TheLastManInAmerica

Dear John,

They say the best defense is a good offense and it’s very true at times. You seem to have taken this as your life’s motto, not only in what little you’ve revealed for you plans fir the War on Terror, but also for your presidential campaign. You critique and criticize your opponent at every cue but all the while you seem reluctant to speak of your plans for the war. Are we to assume that you represent the flip side to everything Obama stands for? Are you the yin to his yang, the 7 Up to his Pepsi Cola? Because here’s what I know for sure 1) the troop surge worked (and simultaneously I know that Obama didn’t think it would) and 2) you were a POW and that somehow makes you fit to be President. Other than that, all I can decipher is that you are not Barack Obama.

            When pushed by the New York Times this week to sum up your plans for the War on Terror you made it your goal to attack your opponent’s strategy and relying on the fact that the recent troop surge has succeeded in putting down insurgent violence in Iraq and that the same plan will work to combat the increasing violence in Afghanistan. While he has set timetable for the withdrawal of troops in Iraq, you say that such a move would admit defeat and that a withdrawal should be based on the conditions on the ground and not an arbitrary schedule. But I’m confused, aren’t you are the one touting the success of the recent troop surge and the accomplishments of the Iraqi government? If conditions on the ground really are this good, shouldn’t we be drawing up plans to extract our forces from that country? Using rhetoric instead of words, you make it clear that you wish to continue the thinning out of our military across the Middle East. But why not just say it, John? Haven’t you made it abundantly clear in your speeches that you know how a war should be run?

            Indeed, which reminds me, why does your service in the Vietnam War all of a sudden make you Alexander the Great? I seem to remember from the history books that we lost that war. Don’t get me wrong, John, I completely respect your service in the military but you can only ride that wave of glory so far. And just because you were a POW doesn’t mean you’d make a good President. After all, the Vietnam War ended over thirty years ago, and you’ve been out of the service for nearly three decades as well. So what part have you played in any wars since then?

            If you believe that we need to keep fighting until very last terrorist is defeated, then say so, at least then we know where you stand. But this beating around the burning bush thing doesn’t do anything to help the situation or your chances. I remember a few years ago John Kerry took the same stand as you and built his campaign up around the idea that he wasn’t George Bush and we all remember how that turned out. A bad stand is better than no stand at all. However, you can’t just keep hyping the success of the most recent maneuver to go your way; you need to proceed from here in the best interest of everybody involved, you need to be a good leader. Being indecisive is not the sign of a good leader. No, a good leader takes charge and stands by his actions, he’s someone the people can rally around, right or wrong. I mean, hell, Dubya is no leader but at east he can stand by the decisions he’s made, right or WRONG. We understand that you think Obama has it all wrong but if you want people to listen to you you need to show them how you have it all right.

Sincerely,

The Last Man in America

“Oops. Our bad” These might as well have been Pope Benedict XVI’s words as he apologized for the reports of sexual abuse of children by Catholic Priests. He called the events “evil” while speaking to a congregation in Sydney, assuring them, “…as their (the victims) Pastor, that I, too, share in their suffering.” So the Pontiff knows what it is like to be molested and sodomized and forced to perform depraved acts on a man who, as a Priest, is supposed to be there to comfort children, not rape them of their innocence? I hardly think so and think if truly he did, he would’ve elaborated on his call to have the culprits brought to justice.        

    The abuses suffered at the hands of members of the clergy are horrors only the victims can know, sure we can feel for their pain but we can never understand and the Pope feigning empathy for the victims belittles the amount of damage they’ve truly sustained, not only physically but mentally. Sure he may “suffer” over the bad press the Church must endure amid the controversy, and I’m sure he’s truly sorry for the pain inflicted upon young members of the flock, but it would’ve done more for him to say, “I can’t begin to imagine how hard this must be for the victims but let me assure you I feel for their pain and will do everything in my power to assure such evils do not happen again.”      

       The man is definitely in a precarious position. On the one hand, he must protect the sanctity and good name of his Church and not let such reports get too much attention but on the other hand, he must also not turn a blind eye to them and corroborate them through inaction. The best way to go about it is to attack it, bring the wrath of God upon those who would use his name to harm the innocent. He says he wants to see them brought to Justice, well, my friend, Batman only exists on the silver screen. The Catholic Church is your backyard and it’s up to you to keep these dogs from shitting in it.     

       It’s strange to me that the Catholic Church, who considers homosexual acts sinful, are quick to condemn the actions of gay priests and bar them from service but when it comes to these pederasts, they may censure their behavior but seem to never take action against them, aside from shipping them to another parish. If homosexual acts are to be considered a sin, then what is to be made of them being performed with children? Perhaps if the Pope himself were bent over and forced to take something as big around as his forearm up the ass, he’d know what kind of suffering has been inflicted on innocent children. And maybe then he’d be a little quicker to take action against these degenerate monsters. Oh, I’m sorry, I meant Servants of God.       

Child molesters and Jesuits

Holding secret conference

Underneath the Pontiff’s nose

And only god will ever know

“Sinister Rouge”- Bad Religion (2004)