Which of these Americans are you accusing of being part of the "most racist nation on the planet"?
KHAN NESHIN, Afghanistan — Five-year-old Sadiq was not a casualty of war. He was simply unlucky. The boy had opened a sack of grain at his home early on Wednesday morning, and a pit viper coiled inside lashed up and bit him above the lip. 

His father, Kashmir, knew his son was sure to die. With no hospital anywhere nearby, he rushed the boy to an American outpost to plead for help. By midafternoon, Sadiq’s breathing was labored. Respiratory failure was not long off. 

The events that followed unfolded like a tabletop counterinsurgency exercise at a military school. On one hand, the United States military’s medical capacity, implanted across Afghanistan to care for those wounded in the war, could not be used as primary care for the nation’s 29 million people. On the other hand, would the officer who upheld this policy be willing to watch a 5-year-old die? 

Since last year, Helmand Province has been the scene of the most intensive combat in Afghanistan. Marine patrols and the Taliban fight daily, and helicopters are needed to evacuate the wounded. 

Under NATO rules, any Afghan civilian wounded as a result of military activity is treated in the Western military’s medical system. Black Hawk helicopter crews often scramble and collect them. But each day, Afghans seek help for other injuries and ailments — for heart attacks, for trauma from vehicle and agricultural accidents, for twisted backs, cut hands, spiking fevers, infections, insect bites or dental pain. 

For these ordinary medical conditions, unrelated to war but often urgent, Marines and Navy corpsmen in Helmand Province provide first aid. Getting approval for a Black Hawk is another matter. 

The helicopters are few. They are spread out. Picking up Afghan civilians with routine ailments puts aircraft and crews at risk. It could also put a helicopter out of position for a gravely wounded soldier or Marine. 

Often the decision is made against the patient: helicopters cannot be spared. Many aircrews, and many officers on the ground trying to forge relations with Afghan villages, do not like this. The choice is not theirs; flight approval is made by higher commands. 

Maj. Jason S. Davis, a pilot and the commanding officer of Company C, Sixth Battalion, 101st Aviation Regiment, which provides a detachment of Black Hawks to fly medical missions in central and southern Helmand Province, described two conflicting truths. 

“We can’t be Afghanistan’s E.M.S.,” he said. “But right now we are.” 

Sadiq’s father appeared with him at a Marine outpost in southern Helmand. It was clear that local care could not save him. The Marines requested an evacuation helicopter. 

At the Camp Dwyer airfield, to the north, Major Davis and a co-pilot, First Lt. Matthew E. Stewart, saw the request posted on their operation center’s electronic message board. With an escort aircraft trailing behind, they soon lifted off from Camp Dwyer and headed south, expecting that the mission would be approved. 

After flying perhaps 15 minutes, they were called back. The boy was not eligible for care. Sadiq was on his own. 

A few hours later, a new request for medical evacuation, or medevac, appeared on the screen, this one from another Marine outpost. A small boy, it seemed, had been bitten on the face by a viper. 

Everyone knew what this meant: Sadiq’s father had brought his dying son to the next Marine position and had started over. 

There were no other medevac missions under way. While the pilots stared at the message board, wondering whether this time the mission for Sadiq would be approved, an officer at the second outpost issued a blunt challenge: would whoever denied the mission, the officer wrote, acknowledge that they knew the boy would die? 

The typed answer came back on the screen. The mission was approved

The Black Hawks lifted into the air at 2:25 p.m. Soon they were flying through a dusty haze a few hundred feet up. “Ten minutes out,” Major Davis said. Halfway to the rescue, and they had not been called back. 

While the desert dominates Helmand Province, the contest between the Marines and the Taliban plays out elsewhere, in belts of farmland along the river and in irrigated villages kept alive by pumps. 

The military calls these areas “the green zone,” a nickname derived from how they appear from the air — pockets of vegetated terrain that end abruptly where the irrigation stops. It is in these areas where almost all the fighting takes place, and where helicopters come under fire. 

