisor to Republican Presidential candidate Patrick J. Buchanan, the campaign announced today.
For the past 20 years Rabbi Spero has served as a spiritual leader of congregations both in Ohio and New York City. He has written extensively on religious, political and social issues. His works have been published in Policy Review, the Washington Times, Wall Street Journal, Judaism and Cultural Conservatism.
Spero was among the first prominent Jewish leaders to endorse Ronald Reagan in 1980.
"I look forward to working with Pat, a man I admire and have always held in high regard," said Spero. "He's one of the major political intellects of our time, articulate, colorful, and without question the best debater of the field. His American-first views on foreign policy, trade and American civilization are entirely consistent with my own."
For the past 20 years Rabbi Spero has served as a spiritual leader of congregations both in Ohio and New York City. He has written extensively on religious, political and social issues. His works have been published in Policy Review, the Washington Times, Wall Street Journal, Judaism and Cultural Conservatism.
Spero was among the first prominent Jewish leaders to endorse Ronald Reagan in 1980.
"I look forward to working with Pat, a man I admire and have always held in high regard," said Spero. "He's one of the major political intellects of our time, articulate, colorful, and without question the best debater of the field. His American-first views on foreign policy, trade and American civilization are entirely consistent with my own."
Now Buchanan is one of the most anti-war conservatives out there. I think the Rabbis agreement with Pat on "His American-first views on foreign policy, trade and American civilization are entirely consistent" may have changed a bit...
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadA...le.asp?ID=19122
The Multiculturalists' Anti-Anti-Terror War Rabbi Aryeh Spero
QUOTE
It would have been hard to imagine in 2001, when the U.S. began responding to Islamic terrorism, that one of the most difficult battles of the war would be overcoming the legal landmines laid by domestic liberals on behalf of the enemy.
QUOTE
The consequence of all this political correctness is dire. For a populace to support a war for a prolonged period, it must feel its homeland is directly threatened or apprehend an enemy motivated by an ideology calling for imminent arrival onto her shores for the purpose of destruction and upheaval. Failure to spotlight this ideology and call it by its name, leaves people complacent, exclaiming: What, me worry!
What an idiot.
Kerry should NEVER have apologized at all.
He was talking about BUSH. And he left out the word "us"
"You know, education -- if you make the most of it, you study hard and you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well.
"If you don't, you get US stuck in Iraq."
Kerry should NEVER have apologized at all.
He was talking about BUSH. And he left out the word "us"
"You know, education -- if you make the most of it, you study hard and you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well.
"If you don't, you get US stuck in Iraq."
QUOTE(Snuffysmith @ Nov 4 2006, 02:56 PM)
Your Apology Is Not Accepted, Mr. Kerry
by Rabbi Aryeh Spero
Posted Nov 02, 2006
How “smart!” An evasive, half-hearted apology on a website. How brave! How very un-soldier-like.
Apologies aside, Sen. John Kerry (D.-Mass.) has been “outed.” In the world of John Kerry and other leading liberal Democrats in the Northeast, the military is for those who are not smart. After all, smart people become lawyers, investment bankers, journalists or professors. That there are Americans both smart and patriotic who wish to serve their country via the military is something alien to those whose life is devoted to service of self and personal ambition.
That among the regular citizens there are people who use their brains to defend the country is incomprehensible to those who see brain-power application only for dissent and agitation against American society.
Kerry’s statement reflects much more than what he and elitist liberals today believe about the military. It expresses their overall view of Southerners, religious people, Midwesterners, and those from modest families here in the East most likely to volunteer for military service.
This is no longer your father’s Democrat Party. While much of the rank-and-file of the party remain union members and those who keep a family tradition of voting Democrat, the leaders who now set the tone of the party are hard-core, affluent leftists. These leftists are not your old-fashioned by-gone Communists from the poor, teeming neighborhoods of urban America. These are immensely wealthy egoists intent on controlling and social-engineering our society.
