Thursday, May 21, 2009

American Veterans: Confront NY Times!

Last night (Wednesday) on "The Factor," Bill O'Reilly basically read American veterans the riot act for not confronting anti-military outlets like the New York Times. He noted there are 25 million veterans in the country, but in terms of political action they're almost invisible. The following is an e-mail I sent to many veterans and members of military families:

The subjects raised on the O'Reilly Show are very much worth discussing. He was talking about direct action and demonstrations, something many of you are very familiar with but which some military people regard only as something engaged in by the Left.

[Some pro-military people are recommending the placement of a full-page ad in the Times]

I'm fearful about the effectiveness of an ad in the NY Times. Perhaps my greatest concern is that such an ad costs a lot of money (in the tens of thousands), and of course the revenues go completely to . . . the NY Times. Personally, I don't read the Times (a few exceptions on the Internet); in fact, I don't subscribe anymore to any daily.

In that regard, I hear people telling me, "Well, I don't watch The View anymore because of [some outrage or other]." I admit I always wonder, "Why on earth did you ever watch The View in the first place?" We need to wean people away from the MSM. Only if we do that will we truly have an effect on the MSNBCs of the world.

In the last election, several people -- some of them friends of mine -- did everything but beg (and maybe we even did that) the American Legion and the VFW for their name/address/contact information for veterans. They acted as if we'd asked them to commit an immoral act. Didn't we, they asked, "understand that [they] were a non-partisan (even non-political) organization?" Organizations that preserve their non-partisanship at all cost are nothing more than enablers for a totally politicized creature like Obama.

Meanwhile, Obama and ACORN were busily trading mailing lists, and the SEIU and the unions generally were acting iin concert, sharing vital information. The Obama organization claims (and they may be exaggerating somewhat) that they had an e-mail list of 13 million people. We had nothing that came anywhere near that number.

Obama has taken actions, including his speech today, that will cost the lives and the limbs of American soldiers. He -- and those who carry water for him -- must be confronted. God bless Dick Cheney for saying today essentially the same thing.

No one is claiming that organizations like Gathering of Eagles don't do great work, but the reality is that WE have lost the last two elections badly, and those results have severely harmed our country. We must do a much better job of organizing and getting our message out.

I admit Bill O'Reilly "ambushed" Pete and Ollie on his show, and I also believe sometimes O'Reilly's ego occupies all the space in a room. But he does understand the way modern politics works.

Remember last night when Bernie Goldberg suggested O'Reilly write a letter to the editor of the Times? O'Reilly scoffed at the notion, because he believed such a letter would do no earthly good. He was right.

How many stories about the Abu Ghraid outrages did the Times have on its front page? The answer is FIFTY-FIVE. They did so to harm the then-President (GWB) and the US military. They did NOT do to inform the American people.

If we can turn out thousands -- tens of thousands -- of people -- and do it repeatedly --it will get noticed. If we send a thousand letters to the Times, they will be discarded. The Times has nothing but contempt for a million active soldiers and 25 million veterans. The Times (like NBC) believes, correctly to this point, that it can get away with such behavior.

Look at it this way: My goal is not to get the Times or other radical outlets to apologize . . . or even "to mend their ways." My goal is to work with others to put them out of business.

No comments: