·support our troops, support Bush, support Cheney, support victory in Iraq, support victory in Afghanistan,  Clinton Liebrary, http://PoliSat.Com , PoliSatDOTcom, Salute America's Heroes, Fallen Heroes Fund, oppose Gore's Global Warming theory, support milblogs, Michael Yon, Pat Dollard, BlackFive, MilBlogs, MilBlogging, Michael Yon, Mudville Gazette, HotAir.Com, JawaReport, PajamasMedia , VictoryCaucus , VetsForFreedom , FreedomsWatch , DayByDayCartoon , WrennCom.Com , Video , Political Satire, Politics, News, oppose MoveOn.Org, oppose Code Pink, oppose DailyKos, oppose ANSWER, support PoliSat.Com, support WrennCom.Com, ·


WWW PoliSat.Com 

  First Things First:  Salute America's Heroes · Fallen Heroes Fund · Frequent-Flyer-Miles for Troops · Thanks to Troops · Military News ··  MilBlogs ·

  Home · Posts:  Current /Recent · Videos/Toons/Songs:  Latest · Embed-Codes · Text Index · Images Index · Archives:  Old · New · About · Contact · Syndication · Affiliates ·

News  Sources/Papers/Magazines   Pundits  Blogs   ThinkTanks   What is "property"?   Pantheopians   Global Climate   Asteroids/Comets Hitting Earth--Risks/Predictions    Science   GlobalWeb  



These are Daily Updates for April 21--30, in reverse chronological order:



April 30, 2004:  #01  Political Satire/Commentary where satire is always commentary but commentary isn't always satire 
(but we're confident you'll know the difference)  Search PoliSat.Com Home  Tell a friend about PoliSat.Com    Subscribe 
Permanent Link to this installment in PoliSat.Com's Archives    Google-News list of recent updates    About author, Jim Wrenn.

No satire re betrayal of American troops by a few bad men among American troops-- A mission for JAG.·

    One would have difficulty conceiving that common-sense American civilians completely ill-informed about military procedure could claim "ignorance" (as has been claimed by the small number of our troops who displayed themselves abusing prisoners) that the kinds of treatment shown by photographs made by those few American troops abusing prisoners not only are wrong under common-sense morality but also contrary to conduct by soldiers respecting the rule of law.  Does the fact that a small percentage of our troops disgrace the vast majority who daily put themselves at greater risk to avoid harming non-combatants place us on the same footing with regimes that routinely commit barbaric atrocities in addition to uncivilized abuse against prisoners?  Of course not.  Our system, unlike the systems of such regimes, will treat such offenders as criminals.  

    Will the mid-eastern media make the effort to explain such distinction?  Almost certainly not.  Thus, the damage those few troops have done is enormous.  Not only have they disgraced and dishonored their country and their fellow troops, the vast majority of who routinely place themselves in peril to obey civilized rules of war, but they've also increased the dangers to their fellow troops' lives by jeopardizing their ability to maintain the trust they've gained, and regain the trust they've lost, among Iraqis.

    I just finished watching the latest episode in the long-running military morality play, JAG, which with rare exceptions does an excellent job of portraying the warts and the beauty-marks of our system, but the most enduring beauty mark consistently depicted by JAG is our system's willingness to remove the warts.  Such approach offers the only hope for our ability in the long-run to overcome the consistently deliberate distortions of such events in the mid-eastern media.  

    Making an example of the goons trying to pose as American "military police" is an essential part of what distinguishes our system from regimes that routinely treat their prisoners (and opponents) with barbarity.  In doing so, we need to seek maximum worldwide publicity for our system's application of suitable punishment on the offenders.  It will take a long time for such distinction to set in the minds of those in other countries blinded by hatred for us and the human-rights system for which we stand, but it's a worthwhile effort.  

    At the same time, one wishes there would emerge among non-fanatical Muslims a group of leaders willing to prominently, repeatedly and unequivocally condemn the consistently deliberate distortions against us in the mid-eastern media.  Just as it's not too much to ask (indeed expect) us to forthrightly condemn wrongful conduct by miscreants among us, it's not to much to ask (indeed expect) the same from leaders in the Muslim world.  Unfortunately, I'll seen few manifestations of such willingness.

--Jim Wrenn, Editor@PoliSat.Com.



April 29, 2004:*  #01  Political Satire/Commentary where satire is always commentary but commentary isn't always satire 
(but we're confident you'll know the difference)  Search PoliSat.Com Home  Tell a friend about PoliSat.Com    Subscribe 
Permanent Link to this installment in PoliSat.Com's Archives    Google-News list of recent updates    About author, Jim Wrenn.
*Editor's note:  Due to delay awaiting further relevant news reports, this update was not ready for uploading until April 30, 2004.