The elitists dwelling on the coasts who ridicule the military are convinced they are brainier than the average American, and long ago pledged their allegiance to transnationalism over Americanism. There is no war they would support if its purpose solely benefited America. Only wars of transnational concern or those for the rights of politically correct groups are, for them, justifiable. Battling for the globe is noble, not, however, for America.
What else can one expect from those whose self-hood and fraternity are linked not with Columbus and Lansing but Paris, Geneva and Stockholm? After all, these are the people who care more about terrorist rights and the Hague than the safety of Americans on Main Street, U.S.A.
The Kerrys, Clintons, Deans, Kennedys, Soros’ and Peter Lewis’ share none of the social values with ordinary Democrats. In fact, most of the elitists leading the Democrat Party today do not in their daily life have anything in common with those still voting for them -- they don’t frequent regular eating establishments, their children attend toney private schools, and they would be horrified if their daughter married the son of a machinist in Pontiac, Mich.
They “loathe” the military because they, themselves, can’t do what the soldier does. They lack the soldier’s courage. They are uneasy about that which is brought about through brawn. They lack the grace of one able to acknowledge traits found in others, not found in themselves. These are courageous-less people who are incapable of bucking the latest fashion, trend, and the approval of European “sophisticates.” For them, courage and being “smart” means valuing and understanding the positions of America’s enemies more than the beliefs of our own country.
We’ve come a long way since military service was admired by all. It was valued so back in World War II because, then, everyone had a family member in uniform. Today’s better-than-thou-liberal rarely has a child or brother or cousin or friend in our voluntary army. Knowing no one in it, they no longer identify with it. “Our people” don’t go into the Army. For them, soldiers are simply statistics and not real flesh and blood. In their cocooned life, none of them live with the anguish and heart-pounding fear of those answering the door wondering if the messengers have come announcing the battlefield death of the person who is their life.
They disdain the military, also, because military victory works against their aspiration of themselves deciding our country’s fate through their vocations: “negotiation” and “understanding.” They despise the military since it replaces our need for them.
Why do liberals seem to have so little gratitude or sense of indebtedness to those who serve in the military, to those who defend our freedom? Obviously, feeling so superior to the rest of us, there is no place in their heart for gratitude for those they view as beneath them. They are snobs -- so far removed from what American people are.
No, it’s not about the Iraq war. It’s not even about apology. It’s about your liberal elitists, stupid! And that’s why we cannot vote for you and the Democrat Party wherein you reside.
Rabbi Spero is a radio talk show host, a pulpit rabbi, and president of Caucus for America. He can be reached at www.caucusforamerica.com.
by Rabbi Aryeh Spero
Posted Nov 02, 2006
How “smart!” An evasive, half-hearted apology on a website. How brave! How very un-soldier-like.
Apologies aside, Sen. John Kerry (D.-Mass.) has been “outed.” In the world of John Kerry and other leading liberal Democrats in the Northeast, the military is for those who are not smart. After all, smart people become lawyers, investment bankers, journalists or professors. That there are Americans both smart and patriotic who wish to serve their country via the military is something alien to those whose life is devoted to service of self and personal ambition.
That among the regular citizens there are people who use their brains to defend the country is incomprehensible to those who see brain-power application only for dissent and agitation against American society.
Kerry’s statement reflects much more than what he and elitist liberals today believe about the military. It expresses their overall view of Southerners, religious people, Midwesterners, and those from modest families here in the East most likely to volunteer for military service.
This is no longer your father’s Democrat Party. While much of the rank-and-file of the party remain union members and those who keep a family tradition of voting Democrat, the leaders who now set the tone of the party are hard-core, affluent leftists. These leftists are not your old-fashioned by-gone Communists from the poor, teeming neighborhoods of urban America. These are immensely wealthy egoists intent on controlling and social-engineering our society.
The elitists dwelling on the coasts who ridicule the military are convinced they are brainier than the average American, and long ago pledged their allegiance to transnationalism over Americanism. There is no war they would support if its purpose solely benefited America. Only wars of transnational concern or those for the rights of politically correct groups are, for them, justifiable. Battling for the globe is noble, not, however, for America.
