Big Tent - Many Minds / Small Tent - One Mind

So, on Wednesday, June 6, the Boston Globe did a lead editorial titled, "The Republican big tent". They were pleased with the diversty of opinions expressed by the Republican Presdential candidates in the debate the night before.

The letter I wrote:

Editor,

On September 20, 2006, I submitted a letter to the editor titled, "GOP Big Tent (Blogger's note: you can read the full text of that letter in my September 23, 2006 post)"; the Boston Globe chose not to publish it. Your editorial yesterday, The Republican big tent (June 6, A14), was sweet, sweet, satisfaction; I am influencing somebody's thinking!

Ironically, on the same day, Mr. Derrick Z. Jackson (Boston Globe columnist) wrote, "Guiliani said, 'It's unthinkable that you would leave Saddam Hussein in charge of Iraq and be able to fight the war on terror,' even though Saddam was not linked to 9/11 or Al Qaeda and did not have weapons of mass destruction (A debate goes nuclear, June 6, A15).

Mr. Scot Lehigh (Boston Globe columnist) wrote, "'It's unthinkable that you would leave Saddam Hussein in charge of Iraq and be able to fight the war on terror', (Guiliani) said. No matter that Iraq wasn't part of the 9/11 attacks and didn't have operative ties with Al Qaeda (Essential qualities, June 6, A15)."

Mr. Jackson and Mr. Lehigh both responded to the same quote, chosen from hundreds, with the same exact words. Evidenced, liberal, group-think, no?

Surely Mr. Guiliani's quote was not more significant than Sen. Hillary Clinton's "I believe we are safer than we were" quote from Sunday night yet that quote didn't even make the Globe's "news" story. (End of letter.)

I always blind-copy the Globe columnists if I use something in her/his column in one of my letters. I hear directly from the columnists often. Well, I heard from Mr. Lehigh. He was gracious to respond to my letter and I'm not going to embarrass him by reproducing his entire email but I do need to reproduce one sentence because it proves my point exactly:

Mr. Lehigh responded in part with, "We don't discuss these mini-columns at all, but just race to get them done after the debate, each in his own office." (End of excerpted email.)

Thank you for making my point for me, Mr. Lehigh.

The liberals are loyal to a strict mind-set, there was no reason for Mr. Lehigh and Mr. Jackson to "discuss" anything. They raced to say the same thing; gee, what were the chances? What were the chances two liberals were going to parrot the same exact thing?

Separately, in my reply to Mr. Lehigh, I challenged him on his use of the word "operative" in his quote; his commentary being more honest than Mr. Jackson's. He was exactly correct in his use of the word, though, only about 73 Americans out of 300,000,000 understand the meaning of this extremely important word. As in, there were, in fact, contacts between members of the Hussein government and al Qaeda before 9/11. There is no evidence, however, that Hussein's government funded, trained, provided security or performed any other activity that provided any operational assistance to al Qaeda for the 9/11 attack. Anyway, I challenged Mr. Lehigh to explain to his readers why he used the very important word. I'll keep you posted.

Also in my reply, I reminded him that just a week earlier, another Globe columnist, Ms. Joan Vennochi wrote something very close to "President Bush trashed Sen. Kerry's war record." As we all know, this is hogwash. Again, you can google till your heart's content and you will never find a quote from the President or anyone associated with his Administration that EVER challenged the Senator's war record. Liberal extremists take it as an article of faith that Bush directed the Swift Boat Veterans and POWs for Truth.

There is absolutely no evidence of any "operational" contact between the Bush White House and 295 Vietnam veterans who carried a rifle in a swamp halfway around the world who earned enough medals to armor-plate a Humvee who also dared to share their opinion with America in 2004.

Of course, I think it is outrageous that being associated with 295 Vietnam veterans who carried a rifle in a swamp halfway around the world who earned enough medals to armor-plate a Humvee and who dared to express an opinion on electing a Commander-in-Chief is something the President has to be distanced from and liberal extremists paint as an atrocity. Think about that for a second.

Well, Mr. Sam Fox is the Ambassador to Belgium.

Finally, in other news, I absolutely kid you not, this is the entry on page A4 of the Boston Globe from June 8: Headline: Edwards says US less safe First Sentence: Presidential contender John Edwards yesterday disputed Democratic rival Hillary Clinton's contetion that the United States is safer since Sptember 11 . . . "

Now please go read my post of June 4, The Clipped Quote, and the third comment to that post.

No, I never tire of being ZACKlyRight.