Report says Hillary Clinton's office denies having spoken to "the London-based newspaper Asharq al-Awsat" attributing anti-Bush statements to Her that inspired PoliSat.Com's caustically satirical "Hillary Workout Tape" commentary, so PoliSat.Com hereby issues a "correction" as tepid as Hillary's denial.·

    As late as midnight, April 29, 2004, EDT, NewsMax was the sole news-source reporting that Senator Hillary Clinton's office issued a "news release" asserting that she "had never spoken to the London-based newspaper Asharq al-Awsat," which had quoted her as having harshly condemned Bush's policy in Iraq and having characterized Iraq was a "quagmire" in which U.S. forces would remain "trapped."  Quotations attributed to Her (disparaging Bush's policy in Iraq) in foreign media reports citing Asharq al-Awsat as their source (of which Mehr News, Tehran, Iran Dateline April 26, 2004 is an example)  "prompted a firestorm of outrage from her critics" and also inspired PoliSat.Com's April 28, 2004, caustically satirical commentary and "Hillary's Workout Tape" animation.  Such quotations were certainly at variance with the milder criticisms of Bush's handling of post-Saddam Iraq she had expressed to Larry King on CNN on April 20, 2004.

    According to NewsMax, her "news release" described the reported interview as having been "made up out of whole cloth."  Her news release also stated:

The comments attributed to Sen. Clinton, first cited by the Asharq al-Awsat newspaper and picked up by major foreign media, is at sharp variance with Sen. Clinton's public positions regarding the president and the Iraq war.

In the Senate, Clinton has voted for the Iraq war and supported President Bush's $87 billion in reconstruction aid, a measure opposed by many leading Democrats, including Sen. John Kerry.

Mrs. Clinton has generally been supportive of President Bush's war on terror, including his Iraq policy. Recently, she did offer criticism, now shared by many Republicans and Democrats in Congress, that the Bush administration had not adequately prepared for a post-Saddam Iraq.

    Assume, argendo, that Senator Clinton's reported assertion that she "never [spoke] to the London-based newspaper Asharq al-Awsat," is true.  Assume further, arguendo, that she feels genuine outrage at having been inaccurately portrayed as having made statements people with common sense would perceive as likely to encourage our terrorist enemies, demoralize our troops, and undermine our troops' ability to maintain confidence gained, and regain confidence lost, among Iraqis.  Notwithstanding such assumptions, one wonders why she has limited her expression of outrage to that of a staff-issued press-release asserting that the report that she had given such interview to Asharq al-Awsat "had been made up out of whole cloth."  

    We know she knows how to convey her outrage in a way to capture worldwide attention, such as when, she made a speech on May 16, 2002, on the Senate floor giving credence to an inaccurate media report that "Bush knew [about the 9-11 plot in advance]."  See Editor's Note below.  Therefore, given the highly damaging nature of what she disputes merely by having her staff issue a press-release denial, one must wonder at the shallowness of her judgment-- if not seriously doubt the sincerity of her denial-- in choosing not to issue such denial in a way not only to capture world attention but, more important, to undo the worldwide damage done by the report she disputes.  If she were to have scheduled a news conference to personally, forcefully and unequivocally repudiate the views attributed to her in those foreign-media articles, her doing so would have received instant, worldwide attention.  She could have (and should have) thereby:  (a) forcefully repudiated the comments attributed to her in the article, (b) forcefully re-stated her support for Operation Iraqi Freedom, and (c) forcefully stated that even though she may have serious disagreements with many aspects of Bush's policy, she agrees with him that the United States will apply whatever effort may be needed to prevail over those seeking to prevent Iraq from achieving a form of government respecting human rights, eschewing weapons of mass destruction and denying haven to terrorists.

    If I were serving in Iraq, I would be angered by the callously tepid nature of her denial that she had made such statements given their wide dissemination throughout the Mid-East, the effects of which have been to encourage those trying to kill me and make it even more difficult for me to maintain trust I'd earned, and regain trust I'd lost, among Iraqis.  For these reasons, PoliSat.Com is making this "correction" of it's commentary about her yesterday as tepid as her efforts to remedy the damage done by what her press release describes as an inaccurate report.

Hillary's Workout--Lite.

I'm Hillary Clinton in strife
from stories on me that weren't right.
My method to show
the stories aren't so?
A "Hillary Workout" that's "Lite."

A Mid-Eastern paper proclaimed
that I expressed views to disdain
our chances to win
Iraq as a friend
and cleanse it of terrorist strains.

So angry am I, I get vapors
when statements that Mid-Eastern papers
attribute to me
are false as can be, 
but how should I chasten those papers?

The damage I'll seek to allay
by having a staffer display
a tepid denial
unlikely to rile
my friends in my Leftist soirees.

I'm Jim, who writes satire with verve.
On learning that falsified words
in mid-eastern news
at Hill'ry were spewed,
I'm fixing my mocking of Her.

However, in straight'ning my curve,
I'm tracking corrections by her.
With careful discretion
I've made this correction
as tepid as Hill'ry made hers.