What else can one expect from those whose self-hood and fraternity are linked not with Columbus and Lansing but Paris, Geneva and Stockholm? After all, these are the people who care more about terrorist rights and the Hague than the safety of Americans on Main Street, U.S.A.
The Kerrys, Clintons, Deans, Kennedys, Soros’ and Peter Lewis’ share none of the social values with ordinary Democrats. In fact, most of the elitists leading the Democrat Party today do not in their daily life have anything in common with those still voting for them -- they don’t frequent regular eating establishments, their children attend toney private schools, and they would be horrified if their daughter married the son of a machinist in Pontiac, Mich.
They “loathe” the military because they, themselves, can’t do what the soldier does. They lack the soldier’s courage. They are uneasy about that which is brought about through brawn. They lack the grace of one able to acknowledge traits found in others, not found in themselves. These are courageous-less people who are incapable of bucking the latest fashion, trend, and the approval of European “sophisticates.” For them, courage and being “smart” means valuing and understanding the positions of America’s enemies more than the beliefs of our own country.
We’ve come a long way since military service was admired by all. It was valued so back in World War II because, then, everyone had a family member in uniform. Today’s better-than-thou-liberal rarely has a child or brother or cousin or friend in our voluntary army. Knowing no one in it, they no longer identify with it. “Our people” don’t go into the Army. For them, soldiers are simply statistics and not real flesh and blood. In their cocooned life, none of them live with the anguish and heart-pounding fear of those answering the door wondering if the messengers have come announcing the battlefield death of the person who is their life.
They disdain the military, also, because military victory works against their aspiration of themselves deciding our country’s fate through their vocations: “negotiation” and “understanding.” They despise the military since it replaces our need for them.
Why do liberals seem to have so little gratitude or sense of indebtedness to those who serve in the military, to those who defend our freedom? Obviously, feeling so superior to the rest of us, there is no place in their heart for gratitude for those they view as beneath them. They are snobs -- so far removed from what American people are.
No, it’s not about the Iraq war. It’s not even about apology. It’s about your liberal elitists, stupid! And that’s why we cannot vote for you and the Democrat Party wherein you reside.
Rabbi Spero is a radio talk show host, a pulpit rabbi, and president of Caucus for America. He can be reached at www.caucusforamerica.com.
For a religious man, this guy is full of hate.
There is an element of truth to what he says, but he goes way overboard. Yes, many liberals are elitists. So are many conservatives. One type inhabits the halls of universities and courtrooms; the other frequents country clubs and golf courses.
There is generally a class distinction between those who serve in the military and those who do not, and often it's an economic one.
The Rabbi says that it's been a long time since military service was admired. I don't think it has much to do with disdain for those who serve as it does with suspicion and lack of trust in our leaders and why we are involved in conflict.
And, I don't think it's just liberal elites who don't have relatives in the armed forces. How many Republican elites do?
I have often questioned why people join the military. I personally would not do it. Many people are proud of the United States and think we're better than any other country in the world. The Rabbi exhibits that mentality, as do many people in the military. I do not feel that way. I think people are people. It's not Americans are good and the French or the Iraqis or the Chinese are bad, or that Americans are all bad either. If someone attacks us, that would be a different story, but in many of the wars that we fight we have very shady if not criminal motivations.
I think some people are more comfortable with brute force. At times, we are all faced with the decision to fight or walk away. Some people are afraid of pain, and won't risk physical danger. Others will risk physical injury because they think it's a disgrace to back down, and they don't care if they hurt someone else either. This would actually be an interesting discussion.
Interesting post, Beamer.
QUOTE(beamer619 @ Nov 4 2006, 10:10 PM)
The Rabbi says that it's been a long time since military service was admired. I don't think it has much to do with disdain for those who serve as it does with suspicion and lack of trust in our leaders and why we are involved in conflict.
I agree with what you say here, Beamer. Actually, his "rant" doesn't make any sense, not to me at least. He's spewing out lots of anger towards " liberal intellectuals" and defining them as though he were the ultimate authority on what they believe and represent. He's throwing a temper tantrum, that's all, IMO.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.