To the Editor,
Blasphemy, really? This is the last refuge of the closed- and weak-minded to end an argument. Should Descartes have been burned at the stake? Threats don't make you correct, theocrats.
Most scientists have been called blasphemous before being proven correct. Unless the world is actually flat and the sun revolves around Earth, I am pretty sure I am on solid ground here. The political persecution has usually been delivered by the extremely religious. Just ask Galileo or Copernicus.
I suppose I should attempt to make my point a bit more clearly to those whose capacity is a little on the light side. I do believe those on the right think. Thus, they exist. My point is, and I'm sure Descartes would agree, that the quality of the thinking involved has no bearing on the existence of those I was commenting on. I believe that you exist. I just don't believe that you think very well. There -get it?
As for other crackpot tea pots, I also believe that you exist. The rest of that thought should be assumed, amigo. Let's see, where to start?
While all of these discussions begin in the same place, "It's the Kenyan's president's fault." They also end in the same place. "It's your fault." You only seek to assess blame and have no solutions or ideas.
Let's start with Benghazi. While Republicans like to talk a good game, they rarely like to back it up with action. The president and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton asked the "do nothing" Congress for money for embassy security, and were declined. Wish to lay blame? Look into the mirror.
The VA has had problems for a long time. Does anybody remember Walter Reed hospital? Of course Republicans don't - it was a scandal during the Bush administration. Selective memory? Some try to solve problems and some should look into the mirror. Once again, the president and the secretary asked for money and it was denied by the Republicans in Congress. They really love those veterans until they need some of the money and Republicans want to give tax breaks to the wealthy. Then, not so much. Anyone see a pattern here?
Last, the bargained-for release of an American soldier. These terrorists that we dealt for and with were actually considered POWs by our military, not terrorists. That would have required their release at the soon-approaching end of the war. The soldier would most likely have died. If that had happened, who do you think would be criticizing the president?
Perhaps Oliver North -that's right folks, the same one involved in the Iran-Contra scandal of the Reagan administration. Arms for hostages, anyone? They were real terrorists, not POWs. Remember that? Selective memory again.
Oh, I almost forgot - who was responsible for starting an unnecessary war, getting 4,000-plus soldiers killed and countless more wounded, thus overburdening the VA? Was it that Kenyan president, or was it the presidential puppet master Dick Cheney?
Look into that deep, dark mirror.