    Editor's Note:  Regarding the accusatory tone of Senator Clinton's May 16, 2002, speech, PoliSat.Com promptly thereafter published a series of commentaries, which, inter alia, then identified the "wall" prohibiting sharing of intelligence between the FBI and CIA as a primary factor preventing the "dots" being "connected."  Such common-sense insight was already self-evident to anyone reasonably knowledgeable about history without the need for a multi-million-dollar, transparently partisan inquisition such as that being conducted by the 9-11 Commission.  Indeed, the 9-11 Inquisition has belatedly exposed such wall's causative effect (to the dismay of the highly-partisan "representatives" of the "9-11 survivors" in the 9-11 Inquisition Gallery who applauded the transparently partisan interrogation of Bush Administration witnesses by Commissioners Richard Ben-Veniste and Jamie Gorelick as well as the testimony of anti-Bush witnesses alleging negligence and/or culpability in failing to prevent 9-11) despite Ben-Veniste's and Gorelick's nakedly partisan  attempts not only to obscure the centrality of the "wall" as a causative factor but also to conceal the fact that Gorelick, as Deputy Attorney General under Clinton, had issued directives making that wall wider, taller and thicker than the law required.  When Soviet and Chinese regimes in the 1950's conducted proceedings such as this, we called them "show trials."

--Jim Wrenn, Editor@PoliSat.Com.


April 28, 2004:  #01  Political Satire/Commentary where satire is always commentary but commentary isn't always satire 
(but we're confident you'll know the difference)  Search PoliSat.Com Home  Tell a friend about PoliSat.Com    Subscribe 
Permanent Link to this installment in PoliSat.Com's Archives    Google-News list of recent updates    About author, Jim Wrenn.

Announcement from Hillary Clinton: The Hillary Workout Edition departs from established tradition-- A Tour de Force Lesson by Rodham on Methods for Scraping the Bottom--i.e., How to use an interview with mid-eastern, America-hating media to malign George Bush's motives in Iraq and further undermine abilities of American troops in peril to earn the trust of Iraqis. ·

    Hillary Clinton is pioneering the "broadening" of the post-Cold-War frontier in foreign policy.  How?  By making self-serving partisan claims (to the America-hating mid-eastern media) that provide maximum grist for anti-American propaganda to encourage and inflame our adversaries and undermine the abilities of our troops in peril to gain the trust of non-fanatical mid-eastern people perched on the fence between passive, fatalistic acceptance of the yoke of fascistic terrorism on one side and support for Coalition forces seeking to free them from such tyranny on the other side.  According to Mehr News, Tehran, Iran Dateline April 26, 2004:

Hillary Clinton, the New York Democrat senator, told the London-based Arab daily
Asharq al-Awsat said that the Bush Administration had not openly and clearly told the U.S. people about the human and financial tolls of the war on Iraq.

The democrat Senator stressed that the U.S. is trapped in the quagmire of Iraq. It can not free itself from the country.

Referring to the Bush Administration policies as arrogant and insolent, the wife of the former U.S. president further added that Bush is not willing to admit his mistakes in Iraq, the grave mistakes that have endangered the lives of both the Iraqi people and the U.S. servicemen alike.

The mistakes have also threatened peace and stability in the region, she further explained.

    Who will take heart in the mid-eastern media's reporting of her comments?  American troops struggling to maintain trust they've gained, and regain trust they've lost, among the non-fanatical majority of Iraqis?  Certainly not.  The Baathist dead-enders trying to slaughter our troops and anyone not opposing our troops?  Of course.  The fanatical minority among the Shiites in Iraq?  Of course.  Al Qaeda?  Of course.  Islamic Jihad?  Of course.  Hammas?  Of course.  Hezbollah?  Of course.  The fascistic mullahs in Iran?  Of course.  The Baathists in Syria?  Of course.  Yassir Arafat?  Of course.  Ansar al Islam?  Of course.  The French?  Of course.  

    Perhaps Hillary will take inspiration from Jane Fonda by producing an "intellectual workout" video tape to teach us intellectual "fatheads" who find her tactics offensive to "slim down" by embracing her radical departure from the non-partisan nature of our foreign policy that was prevalent among those in the "loyal opposition" until Reagan became president.  Surely we dunderheads who lack the intellectual capacity to understand what is so obvious to the smartest woman -- no, smartest human-- on the planet-- no in all of human history-- could benefit from such "intellectual workout" to enable us to learn how encouraging our worst enemies by disparaging our capacity and will to defeat them is so much better than the reverse.

Hillary's Workout Tape.

You know me as Senator Clinton,
a woman of great erudition
with talent to make
instructional tapes
called "Hillary's Workout Edition."

My "Workout" reveals the positions
for breaking the mold of tradition
with methods to rip
from statements on foreign positions.

To teach these positions I must
display how to parry and thrust
at Bush so the world
perceives him a burl
too stupid to merit their trust.

This tour de force lesson from Rodham
explains how all gains I have gotten:  
To navigate shoals
with partisan goals,
one must have the will to scrape bottom.

So-what if my words to the press
in mid-eastern lands that detest
our goals in Iraq
encourages not
the people by terror repressed?

So-what if such words cause dismay
among troops dispatched in harm's way
implying we'll not
succeed in Iraq?
It pleases my Leftist soiree.

--Jim Wrenn, Editor@PoliSat.Com.



