John Kerry, International Piranha, Dumps on India's Pariahs; Senate Resolution Stabs Troops in the Back

Let's start today with the never-ending saga of John Kerry the international piranha.

Yes, yes, I know he was in Europe last week, once again grabbing the spotlight to accuse the United States of being an international Pariah. But in my view HE is an international Piranha, gobbling up every possible opportunity to disparage our country and our way of life, probably because we collectively failed to see the wisdom of electing him President For Life.

And once again, Kerry shows off his no-longer-so-latent racism by using a racial epithet to criticize us. Oh, you didn't know that Pariah is a racial epithet? Well, allow me to retort. (Samuel L. Jackson, Pulp Fiction.)

Pariahs are members of the "untouchable" caste, the lowest possible class of human existence in India's outlawed but still functioning caste system, primarily in the southern section of that country, where millions and millions and millions and millions of Pariahs live. How do you think it made them feel to have John Kerry use their social and ethnic identity to say the worst possible thing he could say about the United States?

Did he give even a second's thought to how those millions and millions and millions and millions of Pariahs might feel about that? How do you think it made all the Pariah mothers feel when their children got home from working in the international Information Technology industry and turned on the BBC to watch their very existence being disparaged by a United States Senator, self-proclaimed war hero and unsuccessful candidate for President?

Don't believe me? Well then, allow me to quote from the scholarly works of Dr. Iniyan Elango (a.k.a.) R.S. Sridhar copyrighted in 1998 and updated in 2001. The following is posted on the Global African Presence web site.

"Every time the international English and British media use the word "Pariah" to attribute the meaning of "outcast" or "shunned" to anybody or anything, all real Pariah people who can read English cringe in humiliation and wonder whether they will be excused if literary liberty is taken by them to use the word "English", "American" or "British" to collectively convey the meaning of "ignorant bigots".

The real "Pariah" (or "Pariar") people are a large indigenous tribal group in the Tamil Nadu state of South India who are physically, religiously and socially segregated as "outcasts" and "untouchables" by the Hindu majority along with two hundred million other similarly "outcast" people who are collectively referred to as "Dalits". The Hindus themselves are hierarchically divided into a step ladder structure of upper and lower castes, but, the hierarchically divided "caste" Hindus collectively discriminate and segregate the "outcast" indigenous Dalits of whom the Pariahs are prominent members.

The English language mindlessly institutionalized the bigotry of Hindus by usurping the tribal name of the Pariah people to convey the degrading meaning attributed to the Pariahs by the bigoted Hindus."

Way to go Kerry? Screwed up again didn't you? What's with you anyway? Do think that just because Pariahs live in India and don't vote in the United States that you can use them for doormats?

What kind of international status do you claim for yourself after such an unthinking and outright stupid remark?

Where is the outrage over Kerry's blatant racial stereotyping? Where are the speeches of condemnation on the Senate floor? Where are the media moguls, especially left-leaning communist sympathizers, dumping all over his latest faux pas like a Rocky Mountain avalanche?

Are we to believe that while it is inappropriate to make racial slurs against descendants of African slaves brought to America against their will, it is nonetheless appropriate to make similar disparaging remarks against people of Indian ancestry who were forced into a slave-like social existence due merely to the circumstances of their birth?

Where are the New York Times and the Washington Post, the AP and all the television networks? If former Virginia Senator George Allen can get hammered for using an obscure racial stereotype in last year's Senate race against Jim Webb, (and I agree, it was totally inappropriate for Allen to make that comment) then Kerry should be on his hands and knees begging forgiveness for this blatant, unthinking, unfeeling scornful use of a racial slur.

But once again, the comment was made by a communist sympathizer, and once again, the World Terrorist Media and its local affiliate the American Terrorist Media give him a pass.

This guy has bashed American troops, South Vietnamese troops, Israel and by extension the Jewish religion, and the Swift Boat Veterans For Truth, all with impunity. But let any member of the aforementioned groups commit a slip of the tongue and Whammo! the media is all over them like bees on honey.

I mentioned these points previously, and I'll say it again. Israel is our primary defense against a global wave of terrorism that threatens to engulf all we hold valuable, and the Swift Boat vets were pilloried by the ATM for doing exactly what they should have done.

I once told a leader of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth that I believe I had it a tad easier flying gunner in Marine helicopters than they did on the rivers, because we could alter our flight path in a heartbeat, and had three-dimensional maneuverability. The Swift Boats were relegated to a predictable path, a river, where it was far easier to mount an ambush against them knowing exactly where and how they would be forced to maneuver.

My feelings about the Swift Boat vets match my feelings for the 'grunts' - the infantry and supporting units. They are the best, the finest examples of American spirit and valor and I stand in awe of them.

Yet they have spent an entire generation being disparaged by the likes of Kerry and the American Terrorist Media, while he passes himself off as the cream of western society. But Mr. Genius once again manages to insult millions of people in the international community that he so vocally claims to be in tune with, primarily because he is ignorant and self-absorbed.

Way to go Kerry. What are you going to do next?

Senate Irresolution.

Believe it or not, this brings me to the subject of the so-called Consensus of the Senate resolution, or should I say, resolutions, that are the topic of such heated debated and commentary of late.

The essence of this debate is that the Democrats and some Republican turncoats in the Senate want to pass a resolution condemning President Bush's change of strategy in which he is sending more than 20,000 infantry into Iraq, mostly Baghdad to take out the bad guys. The Senate Democrats and the Republican turncoats gave unanimous approval to Bush's choice to lead the charge, but also want to put themselves on record as opposing the charge.

What an unspeakably opportunistic, spineless crock! Who do these people think they are kidding?

The claim from the supporters of this movement is that they are voicing disapproval with the president and his policy, but at the same time supporting the troops. In a word BULL!

What really is going on is the all-seeing, all-knowing, all-gas blowing Senate is hedging its collective bets. As Arizona Sen. John McCain said this weekend, the Senate is really voting no confidence in the troops.

McCain knows better. He has seen the grunts in action and knows their capabilities. He knows what I and most other American veterans know. Give our guys a clear objective, give them the equipment, manpower and backing to achieve it and they will move heaven and earth to get it done.

Don't weigh them down with incomprehensible Rules of Engagement and don't let the diplomats and bureaucrats have a say in anything they are doing until the battle is won. Believe me, you can bet the farm on our guys, they will not let this country down because they won't let each other down.

But the US Senate is saying it does not have faith in our fighting men and women. The US Senate is saying that it has never studied the real battle history of Vietnam, because if it had, the senators would bet on our guys and be 100 percent vocal in their support.

My prediction? The 'surge' works, the Iraqis get a chance to work out their very real and very volatile religious, ethnic and political differences, and Iraq is far less of an issue in 2008 than it is now. And these inane 'consensus' issues will be about as useful as used toilet paper.

Want to win in 2008? Get a handle on this immigration situation, stop sending good men to prison for shooting at smugglers and border crashers, and start showing the American public you are listening to their concerns. That is how you win in 2008.

In the meantime, these resolutions are the ultimate proof of a lack of faith in and support for the American military in general and the individual troops in particular. If I was planning on running for national office in 2008 I would pray that my opponent votes 'Aye' on one of these resolutions. Then I would wage a campaign showing the resolution and my opponent's picture next to it in the area media every single week with the word 'hypocrite' as a headline.

Out in America-land we don't like people who talk out of both sides of their mouth at once. At the moment, that includes better than half of the US Senate. Hopefully, it will never reach 60 percent of the US Senate.