After President Bush's weekly radio address Saturday the Democrats used a 12-year-old kid who needed medical care after being hurt in a car accident to attack Bush's opposition to expanding a federal health care program that serves poor kids.

The president is opposed to the expansion, as are most people who can do basic math, or at least use a calculator, because it will use tax dollars to provide medical care for millions of adults and children who are nowhere near being poor, and in many cases already are covered by their own medical insurance. In other words, it is necessary only if you believe in a Big Brother government, not because it will serve people who aren't covered and can't be in any other form.

The use of a kid who doesn't know he is being manipulated is reprehensible, and drew plenty of comment in the media. But not enough, which probably was the intention behind using him in the first place.

All I heard from the Democrats on the Sunday talk shows was how this expansion is "for the kids." Anyone who has ever voted on the school budget in their local community has heard this refrain every single year, and it usually is a harbinger of big increases coming, usually for big bureaucracy, and little to nothing is actually "for the kids."

Maybe while useful idiots like New York Senator Chuckles Schumer is fooling himself into believing that taxpayers are really buying his line, he can think about how he and his cronies are using a kid to sell a lemon of a program to unsuspecting adults.

Or yet, maybe Chuckles the Schumer can explain how using a kid to kill a country through slow strangulation of the taxpayers is different from Third World militias kidnapping kids not even in their teens and forcing them to carry weapons and kill their countrymen while the adults sit on the sidelines. Frankly, I don't see a difference except in the speed of the execution.

I am well aware that there are children in this country who are under insured, or uninsured, and their parents don't make enough money to buy them adequate health insurance. But they already are covered by this program in its current form, and others, but the expansion being pushed in Congress goes way above those living at or below the poverty line.

It is just another step toward mandatory socialist health care, which not only is inadequate, it doesn't work, costs way more and in the long run deteriorates the quality of medical care available to US citizens.

Don't think so? Check out Canada or France and see what they are getting for their unbelievably high tax dollars.

Ask why so many Canadians pay tens of thousands of dollars to come across the border to get fast and effective care, including major surgeries, instead of having to wait forever and possibly too long in some cases, under the Canadian government system.

I also had to wonder why it was that a kid who was injured in a car accident wasn't adequately covered under the automobile insurance of one of the drivers. Their policies might have had limits on the amount available for medical care, but once responsibility for the accident was established a reasonably competent lawyer should have been able to sue for more under other sections of the policy, or even outside the policy if necessary.

Or, was the kid riding in a car driven by an uninsured driver? Or was there another factor at play keeping him from accessing the full amount of the insurance policy? Maybe the White House or GOP members of Congress don't want to ask these questions, but they seem pretty obvious to me, and someone should ask them, so I will.

I have said in the past that I believe in safety nets and I do. It appears that adequate medical safety nets are available for Americans who are living at or below the poverty level.

But this expansion is for people who are making way above the poverty level. If people who are making incomes that are twice or three times higher than the poverty level can't prioritize their budgets in such a manner so they can purchase adequate health insurance, why should I have to pay for it through increased taxes?

And please don't bore me with this nonsense that the program is going to be funded through a whopping increase in taxes on tobacco products. Smoking is decreasing across the board, the government at all levels is trying to reduce or eliminate it, so that translates into fewer tax dollars to fund this expansion.

Which means the taxes will have to come from somewhere else. Which means, more taxes on us. By us I mean the average working Americans, because you can bet your butt that the people who are pushing this program aren't going to be the ones paying for it.

The White House should be hammering the hell out of the nonsense aspects of this further expansion into Big Brother government. We have a whole new team there now, so let's see what you have. Bring it out to the voters, make these points and don't worry about backlash.

The only backlash you'll see from educating the public on the real reasons behind this expansion will come from Socialist Democrats, and that is coming anyway. So go for it, and don't sweat the small stuff.

All the gas bag rhetoric aside, the Democratic presidential candidates are heading for the hills on the Iraq War issue. Which brings us to one of the first questions we are taught in Journalism 101 - Why?

Only a week or two ago, they were steadfast that we should get out now, not later, consequences be damned, and the only degree of separation in their positions was on the issue of how many troops to get out how fast.