April 27, 2004:  #01  Political Satire/Commentary where satire is always commentary but commentary isn't always satire 
(but we're confident you'll know the difference)  Search PoliSat.Com Home  Tell a friend about PoliSat.Com    Subscribe 
Permanent Link to this installment in PoliSat.Com's Archives    Google-News list of recent updates    About author, Jim Wrenn.

Bill Clinton's Memoirs, "My Life," feature chapter titled "Living With Hystery" answering questions and questioning answers in Hillary Clinton's "Living History." ·

    Unprecedented interest in Bill Clinton's memoirs, "My Life", continues rising unabated.  Subliminally subtitled "My Life with Living Hystery," his book "answers questions unanswered" and "questions answers unquestioned" in Hillary Clinton's memoirs, "Living History," subliminally subtitled "Living Hystery."  Anonymous spokes-beings for both Clintons disputed the authenticity of the "Billary/Hillary Dueling Memoirs" chapter in the unauthorized mini-biography, "Clinton Liebrary Book" (see Clinton Liebrary Book) publishes under the auspices of the Clinton Liebrary (see Clinton Liebrary).  

    Although Clinton conceded he had claimed "writer's block" delayed completion of his memoirs, he adamantly denied the authenticity of PoliSat.Com's surreptitious recordation of Clinton's own voice explaining of his writer's block.  (Full text version is here.)  He also denied the authenticity of PoliSat.Com's recordation of Clinton's shortest speech, which, by surpassing the brevity and succinctness of Lincoln's Gettysburg Address, became Clinton's greatest speech.  (Full text version is here.)

    John Kerry, resentful that media focus on Clinton's memoirs diverts attention from his campaign, is frantically working to complete his own book, Full Medal Jacket.   (As a preview of Full Medal Jacket, an illustrated version is here and the text version is here.)  Speculation continued to spread that Clinton's desire to maximize Hillary's political clout in 2004 and 2008 motivated his timing for publishing his book notwithstanding his claims that protracted delays in filling all his intern spots prevented him from completing the book in 2003.  (However, a September 13, 2002, report exposed the phallacy of such claims.) 

    Kerry's top advisors remain evenly divided on whether Hillary's real strategy for 2004 focuses more on success in 2008 than in 2004. They are likewise equally divided regarding whether Bill Clinton timed publication of his memoirs to impair the Democratic ticket's chances for success in 2004 in order to enhance Hillary's strategy for 2008.  Some are convinced her strategy is to covertly subvert while overtly serving the Democratic ticket in 2004.  Others are convinced she's genuinely changed her strategy to focus on 2012 rather than 2008 and thereby seeks success for the 2004 ticket as a tactical element of her 2012 strategy.  However, Kerry's top advisors all agree that the Clintons' strategies are always far more complex than they appear on the surface.  

    Publicity surrounding Bob Woodward's recent claim (in promoting his book, "Plan of Attack") that George W. Bush with Saudi Prince Bandar has refocused attention on a May 15, 2002, report indicating that Clinton was far more simpatico with Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah than is Bush with any of the Saudi leaders.  That report arose from the fact that during Crown Prince Abdullah's May, 2002, visit with Bush in Texas, he actually spent more time in an "all-night bull session" with Bill Clinton, who happened to be staying in the same hotel in Texas at the same time to give a fund-raising speech, than he spent with George Bush.

    The question uppermost in the minds of the entire publishing industry is whether Bill's memoirs will outsell Hillary's memoirs.  It's an open secret that Bill took great satisfaction from the fact that the twelve-million-dollar advance he received for his memoirs exceeded the eight-million-dollar advance for Hillary's memoirs.  Regardless of which one wins the battle for royalties, there's no doubt that Bill Clinton wants his memoirs to create a legacy to eclipse the Monica Lewinsky scandal.  He sincerely believes his real legacy, like that of George Washington, warrants a monument recognizing his instinctive skills for governance.  

    One of PoliSat.Com's highly unreliable sources has obtained a copy of Clinton's most recent articulation of how publication of his memoirs will serve his long-term strategy for a monument to his legacy.  Whether Clinton will succeed in doing so remains to be seen.  However, his most ardent supporters expect his legacy to be most solidly established by the opening of his Presidential Library, which he named the "Clinton Presidential Center" rather than "Clinton Library" to avoid using a name sounding the same as Clinton Liebrary.  It's also unclear whether the Clinton Presidential Center will comply with OSHA requirements for the protection of women and children visitors.


Says Bill "My Life" Hist'ry is Living With Hyst'ry.

I'm Bubba, whose book ends the mystery
of how I've entitled my history:
My book that's entitled
My Life is sub-titled
My Life I Spent Living with Hystery.

My book on my terms and elections
assures my complete resurrection
as history buff
on hystery buffs
whose monument merits erection.

--Jim Wrenn, Editor@PoliSat.Com.






April 26, 2004:  #01  Political Satire/Commentary where satire is always commentary but commentary isn't always satire 
(but we're confident you'll know the difference)  Search PoliSat.Com Home  Tell a friend about PoliSat.Com    Subscribe 
Permanent Link to this installment in PoliSat.Com's Archives    Google-News list of recent updates    About author, Jim Wrenn.