Up ahead, a crosshatched pattern of pale fields appeared. “Entering the green zone,” Major Davis said. “Tell them to pop smoke.” 

Beside a fortified compound, a Marine lobbed a smoke grenade. 

Major Davis banked the aircraft in a wide circle and landed beside the billowing plume. 

This page was last updated: February 22, 2018
Specialist David C. Harrell, a medic, slid open the left-side door. Sadiq, on a stretcher, was placed gently inside. He was wrapped in a poncho liner. An oxygen mask covered his face. His father climbed aboard. He was in the system now. 

Dust swirled as the Black Hawk lifted, and Major Davis put it through a series of maneuvers, a fast zigzagging flight low over the village and the fields, and then set a heading toward Camp Dwyer, where a second aircrew was headed with the antivenin. (sic) 

Sadiq thrashed, his face severely swollen. His breathing was erratic. But he was conscious. Specialist Harrell checked the boy’s vital signs and tried to keep him awake. The boy lived through the flight. Doctors at the trauma center quickly decided to transfer him to a more advanced hospital. He was rushed to his next flight. 

Back at Company C’s operations tent on Wednesday evening, a message was posted: “LOOKS LIKE THAT KID IS GOING TO MAKE IT.” 

But overnight, the prognosis changed. A doctor told Specialist Harrell that Sadiq had been transferred to Kandahar, and was likely to die. 

Sadiq had been given all of the antivenin (sic) on hand in Afghanistan, but he was barely alive. The venom was breaking down his blood, and his wounds — where the IV needle entered his arm — were seeping. He was on a breathing machine. The fang marks showed on his face. 

Snakebite toxicology was tricky, Specialist Harrell said. The dosage was hard to calibrate, especially for a child of perhaps 40 pounds. And maybe the helicopter reached Sadiq too late. 

Friday afternoon, Specialist Harrell called the military hospital at Kandahar. He listened, nodded, put down the phone and called out. “He’s off the breathing machine,” he said. “He’s still in I.C.U., but right now he’s sitting up, drinking juice and milk.” 

“And he’s talking,” he added. 

What this meant sank in. Stung by a venomous snake in a primitive and isolated corner of a war, helped by a persistent father and a chain of people who heard him, Sadiq had reversed Afghanistan’s cruelest math. 
To whom in your own article below (NYT MAY 29, 2010) do your editorial writers routinely refer as "imperialist occupiers"? 

If those elitist  (self hating) people of the world, who believe they are smarter than the rest of us; who believe that there is no 'American Exceptionalism', that Americans consume more than their 'fair share' because of greed;  that capitalism and America are what is wrong of this world - can pursuade a majority of US that THEY are correct and that there is no American Exceptionalism, than the world may loose its one true free country and the hope for freedom everywhere forever.

Take a look at the images on this page. What do you see?

What does Arthur Sulzberger, Jr. see?

What does George Soros see? 

What does MIchael Moore see ?

I'll bet you view the images differently from the way those other three see them. 

Inscribed on the Statue of Liberty are these words: 

Give me your tired, your poor, 
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, 
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. 
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, 
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!

Nowhere are inscribed these words: Give us your lords and ladies.Your rich and idle. Send us your huddled dukes and your duchesses. We welcome your  bankers and moneychangers; your manor dwellers.

This vast and wonderful country had one need: people willing to work hard  to succeed. America offered only one reward in return: Freedom. No handouts; no welfare; no subsidies; no tax breaks; no student loans. Just OPPORTUNITY. And immigrants came here from every corner of the Earth and made America what it is today.

Michael Moore calls this the most racist country on Earth. Really? Compared with whom? Look at the scenes from American life that surround this article, and tell me what country has the diverse ethnic population that we have.