But in their debate this week, the leading Dems suddenly have changed their stripes and are saying they can't and won't guarantee a swift withdrawal, if and when they all become joint presidents of the newly established Politburo of Amerika.

As can be expected, they aren't saying it is because of the successes of the troops. (I told you so way back when, then if the American military is given the freedom to do its job, and the damn handcuffs are taken off, the troops will never let our country down. But you have to read my blog archives for the articles. I'm not a librarian.)

No, the Dems are blaming it on President Bush, surprise, surprise, who, by the way, isn't running in 2008. Regardless, they say it is because they don't know what Green Bean Almondine, the Grand Poobah of Iran is doing, or what "secret" things have been going on behind the scenes courtesy of the president and Vice President Cheney.

Doesn't this just send chills up your spines? Reminds me of the first Lion King movie, the good one, not the sequel. Go ahead, say it. Cheney ... Cheney ... Cheney.

Gives you goose bumps doesn't it?

Anyway, that is all to be expected because I haven't seen a single Democratic presidential candidate come up with a single honest or new proposal to deliver us into the bright new world of workers united that they envision for us peons. All I have heard is the same old rhetoric, the same old communist/extreme socialist claptrap, and the same old race-baiting divisiveness that they have been spouting since the last half of the last century.

But the Dems hate Bush and the military so much, that there is no way they would abandon their attack on him over Iraq unless there was one heck of a good reason. Such as the troops winning, Ahmadinejad posing far more of a threat than they wanted to believe, and some significant signs of progress on the Iraqi political front.

Don't believe me on the "Hate The Military" mindset? Take a look at these two pictures of front-runner Hillary Clinton with an indicted donor, and while sitting in on the inquisition of Gen. David Petraeus, who is leading the current offensive in Iraq.


This is how Clinton appears when she is associating with someone who comes to her with a big wad of cash in his fist. This is Democratic fundraiser Norman Hsu who is described as a former fugitive who pled guilty to fraud charges more than a decade ago, and skipped bail when he was to be sentenced.

But according to the media, for the past few years Hsu has been living a high profile lifestyle, and has been a regular on the Democratic candidate contributor lists including Clinton and Barack Obama's. He is now free on $2 million bond awaiting resolution of his conviction.

Now let's take a look at how she appears when she is interrogating Gen. Petraeus, a four-star general in the U.S. Army, commanding a major contingent of troops who are locked in battle with terrorists who are trying to take out our troops so they can have easy pickings with our country.


Quite a revealing set of images isn't it. By the way, these came to me over the Internet from multiple sources in the last three or four days. If I need to attribute these to an individual or news organization please let me know, and prove it, and I will be happy to insert attribution.

Back to the original issue, I believe the Dems are backing off the Choose to Loose bandwagon because they have seen something and it scares them. It is the specter of victory, and they don't know how to handle victory.

So, just as they run from c-o-n-f-r-o-n-t-a-t-i-o-n they also run from victory. They have sent a bunch of people to Iraq in the past several months all looking for evidence that The Surge, as the offensive is known, isn't working, or that the political issues are insurmountable, anything to show that we as a country should high tail it for a nice safe, but ultimately fatal, fetal position under the covers of our leaky national borders.

Yet, everyone is coming back and saying things are improving. Our troops are routing the terrorists, killing and capturing them by the thousands, and the Iraqi politicians, while not entirely on the same page, are at least moving in that direction.

Good God, this just might work! Oh, No! What shall the Dems do? What they always do. RETREAT!!

Want more evidence? What is the biggest negative news story out of Iraq in the past two weeks? OK, I get it, redundant, right? All the news out of Iraq is negative, or there is no news.

Which makes my point. There has been NO news about our troops in Iraq in the past several weeks, which is a strong indication that they are making tremendous headway, because the American Terrorist Media doesn't cover successes, only difficulties. (I chose the word difficulties with care, because we haven't had any defeats, only difficulties that have been overcome. Such is the nature of war.)

Nope, the only major news out of Iraq in the past few weeks has been about private security guards hired to protect our civilian officials, getting into a firefight that resulted in the deaths of several Iraqis. The security guys say they were fired on first, the Iraqi government says they opened fire without provocation, and I don't have any idea which is the truth.