John Kerry's Full Medal Jacket-- Lies of Ribbons or Ribbons of Lies?  Fault of Memory or Memory of Fault?  Medals for Metal or Metal to Meddle?·

    Today ABC News authored a report about John Kerry's claims about his medals and broadcast a video-tape of a 1971 television interview of Kerry clearly implying, if not explicitly asserting, that as part of an anti-Vietnam War protest, he had thrown his medals away "over the fence in front of the Capitol."   According to the report's description of the interview:

"I gave back, I can't remember, six, seven, eight, nine medals," Kerry said in an interview on a Washington, D.C., news program on WRC-TV called Viewpoints on Nov. 6, 1971, according to a tape obtained by ABCNEWS."

Kerry was asked if he gave back the Bronze Star, Silver Star and three Purple Hearts he was awarded for combat duty as a Navy lieutenant in Vietnam. "Well, and above that, [I] gave back the others," he said. [Quotation from ABC News report]

    The same ABC News report also recited a history of news accounts of Kerry's statements on the subject in the decades since then:  

Calling it a "phony controversy" instigated by the Republican party, Kerry said on Good Morning America today [April 26, 2004] that he has always accurately said what took place. "I threw my ribbons. I didn't have my medals. It is very simple."  


But in 1984, when he first ran for the U.S. Senate, Kerry revealed he still had his medals. According to a Boston Globe report on April 15, 1984, union officials had expressed uneasiness with Kerry's candidacy because he had thrown his medals away. Kerry acknowledged the medals he threw away were, in fact, another soldier's medals. He reportedly invited a union official home to personally inspect his Silver Star, Bronze Star and three Purple Hearts, awarded for his combat duty as a Navy lieutenant.  


And in 1988, Kerry again clarified his statement by saying he threw out ribbons he had been awarded for three combat wounds, but not his medals. "I was proud of my personal service and remain so," he told the National Journal.  

Eight years later in 1996, Kerry said while he did throw out his ribbons, he didn't throw out his own medals because he "didn't have time to go home [to New York] and get them," he told The Boston Globe.  


The statement directly contradicts Kerry's most recent claims on the disputed subject to the Los Angeles Times last Friday. "I never ever implied that I did it, " Kerry told the newspaper, responding to the question of whether he threw away his medals in protest.  

"I'm proud of my medals. I always was proud of them," he told Jennings in December, adding that he had only thrown away his "ribbons" and the medals of two other veterans who could not attend the protest.

[Quotation from ABC News report]

    Was a Vietnam veteran such as Kerry, having been traumatized by facing combat for his country, entitled to "throw away" some, or all, of the "medals" and/or "ribbons" he earned in such combat as a way of protesting what he considered an unjustified war?  Of course he was.  Should it be understandable that such young man at the time may have unwittingly or purposely described his actions in a misleading way?  Of course.  Would such mistake be forgivable?  Of course.  

John Kerry's Full Medal Jacket.

I'm Kerry, whose favorite tactic,
political squash with a racket,
allows me to pose
in customized clothes
including my Full Medal Jacket.

It's true I've been claiming I never
had claimed or implied that I severed
my ownership of
the medals I love
despite claims I made such endeavor.

Though tapes of my conduct belie
what now I so strongly deny,
a hero like me
you ought to believe
instead of your own ears and eyes.

But even if most voters don't
vote "yes" for my nuancing tones,
a job I could win
like Teller with Penn--
"Voilà, see 'em now, now you don't."

    Could Kerry's current memory be playing tricks on him?  Of course it could.  Could Kerry's current statements be manifestations of dissembling?  Of course.  Does his status as a war hero confer upon him immunity from questions seeking to elicit whether the former or latter hypothesis is correct?  Of course not.  Since ABC News, not the Bush campaign, discovered and released the 1971 video tape and then asked questions about it, is Kerry entitled to treat the ABC report as an "attack" on him "by President Bush"?  Of course not. 

--Jim Wrenn, Editor@PoliSat.Com.



April 25, 2004:  #01  Political Satire/Commentary where satire is always commentary but commentary isn't always satire 
(but we're confident you'll know the difference)  Search PoliSat.Com Home  Tell a friend about PoliSat.Com    Subscribe 
Permanent Link to this installment in PoliSat.Com's Archives    Google-News list of recent updates    About author, Jim Wrenn.

No update for Sunday, April 25, 2004.·



April 24, 2004:  #01  Political Satire/Commentary where satire is always commentary but commentary isn't always satire 
(but we're confident you'll know the difference)  Search PoliSat.Com Home  Tell a friend about PoliSat.Com    Subscribe 
Permanent Link to this installment in PoliSat.Com's Archives    Google-News list of recent updates    About author, Jim Wrenn.

No update for Saturday, April 24, 2004.·



April 23, 2004:  #01  Political Satire/Commentary where satire is always commentary but commentary isn't always satire 
(but we're confident you'll know the difference)  Search PoliSat.Com Home  Tell a friend about PoliSat.Com    Subscribe 
Permanent Link to this installment in PoliSat.Com's Archives    Google-News list of recent updates    About author, Jim Wrenn.