Ironically, these same people have (a) a high opinion of THEMSELVES, notwithstanding the many faults of the rest of US. And whenever they dream up some scheme or other for the rest of US to make sacrifices for this do-good project or that one, THEY always manage to exempt themselves from the same prescribed sacrifice

So, fossil fuels are causing global warming. Solution: The liberal cogniscenti will continue to ride in gas guzzling limousines and private jets and use their wealth to buy the fossil fuels from us while we take a bus, walk, or go by bicycle. Is that a plan or what?

Same, same with their 24 room mansions. You can turn off the air conditioning in your two bedroom walkup, so Barbra Streisand and Al Gore can buy your allotment, that because of the energy tax you can't afford anyway, to chill their 12 bedroom mansions.

All barn animals are equal; some are more equal than others.


The question begs then: who are we to think we are better than anyone else? For 7,000 years of recorded history, governments have come and governments have gone. Monarchies, Socialism, Communism, Dictatorships, Anarchy, Deism, Theism, Obamism. Few last for very long. All have a common thread: In some ways or in all ways, the government looks out for it's citizens. In return, the people are subject to the dictates of the government - individual choices and individual freedom are sacrificed for the welfare of the people who rule. 

In the late 18th Century a handful of men decided they wanted freedom, and after 7 years of war, and the loss of thousands of lives, America was born. But what form of government to take? Our founding fathers decided that the first thing to be considered were the rights of  individuals, and the Constitution was written. Soon thereafter, the Bill of Rights was added enumerating and detailing those individual rights.

George Washington was (s)elected  President, but he had doubts. Many of his foreign counterparts (kings, writers, aristocracy) counseled him that the concept of individual rights and self-governance were pipe dreams that would never work. Men are, by nature, rather nasty and self-centered beasts who need someone to rule over their diverse self-interests. To hos credit he dedicated himself to upholding the Constitution to protect the individual's rights over those of the State.

Immigrants came here and helped build the nation. Many died trying, but almost all were appreciative of the land that at least afforded them the opportunity to succeed. We prospered, not because we were better than everyone else, but because we were free. 

The road we took always has been an option that any other could take, but few did, and none for very long. When free people encounter a roadblock, they often must dig themselves out. To citizens of other countries, a government to come to their aid in a time of need is an enchanting temptation - and to varying degrees, all other countries have taken it. It's hard to blame them, but Americans should not feel guilty for the rewards gained through our belief in freedom.


Freedom is neither free nor dumb. But for the first time in our history, we may be indanger of losing it. Why? Because unlike those other forms of government, where the King, Dictator, President-for Life, Pelosi, or whomever makes the choices for you, the people living in a Democracy have to maintain diligence to protect their individual rights against the usurpation of the state. As things stand now, this necessary enforcement is being made more difficult for two reasons:

1. The party system is dividing this country along irreconcillable lines. and 

2. The interests of the political parties is superseding the interests of the people as a whole.

Government has become destructive of these ends . . . the right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. Government has become the arbitrator of too many things in America. As such, too many people are afforded a means of extracting some form of regress from others through some government law or some agency dictate. Witness the endless lawsuits clogging our courts. This attitude on all of our part needs to stop.

Factions and parties have to start thinking more of the common good, and less on the good of the party. If, for example, we can't agree compromise on such core beliefs as say abortion rights, gay marriage, or gun rights, can't we all agree that something needs to be done to improve our public education. to produce more well-paying jobs; to reduce our dependence on foreign oil; to protect the environment; to lift African-Americans out of the cycle of poverty once and for all? Does ANYONE really think that these can be solved without liberals and conservatives, or republicans and democrats getting together to work things out? 

We really are not as divided today as were our founding fathers. Hamilton and Jefferson were bitter enemies. John Adams didn't get along with Washington or Jefferson. While everyone liked Madison, few could stand the arrogant Hamilton (most especially Aaron Burr - but I digress).

Democracy will not work if free people won't work together, period. The American experiment has made us the most respected and most prosperous country in the history of the world. If we lose our freedom, it is likely that the world never will see the likes of America again.