So I will wait to comment on that until I do, because otherwise I would end up looking like a loudmouth Democratic blowhard like Congressman john murtha who convicted the Haditha Marines of cold-blooded murder before he ever heard the evidence.

Remember the Haditha Marines, the ones that murtha and the American Terrorist Media convicted but who now are winning their cases? Oh, that's right, you probably didn't since the ATM doesn't cover any good news about our military. Covering only the negative helps advance their agenda to weaken our military so their communist backers can ultimately take over without interference.

More on that in a near future column.

It really doesn't matter what the Democratic presidential candidates do or say now. They have all branded themselves as anti-democracy, anti-military, anti-troop zealots who haven't a clue about how to fight a war, only a propaganda campaign that they have lost.

So they are running helter-skelter looking for something new to carp on. But the American public hasn't forgotten how they have betrayed our troops and called for defeat in the face of victory.

They can run, but they can't hide. And there is plenty of video evidence this year, to prove that point next year.

Hillary Clinton stopped by Fox News Sunday yesterday, an unusual move on her part because host Chris Wallace had sliced and diced her husband, the ex-president, gadfly and heir apparent to Hugh Hefner, in a controversial interview a while back.

However, although her interview lasted more than 15 minutes, the fact is she talked incessantly, laughed a bunch of times in a manner that reminded me of the Wicked Witch from the Wizard of Oz, but said little to nothing, and answered very few questions.

After her appearance that was terribly short on substance other than to toe the Move On party line and accuse George Bush of being the Great Satan - I think she got that from Green Bean Almondine, the President of Iran who has infiltrated New York City and is set to launch an attack on us from within later today and tomorrow - the Fox panel of commentators gave her high marks for her handling of Wallace's questions.

I have another point of view. I don't recall her answering a single tough question that Wallace sent her way, even though she cackled and yakked incessantly. What I recall her doing was filibustering through each segment with a series of claims that Bush is the source of all that is wrong in the universe.

For instance, Wallace brought up the controversial MoveOn.org ad in the New York Times on Sept. 10, in which General David Petraeus, commander of the ongoing offensive in Iraq, was labeled a traitor. That also was the day Petraeus began his report to Congress on the status of the offensive, referred to as The Surge.

Wallace noted that Clinton had voted against a measure that would have condemned Move On for its ad, which the Times ran at an incredibly favorable ad rate, reportedly tens of thousands of dollars less than most others would pay for the same space.

He asked why Mrs. Clinton had voted against that resolution.

But instead of answering him, she immediately launched into an attack on Republicans for attacking her, and her husband, and John Kerry, and all the other choir boys and girls in the Democratic Party during political campaigns, which now run 365 days a year and have no off season.

Mrs. Clinton equated the attack on a general who is currently serving in a war zone, leading all the troops in that zone, which requires absolute confidence in his motives and abilities, with political ads during a campaign! Can you believe the pomposity, the arrogance, the disconnect with reality?

This woman is totally in denial, not to mention fantasy land.

To its credit, the Fox News Sunday panel of commentators later regained its senses and launched a blistering response, making the point that partisan political ads, which are as old as the country, have no relationship whatsoever to an ad that attempts to undermine a commanding general in the middle of a battle.

To add my two cents, there not only is no correlation between the two issues, but attempting to undermine Gen. Petraeus while he is commanding troops in battle quite easily can be considered a violation the U.S. Constitution's prohibition on treason.

Rather than passing meaningless resolutions in Congress, the issue should be bumped up to the Commander in Chief, President Bush, and he should launch an immediate Justice Department inquiry into the New York Times' part in this. He also should investigate filing treason charges against MoveOn.org and anyone associated with producing or publicizing that ad!

This is NOT a First Amendment issue! This is tantamount to allowing an enemy with whom we are locked in battle to establish a propaganda post right inside our country, in its largest city!

Would we allow terrorists to start shooting RPGs at motorists in Times Square?

Hell NO!

Then why are we allowing them to use another weapon against our citizens and military without responding in kind? Wake up White House, the opportunity is here, Congressional approval is at 11 percent, and the time is NOW!