No Satire Today-- To Honor Pat Tillman, an American Hero and the Other Heroes He Represents; Condolences and Honor to Kevin Tillman and the Tillman family, to the Rest of America's Heroes and Their Families; How to Help.·

    Today the Defense Department announced that Pat Tillman, a former NFL player who turned down a multi-million-dollar NFL contract to become an Army Ranger, was killed in Afghanistan.  Pat Tillman was serving with his brother, Kevin Tillman, who had given up a highly promising professional baseball career to become an Army Ranger.  Certainly Pat Tillman's sacrifice of his life is no greater than such sacrifices by others serving in our military, but his sacrifice also honors them because, as an active NFL player, he had viewed those who were already serving as "real" heroes, and his admiration of them and his patriotism motivated him (and his brother) to turn down lucrative careers in professional sports to join the non-famous Americans he (and his brother) considered heroes serving their country.  

    We express our sympathy and gratitude to the Tillman's for their sacrifices and to all others who have made, and are willing to make, such sacrifices.  To honor Tillman's sacrifice is to also honor, rather than diminish, the equally heroic sacrifices of the hundreds of others who have died, the thousands who have sustained injures, and the hundreds of thousands now risking their lives for us.

    Here's the text of a Defense Department profile of Pat Tillman and his brother, Kevin Tillman, written in July, 2003, on the occasion of their receipt of 2003 ESPY Awards on ESPN.

U.S. Army Spc.'s Kevin & Pat Tillman
Ranger Brothers Get ESPY Award

WASHINGTON -- Brothers Kevin and Pat Tillman, both Army specialists with the 75th Ranger Regiment, were presented with a distinctive award July 16 during the 2003 ESPY Awards on ESPN.

The brothers were chosen as the recipients of the 11th annual Arthur Ashe Courage Award. This award is given to those who serve a greater good outside the sporting arena, officials said.

The two are known for trading in their team uniforms for BDUs. Both had flourishing sporting careers. Pat played football for four seasons as a safety for the Arizona Cardinals. Kevin played baseball for the Cleveland Indians' minor league team.

The brothers were deeply impacted by the Sept. 11 attacks, according to family and friends. It was the catalyst for pushing them to enlist. Pat turned down a $3.6 million contract with the Cardinals to join the Army. Kevin ended his baseball career for the same reason.

Pat and Kevin both signed up for three years with the Army. They soon earned their place with the elite Army Rangers. There they were able to serve in Operation Iraqi Freedom, from where they recently returned.

They maintained a low profile while they served, said Lt. Col. Don Sondo, deputy commander of Infantry Trainning Brigade. They did not want special treatment for their celebrity status. The difference between sports and combat is the cost of being wrong, said Sondo. In a sport, you lose a game, Sondo said, adding that in combat you lose lives.

Sondo said the Tillman brothers fully integrated themselves to the Ranger team.

Younger brother Richard Tillman was not shocked when he heard of Kevin and Pat's decision. They had talked about it for a long time, he said. He pointed out that they would look up at pilots flying over the stadium during their games and think, "this is a game, what am I doing...I'm playing a sport."

Throughout their enlistment and service, the brothers have refused to give interviews.

"Pat and Kevin don't think they are better than anyone else," said Richard.

They do not feel that the soldiers fighting alongside them are giving any less than they themselves are, he said.

Family and friends said the brothers are no strangers to obstacles. "No one could be harder on them than them," Richard said. Pat for one attended Arizona State, being the last chosen scholarship recipient.

Actor Keifer Sutherland presented the Espy award to Richard. He said that he proudly accepted the award on behalf of his brothers. The ceremony was the first public discussion by family and friends about Pat and Kevin.

A video presentation showed clips of the Tillmans from youth to enlistment. Family and friends spoke highly in the video.

"You'll spot a Tillman from a mile away," said high school coach Scott Gillis, mentioning how they stuck out in crowd.

"Pat and Kevin always try to save the day," said Richard.

The three brothers were very close growing up and never had jealousy issues, said their father Patrick Tillman. "They believed family was more important than everything," added Richard.

Richard concluded by thanking the Ashe family, his parents, and his sister-in-law. He then thanked the men and women of, "special operations for the freedoms we've become accustomed to." 

Author of article:  By Alfonso Lopez / Army News Service.  
Source:  http://www.defendamerica.mil/profiles/jul2003/pr071803a.html.

    For information about others who've made the supreme sacrifice, go to http://www.militarycity.com/valor/honor.html or http://www.defendamerica.mil/fallen.html.  For information on how to contribute to support the families of our military personnel killed in our war against terror, go to http://www.intrepidmuseum.org/foundation_heroesfund.html. To view the yet-to-be-recorded lyrics of a song expressing thanks to our troops, go to Thanks in Our Name for Deeds in Our Name.

--Jim Wrenn, Editor@PoliSat.Com.