We deserve our prosperity.We earned it. If Pinch Sulzburger, or Michael Moore, or George Soros can't see that, they can kiss my ass.


How did we get to the sorry state we now are in? Complacency? Yes in fact, it was complacency.  Does that make us bad people? Not at all. Through hard work and individual sacrifice we forged a free nation unlike no other in history. But its human nature to take things for granted when things are going well. After all, we earned some enjoyment.

So what happened? 

First, Democracy worked, I’m sorry to say, most efficiently in America under the one-party system we had from 1934 to 1994, sixty years in which the Democrats controlled both Houses of Congress, the Presidency, or all three. Of course in the earlier years, party members enjoyed a diversity of ideas that the lock-step far left, Democratic Party of the 21St Century doesn’t have – patriotism, a belief in God, a commitment to the American People over commitment to the Democratic Party.

When legislation such as government programs to combat the Great Depression came before a Congressional vote, Democrats had little trouble mustering the votes. But when some other issues, like Civil Rights came up, the we Democrats could not count on several of their colleagues from segregated Southern States to line up behind a bill, so Republican votes were solicited to gain passage. Essentially through the implementation of these social-issue laws the Federal Government was able to gain more and more control over the daily lives of American Citizens.

With dependency, comes power. Americans getting a government check, loan, or tax break, are more likely to vote for the elected official who provided their largesse, and the Democratic Party leaders know it. 

So, the one-party system (steam) rolled on. Democrats proposed government programs; Republicans, ever the patriotic ‘loyal opposition,’ fought to limit these programs, and traded their votes for a more moderate compromise. So over the years, Republicans got legislation like the 1964 Civil Rights Act, home interest tax deductions, and a strong military, and Democrats got Welfare, food stamps, subsidized housing, and ‘don’t ask, don’t tell.’

Sounds like a plan to me.

Then in 1994 along came Newt Grinch, who not only upset the applecart, but also made applesauce out of Congressman who thought they were entitled to a  job for life (Can you say Tom Foley or Jim Wright?).Republicans swept the House AND the Senate. Fearing the possible loss of his own job in 1996, Democratic President Bill Clinton found religion and moved to the right. By 2000, Republican George Bush was President and Congress was solidly in the Republican camp.

For the first time in 60 years, Democrats were on the outside looking in. The limelight and the big-time White House invites were gone, the CNN and Washington Post interviews slowed,  and it was the Democrats turn for the good of the country to assume the unaccustomed role of ‘loyal opposition.’ Which, of course, they did. Will you excuse me for a minute . . . . I’ll be right back.

Hahahahah oh, ho ho ho ho. Heheheh . ahahhahahahaha. Haw  haw. Choke, gasp wheeze.

Sorry. Where was I? Oh yes, loyal opposition – for the good of the country. Umm hmm. Even a casual reader of these pages knows that the gravaman of my criticism concerning liberals is their penchant for putting the interests of themselves and the Democratic Party ahead of the interests of the American People – always. And after the upset elections of 1994 and 2000, Democratic leaders made little effort that (Party First) screw the American People, they were going to do everything possible to get Republicans out of office.

Chief Clinton thug, James Carville, went on every talk show threatening wahrrwwer. Every decision of the Bush Administration, however small, was met with a barrage of criticism. Every piece of Republican Legislation, however insignificant or regardless of its import to the American People, was publicly threatened with the specter of a filibuster. Unlike the overwhelming, patriotic support Republicans gave Presidents Roosevelt during WWII, Truman during the Korean War, Kennedy during the 1962 Missile Crisis, Lyndon Johnson during the early years of the Vietnam War, and Bill Clinton when he bombed Iraq and Kosovo, Democrats had no intention of returning the favor for Republican George Bush. 

Even after 3,000 American men, women, and children were murdered by terrorists on American soil,  Democrats were going to take back the power they enjoyed for so many decades. Patriotism be damned – party first. So every nascent move the Bush people made to prevent another attack, or every action they thought prudent to prosecute a war against those terrorists who attacked us, was met with a wall of resistance. Demagogory displaced civil discourse; civil action superseded common sense.