Back to Hillary. Not only did she filibuster when Wallace asked why she wouldn't criticize a political action committee that very well may have committed treason, she did the same thing when she was asked about how she would fund her ill-conceived national health care plan. The new version is just a poorly rewritten version of the national health care plan she tried to stuff down our throats when her husband was president, and incredibly expensive.

According to Clinton, the plan would cost in excess of $125 billion, and more than $70 billion of that amount would come from clamping down on fraud and waste in the current health care system. When Wallace pointed out that Ronald Reagan said he was going to do the same thing, and ended up with huge spending deficits, Clinton again went the filibuster route.

He asked her as point blank as a question can be asked, whether, if she couldn't raise the necessary money to fund her plan through elimination of alleged fraud and inefficiencies, would she raise taxes?

Again she cackled, again she talked on and on, but once again she did not answer the question.

By the way, she also said that another $50 billion would come from raising taxes on "The Rich," whom she described as anyone making more than a quarter million a year. Just for reference, I don't make anywhere near that and I am not included.

But I know quite a few couples who file their income taxes jointly, who both have professional degrees in fields such as law, accounting, chemistry, medicine, etc., who jointly exceed the income level for such a tax increase. I understand that they are well off compared to someone at the poverty level, but they also worked their butts off to get the education required to work in those fields and they work their butts off to maintain the lifestyle to which they have become accustomed.

I don't consider them rich. People like Hillary Clinton and her husband, the ex-president and heir apparent to Hugh Hefner, are rich. But they would NOT pay any extra taxes to fund her health care plan.

Know why? They keep their "income" low, and live off other forms of revenue that aren't taxed as income. The "rich" don't have big incomes, as Rush Limbaugh is constantly preaching, they have WEALTH, which is NOT TAXED.

Another bulls--t line from another bulls--t politician.

Oh, another thing. Although Clinton touts her health care plan as user friendly to small businesses, studies by reputable university economics departments say it will result in at least 200,000 people losing their jobs right off the bat.

And small businesses won't have an option of whether the plan best fits them and whether they should sign up. Participation in the Hillary Clinton Socialism 495 Health Initiative will be MANDATORY! And if you don't sign up you will be FINED, although she calls it being TAXED, but I can't tell the difference between the two.

Well, that was basically it. Other than the items mentioned above all I can remember from Clinton's appearance on Fox News Sunday was yada, yada, yada, HATE BUSH, yak, yak, yak, THIS ADMINISTRATION, natter, natter, natter, CHENEY, (ok she didn't really say Cheney, but you could tell she was thinking about him when she said ADMINISTRATION.

All in all, a typical interview by a person who thinks running this country involves blowing smoke past the electorate, then doing as she pleases.

Didn't the Clintons try that once already with disastrous results?

Veterans across the country are bristling over an e-mail sent out by Massachusetts Sen. John F. Kerry, described in the media as the only true hero of the Vietnam War, seeking veterans to join him and the Vietnam Veterans of America in a parade November 10, celebrating the dedication of the Vietnam War Memorial.

It occurred to me that holding a parade on the Marine Corps birthday that is 'celebrating' anything other than the Marines, certainly could be seen as a slap in the face to the Corps which is very busy that day with birthday ceremonies.

We also must question just who celebrates a tombstone? The Vietnam memorial is a black granite tombstone bearing the names of more than 58,000 men and women who died fighting the communists in Vietnam. Don't take me wrong here, I have visited the Memorial many times to remember the dozens of friends, most from my unit in Vietnam, whose names are inscribed there.

But the only 'celebration' I remember in the past 25 years was actually a 'dedication' of the memorial when it was opened to the public. I also was there two years later, each time as a journalist, when the statue of the Three Servicemen was unveiled nearby.

But the statue was and still is seen as throwing a crumb to the many veterans who don't believe The Wall is an appropriate monument to those who successfully defeated the communist armies in Vietnam only to have their service sullied by communists in the American State Department and Congress.

All across the Northeast there are cemeteries where my family members and friends are buried. I go to them occasionally to ensure that the graves are well tended, and to take a moment to remember their lives. But I have never been to a parade that celebrates a cemetery or a tombstone, so the concept of holding one for the Vietnam Memorial seems a bit over the top to me.