April 22, 2004:  #01  Political Satire/Commentary where satire is always commentary but commentary isn't always satire 
(but we're confident you'll know the difference)  Search PoliSat.Com Home  Tell a friend about PoliSat.Com    Subscribe 
Permanent Link to this installment in PoliSat.Com's Archives    Google-News list of recent updates    About author, Jim Wrenn.

Earth Day is Dearth Day-- Dearth of Common Sense; Pantheopians Worship Earth, disdain humans; Priests of Greenhouse Beliefs pose as scientists; Political Science (i.e., Politicized Science) Eclipses Real Science; Science Versus Religion-- Evolution, Creavolution, Creationism, Darwinism, Atheism, Agnosticism, Theism, and Deism; Unified Field Theory Versus Unified Feel Theories;  What's Needed is a Homo-Sapiens Day.·

    Earth Day is the High Holy Day for tree-huggers and other Pantheopians.  Paradoxically, among the most ardent Earth Day activists are those professing to be secular in their thinking.  Yet their zealotry connotes religious fervor rather than secular logic.  What are the differences between dispassionate scientific analysis and ideological and/or theological beliefs?

Theology, Science, Ideology and Secular Fundamentalism.

     Theists (Jews, Christians, Muslims and, perhaps, Buddhists and Hindus) assert the ultimate source of the Universe to be a Conscious Entity.  Non-theists decline to embrace such conclusion but do not unscientifically contend existence of such Conscious Entity to be impossible.  Many, but not all, "atheists" are really "anti-theists" who unscientifically assert that "there is no Deity," but in doing so, they fail to recognize such assertion as an unscientific leap-of-faith of the same type they so smugly condemn as the basis for theists' assertion that a Deity does exist.  I call them Secular Fundamentalists, who suffer the delusion that they are scientific, secular thinkers rather than religious zealots.

    Many brilliant scientists are profoundly religious but, unlike the Secular Fundamentalists, they recognize their religious beliefs constitute leaps of faith unsupported (but not refuted or refutable) by science.  They tend not to be religious (or secular) zealots.

Theists, Religious Fundamentalists, Science, Evolution and Creation.

    Many theists (mostly fundamentalist Christians and Muslims) incorrectly (in my opinion) construe the Theory of Evolution as being somehow incompatible with the existence of a Creator.  Literalists among them (Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, for examples) reject evolution as the probably-correct explanation of how homo-sapiens "got here" by making their leap-of-faith assertions of the infallibility of ancient texts by ancient humans attempting to explain their existence in a world they believed to be flat and to be the center of the universe between places they called "Heaven" and "Hell."  Non-literalist theists correctly (in my opinion) see no incompatibility between belief in a Creator and the Theory of Evolution-- i.e., they recognize that if one hypothesizes a conscious entity that pre-existed and then created the Universe, one could easily recognize that such Creator could have designed the Universe with laws of physics that would inevitably lead to the evolution of consciousness in the form of Homo-Sapiens.

Secular Fundamentalists, Science, Political Science and Politicized Science.

    Secular Fundamentalists, deluded by their erroneous perceptions of themselves as scientifically secular thinkers and blinded to their emotional craving for theology, worship Nature and therefore exhibit religious zealotry in disdaining Homo-Sapiens' efforts to control or manipulate Nature to serve their interests and desires.  What Secular Fundamentalists fail to understand (or, at least, seem emotionally incapable of accepting) is that the premise upon they claim to predicate their beliefs (i.e., that absent a Creator having designed the Universe for the benefit of mankind, there can be no moral basis for asserting Homo-Sapiens' "right" to dominion over Nature) does not support the opposite conclusion-- i.e., that Nature is somehow entitled to dominion over Homo-Sapiens.  Their worship of nature is what I call "Pantheopianism"-- the worship of Nature (pantheism) with the zealotry of utopians.

Secular Fundamentalists and Pantheopians.

    This is why Pantheopians fail to understand that the Universe has no value absent a consciousness to appreciate it and that in order for such appreciation to occur (i.e., in order for such "value" to even exist), the consciousness must, for sake of its own self-survival, exercise (or at least attempt to exercise) dominion over the Universe.  Such fundamental misunderstanding leads them to believe, for example, that preserving "endangered species" (on a planet in which at least 99.999% of all species that ever evolved are already extinct) has intrinsic value rather than merely the subjective value accorded to it by Homo-Sapiens' desire to preserve species pleasing to, or at least not threatening to, Homo-Sapiens.  In other words, if one were to apply genuinely scientific, secular thinking (in contrast to the theology of the Secular Fundamentalist Pantheopians), one would recognize the value preserving "endangered species" is to preserve what what either pleases us or has (or may have) the potential to help us.

Homo-Sapiens' Day.

    Therefore, scientifically-oriented theists, as well as scientifically oriented non-theists, should inaugurate a Homo-Sapiens Day.  The former group could celebrate their beliefs that a Creator designed us to have dominion over Nature; that latter group could celebrate their beliefs that the evolution of our consciousness created our power (i.e., our self-asserted "right") to exercise dominion over Nature.  I'm in the second group, but I respect those in the first group.  To do otherwise would be unscientific.