Interrogation became torture in the liberal media, and in liberal Hollywood movies. Wiretapping even from known terrorists outside the U.S. melded into a serious breach of American’s right to privacy. And so it went, and Democrats got their precious power back – and we got Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. And Barack Obama. Ironically, those policies employed to fight terrorism by the Bush folks – so often loudly denounced by progressive Democrats and berated in the liberal media (Remember ‘Petraeus, Betray us, in the New York Times) have been adopted intact by the Obama Administration with nary a whimper from a sycophantic press.

As a result of this divisive partisanship, progressives and conservatives have lined against each other like French and German soldiers hunkered in a Flanders trench, So now we can’t fix Social Security, illegal immigration, Medicare, public education, the loss of jobs, high taxes, Wall Street fraud, business failures, or anything that requires cooperation. Nor, as the bickering over the handling of the Christmas and Times Square attempted bombings have bitterly proven, can we successfully prosecute a war on terrorism if we can’t even reach a consensus on what it takes to win such a war.

Democracy and Freedom cannot work without co-operation. If the majority of a Free People can’t agree on anything, then majority rule is gone – maybe forever. 

Second, welfare and other assistance was almost non-existent prior to the Great Depression of the 1930’s, and was issued by state and local governments. People immigrated to America fro freedom, not a handout. Today government assistance even at the state level is supported by some Federal Government program or other. Entire families and even several generations of some families are raised and supported exclusively by a federal program paid for by their fellow Americans. We are the only country on the planet who thinks it’s all right for some people to refuse work, while others pay their way – it simply isn’t done anywhere – but here. 

While most of the people who come here are looking for work, all who come here are aware of the free benefits that liberal politicians have provided for them, once they arrive - legally or otherwise: Free medical care, foodstamps, rent assistance, free education, etc. - depending on the state. Unlike previous immigration, this wave of immigration has a safety net, steered by activist immigration organizations and written into law by liberal lawmakers, has little incentive to assimilate into the American melting pot - the foundation upon which our country was built. In fact many of these people and groups are against assimilation, with organizations like S.A.L.A.D. advocating a Balkan-like quasi-separation of races and ethnic groups, and La Raza, who advocates returning California, and other states to Mexico (back to the Aztecs and Mayan?)

Free and Freedom are not the same thing. A person on the dole suffers a loss of self-respect; which leads to bad behavior; that results in a permanent underclass. Welfare is anathema to Freedom – welfare enslaves. Progressives who hide behind government handouts under the auspices of fairness or leveling the playing field strike a blow for freedom. Political parties who pander to the ensuing underclass to win elections, are selling America, and the world’s hope for freedom right down the river. Party first. 

Enough is enough. Throw them all out. Go Tea Party.

June 3, 2010: Update. Apparently California Democratic Representative, Chavez claiming that the people "behind the new Arizona Immigration are tied to race supremacists" didn't get my memo about co-operation. Ms Chavez and others in the La Raza movement don't want assimilation - they want to "repatriate" Californis, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas back to Mexico (the Aztecs and Mayans, np doubt). - be aware.

May 24: Secretaries Salazar and Napolitano showed up today for a photo-op in the bayous off Louisiana, no doubt to reinforce the baloney Ms. Napolitano had showered on us all when she stated, belatedly, that “we were on the job from day one.” Unfortunately the usually compliant media streamed the press conference live wherein the abovementioned cabinet chiefs shoveled their nonsense in front of Louisiana Governor, Bobby Jindal, known for his low threshold of crap tolerance. 

As the live cameras rolled, Governor Jindal let the bureaucrats have it, unedited, right there in American living rooms. Why are government bureaucrats who were there from day 1, holding up permits that would allow Louisianians to protect their shores from the oil spill?

Why indeed.      

BETWEEN 1 - 100