This feeling is even more pronounced when I think that the Memorial, which was so divisive to the Vietnam veteran community when it was first proposed, has recently been defaced by anarchists opposing our successful military efforts in Iraq. Perhaps getting some VVAW folks to help clean up the mess would be more appropriate than sponsoring a parade.

But back to Kerry. Regular readers of this column know that at times I have been somewhat probing and incisive in my commentary, questioning his medals, his 'wounds' and his vicious attacks on Vietnam veterans when he was a founder of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War, VVAW. Then there are the attacks on the military in general, and the dismissal of millions of civilian deaths in Southeast Asia at the hands of rampaging communists after allied troops were pulled out as insignificant.

As you might expect, I have received quite a bit of email from those posts claiming that not only am I wrong, but Kerry's peers from the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth are wrong too, and that Kerry really is the only living, true hero of the Vietnam War.

So, even though this is a column, and more to the point MY column, and I don't have to publish anyone's point of view but my own, I have decided that since I am a journalist who prides himself on thoroughness and objectivity, I will share some of the other opinions with you.

First on the Silver Star medal Kerry wears. His citation says his Swift Boat was involved in a supporting operation, and that he spied a fleeing Viet Cong on the shore about 10 feet from his boat. Some people say the boat's bow gunner had unleashed a burst of fire from his machine guns at the enemy combatant, but that the VC was not immediately killed.

So Kerry beached his boat, leaped ashore, pursued the wounded Viet Cong behind a thatched dwelling and shot him dead.

I have said that it appears that if there really was a firefight at the time, Kerry left his post while under fire, an action that should have resulted in a court martial. Or, conversely, if there was no shooting at the time, the conditions for a medal were not met. Reports from the scene also have indicated that two infantry units had already swept the area of nearly all enemy and that the lone wounded VC was youthful and inexperienced.

But I have been assured by his close associates that Kerry did indeed do the unthinkable that day, wresting a machine gun from the hands of a lower ranked, enlisted crewman who was frozen into inaction, and with the machine gun in one hand, a .45 caliber pistol in the other, and a K-Bar fighting knife in his teeth, stormed ashore like a one-man assault battalion! There the marauding Viet Cong melted before his onslaught like rancid butter before a hot knife, needing only to see the steely look in his eyes and the stone cold expression on his face to realize they had met their match.

Then there is the disputed Bronze Star where Kerry plucked a hapless Army soldier from the water after he had fallen off a Swift Boat during a high speed maneuver. Many said Kerry wasn't under fire and his actions were routine, but Kerry's supporters say otherwise.

They say the riverbeds were virtual anthills of concealed enemy positions and that firing did occur, during which the accompanying Swift Boats all fled to safer positions while only Kerry stayed to fight. (I have to admit that there was somewhat of a flap when Kerry later said he "came back" to a position from which he previously said he never left, but obviously it was simply a misstatement due to the heat of combat, er, Senate debate.)

The word from his supporters is that Kerry's Swift Boat ran a gantlet of fire from both banks, more than a mile on each side, a deadly encounter for anyone else, but one that left not so much as a mark on Kerry's boat. Again, his hapless and dysfunctional crew did little to nothing, while the steely eyed Kerry directed accurate and deadly return fire into the impenetrable jungles, again vanquishing the Viet Cong.

It has even been whispered that the reason no rounds struck Kerry's boat is because he stared down the Viet Cong (much like Davy Crockett staring down a bear in days of old) striking such fear into their hearts that their aim went awry and their rounds whistled harmlessly overhead - until they struck the civilians in nearby villes.

And the Purple Hearts, we can't forget the three Purple Hearts that guaranteed Kerry's early exit from the war zone only four months into his tour. This in turn set the stage for the onset of his political career and his one-man missions to Paris to meet with communists. Here Kerry took huge risks since he was still in the Navy, but preferred to be labelled another Benedict Arnold than to allow Henry Kissinger to continue bumbling through the peace process alone.

But the Hearts, we should talk about the Purple Hearts! Some say Kerry got one for being hit in the duff by a grain of rice after he threw a grenade into a vat of the just harvested crop from a Vietnamese farmer's rice paddy. But Kerry's supporters say it should be noted that those critics can't even say with any certainty whether it was white rice or long grain brown, so how can they be trusted?

