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.

Hillary Clinton Versus Sarah Palin

As the world rightly focuses on the McCain-Obama contest, a battle is shaping up behind the scene -- one that pits two powerful women -- Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Gov. Sarah Heath Palin -- against one another. Why is Sarah Palin the woman the Democrats fear most? I'll try to answer that today (Sunday). If you scan through the previous columns, you'll find comments on both women.

Gov. Sarah Heath Palin welcoming home Alaskan soldiers who fought in Iraq. Gov. Palin's son, Track, age 18, is an infantry soldier in the U.S. Army.

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton giving her concession speech on Saturday, June 10

Sarah Palin may very well be John McCain's choice for V-P on the Republican ticket. Barack Obama apparently doesn't want Hillary to be his V-P choice, but for purely political reasons he may choose her anyway.

Why do the Democrats fear the presence of Sarah Palin on the Republican ticket? In part, it's her legendary toughness (they don't call her "Sarah Barracuda" for no reason). But her main strength is her strong appeal to critical groups of voters. Consider:

Married women: Sarah's marriage to Todd Palin gives every evidence of being a model relationship. Sarah and Todd were childhood sweethearts, and they eloped shortly after she graduated from high school.

Young people: Sarah is only 44, and she exude youthfulness and energy. She has children ranging in age from 18 (son Track) to a few weeks (son Trig).

Military families: Sarah and Todd are a military family. Their son Track enlisted in the U.S. Army Infantry on September 11, 2007. It's extremely likely he will see combat duty in either Afghanistan or Iraq, or both.

Families with children: The Palins have five children, three of them teenagers, as well as daughter Piper, age 7, and baby Trig (a Norwegian name).

Reagan Democrats: Palin has the highest approval ratings of any major elected official in the U.S. -- in the 90% range. That means she's gained approval from the vast majority of Democrats.

Women professionals (journalists, teachers, nurses, doctors, lawyers, and businesswomen): Sarah is the consummate female professional, having served as Mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, and as governor of the state. Her college degree is in journalism. Her parents both served as public school teachers.

Working families: Sarah's husband, Todd, has labored his entire adult life as a commercial fisherman and an oil field production worker. The couple's links to working families go far beyond the usual political rhetoric.

Gun owners: Sarah is an avid hunter and a life-member of the National Rifle Association.

Pro-Life social conservatives: When Sarah found out that her unborn son, Trig, had Down Syndrome, she and her husband elected to have the child. Her point was that God has a purpose for every human being. When Trig was born, the Palins' press release began with thse word, "God has blessed us . . . ." The fascinating point was that they meant every word of it.

Evangelical Christians: Sarah is an evangelical Christian. However, she doesn't wear her religious faith on her sleeve. She is not anti-gay and does not scapegoat people who disagree with her.

People concerned about energy and the environment: As governor of Alaska, Sarah is among the best-informed elected officials on both issues. She's head of the energy committee at the Republican Governors Association and is a strong advocate of level-headed conservation of natural resources.

Overall, there's no other Republican that brings more to the table than Sarah Palin. She has exceptionally wide appeal. She would help John McCain with many groups with which he's currently weak (including young people and women professionals).

Of supreme importance: Sarah could be particularly helpful in battleground states with large numbers of working class voters, including Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Michigan.

In 2012 (if Obama wins this year or if McCain elects to serve just one term) or 2016, the presidential face-off could pit Sarah Palin against Hillary Clinton. One imagines that it would be a battle royal.

Note: I hope everyone will visit my Hillary Supporters for McCain column. It contains a guest column by a Black woman from North Carolina -- a Hillary supporter -- who is now strongly backing McCain.