Earth Day -- Dearth Day.

Today is the day named for Earth
when Pantheopians* assert
their pantheist views
and common-sense views
instead of abundant are dearth.

The Priests of the Greenhouse Beliefs
and Theories that Ozone recedes
from actions by Man
contend Nature's Land
by actions of Man is bereaved.

While billions we waste on their bet
that we are to Nature a threat,
it's when, stead of whether,
from Natural tethers
extinguished by Comet we'll get.

So rather than wasting of billions
to please Pantheopian** minions,
we need technologic
Manhattan-style projects
for ways to prevent such collisions.

For more about cosmic collisions
and follies of Pantheopians,
at PoliSat.Com,
whose index is long,
find links about f Pantheopians.

--Jim Wrenn, Editor at PoliSat.Com.

*Pronounce "panth-ee-oh-pee-uns" to match poetic rhythm in this line.
**Pronounce "panth-ee-oh-pee-uns" to match poetic rhythm in this line.


April 21, 2004:  #01  Political Satire/Commentary where satire is always commentary but commentary isn't always satire 
(but we're confident you'll know the difference)  Search PoliSat.Com Home  Tell a friend about PoliSat.Com    Subscribe 
Permanent Link to this installment in PoliSat.Com's Archives    Google-News list of recent updates    About author, Jim Wrenn.

Political Earthquakes-- Can John Kerry walk straight during a Left-Quake?  War in Iraq; National Security; Ted Kennedy, Howard Dean, Ralph Nader, Al Gore, Jacques Chirac, MoveOn, Hillary Clinton, forget political geological history of Left-Quakes producing Landslides.·















    John Kerry faces a daunting task.  No only does he understand that a majority of Americans do not want a "Vietnam-type" or "Somalia-Type" solution even if they were to accept the battle cry of the Ted Offensive by the Offensive Ted claiming Iraq is "another Vietnam," he seems to also genuinely understand that it is imperative that Iraq not become a failed state and, hence, a haven for terrorists as was Afghanistan and as are Somalia and portions of Lebanon controlled by Syria.  Thus, the closer he moves to supporting George Bush's long-term vision for Iraq, the further he moves from the radical Left which dominates a large portion of "most likely" voters among Democrats.  The further he moves from them, the weaker is his support among those who favored Howard Dean, Ralph Nader or Dennis Kucinich-- i.e., the Deniacs, the Naderites and the Kucinichistas.

    Activists most intensely motivated by visceral hatred of Bush-- i.e., those supporting MoveOn, Media Fund, etc.-- will support Kerry no matter what, but many of the far-left idealogues, tree-huggers and Pantheopians will desert Kerry for embracing Bush's vision.  On the other hand, if Kerry were to try to wholly embrace the Bush-haters' agenda, he would lose far more among the non-far-left liberal and moderately liberal, Democratic voters than he would gain among the Deniacs, Naderites and Kucinichistas. 

    To Kerry's credit, he has refused to embrace Offensive Ted's Ted Offensive, but to his discredit, he has refused to repudiate the morally offensive attacks on Bush by Ted Kennedy.  Kerry also wants to court the Naderites, but do do so, he must embrace the impeach-Bush rhetoric being spouted by Ralph Nader a.k.a. Darth Nader a.k.a. Ralph Vader.

    What will Kerry do?  Notwithstanding Kerry's anti-war activism in the 1970's, one need not be a supporter of Kerry to recognize that a man who drove his swift-boat into a hail of gunfire to save a comrade will be unwilling to embrace the peace-at-any-cost philosophy of the Naderites and Kucinichistas.  If so, what does that mean.  It means Bush will win by a landslide.  In contrast, if Kerry were to embrace the peace-at-any-price crowd, Bush will win by an even larger landslide.

    If this were to be correct, what should be Kerry's best strategy?  He should embrace the Bush vision as his own strategy and thereby position himself as a statesman unwilling to play politics in ways that could jeopardize lives of our troops and the ability of Iraq to become a stable democracy.  Although this strategy might seem to the Bush-haters to be folly, it would be the political equivalent of driving his political swift-boat into a hail of political gunfire to put the long term interests of the country ahead of his own narrow interests.  However, by doing so, he would thereby dramatically enhance his stature as a candidate to succeed Bush in 2008.  

    Other evidence is about to emerge from the scandal of bribery and kickbacks in the administration of the "Oil for Food" program for Iraq that will expose the back-stabbing motives of the French and Germans in not only refusing to support enforcement of the resolution they approved but also working behind the scenes to stab Colin Powell in the back.  This will make even more untenable the theme Kerry has been playing thus far-- i.e., that it was George Bush's lack of diplomatic skills rather than French, German and Russian mendacity that prevented assemblage of a United Nations coalition to depose Hussein.  I think he'll drive his political swift boat into the blazing gunfire of the far, far left and position himself to be the strongest, most statesman-like contender in 2008.




--Jim Wrenn, Editor at PoliSat.Com


Daily Update immediately preceding the one above.


Other sites that feature PoliSat.Com's Political Satire/Commentary-- Click here to view our Affiliates page.