And the sliver in the finger thing, that wasn't looked into until he had been medevaced far out into the South China Sea to a safe haven. Well, let me tell you ladies and gentlemen, that was no sliver, no sir, not according to Kerry's backers.

He was bleeding, profusely according to his supporters, from multiple wounds that he refused to have treated until all of the dysfunctional enlisted members of his crew had been seen to, including counseling for early onset PTSD.

No, the way they tell it, Kerry applied the tourniquets himself, and tended his own wounds, refusing to let anyone else touch them or even look at them until he reached a proper medical facility.

In fact, based on the commentaries I have received from Kerry's political supporters, if he hadn't been so stoic, so heroic, so manly, and so much the epitome of the quintessential Naval officer, he would have stayed in Vietnam for a full tour of duty like the other Swift Boat commanders, and having done so, likely would have won the war single handedly.

Even though the majority of Kerry's supporters weren't actually there with him, they are totally sympathetic to his dysfunctional enlisted crew, despite its many shortcomings, especially exposing Kerry to danger over, and over, and over, and over again.

In fact his supporters say that Kerry's devastating testimony before Congress as a founding member of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War, VVAW, in which he labelled his fellow veterans as baby killers and murderers, was due entirely to his overpowering disappointment at not being allowed to return and take the fight to the NVA. Regular communist troops had by then replaced the Viet Cong, mostly all of whom had been killed, the vast majority by Kerry, single-handedly.

Actually, when you consider the number of enemy killed by John F. Kerry we can even understand that he thinks millions of civilian deaths do not constitute a bloodbath as he has said so often and so recently. Compared to the numbers he has killed, a few million is obviously just a drop in the bucket.

So as I think about Kerry's unheralded heroism, and his stoic refusal to give in to critics who say his war record is straight out of a comic book, I have decided that we should put aside the call from VVA to hold a parade, as their news release states "celebrating and commemorating the dedication of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial ... .

"The festivities will begin at 10:00 a.m. with star-studded Opening Ceremonies at the parade's starting point on the Mall ... "

John F. Kerry sending out emails on his Senate letterhead is not to be misinterpreted my friends, he is just once again displaying his selflessness by asking people to send money to his old friends at VVA so they can continue his work, er, their work. And he is selflessly asking everyone to join their parade.

The appropriateness of celebrating a tombstone aside, I think it is time we honor John F. Kerry, a unique and solitary figure among America's war heroes. I don't think we should have a parade honoring a tombstone, I think we should have a parade honoring John F. Kerry.

And I don't think his parade should be cluttered up with a bunch of bands and fire trucks and cops and sirens and stuff like that. I think it should be a one-man parade, and that one man should be John F. Kerry.

He can get around the bands issue by carrying a boom box playing John Phillip Sousa music, perhaps mixed with some inspiring anti-capitalism ditties from the Communist Party Workers Chorale so the guys at the VVAW won't feel slighted.

Yes, by Jove, that is it! A one-man boom-box parade starring John F. Kerry right down Constitution Avenue. And anyone from the VVAW who happens to be in the area can run out to the sidewalk as he passes by, wave a flag of their choice and give him the clap.

Two-handed clap would be the preferred method.

Yes, I am certain, that is exactly the type of reception that John F. Kerry should get for his years of speaking about veterans, and it is exactly what he deserves.

Come senators, congressmen, Please heed the call,
Don't stand in the doorway, Don't block up the hall ...
For the times they are a-changin'.
Bob Dylan The Times They Are A-Changin'.

A friend came by the other day.

His name is Don Smith, known to his pals in the Pacific fishing fleet and around Half Moon Bay, California, as Ooga. He will always be Smitty to me.

Smitty left Half Moon Bay last month and since then has been on a tour of the continent, or as he and Simon and Garfunkle put it, "to look for America." He has found it, and has discovered that Americans are at once proud of their country and sick to death of their politicians and media, and are just about to the breaking point of doing something about both.

I will go into that a bit deeper in a minute.

We met in New River, North Carolina when we both were helicopter electronics technicians assigned to Marine Medium Helicopter Squadron (HMM)161. In Vietnam we both flew as gunners, but Smitty always had a kind and gentle streak so he spent a lot of his off duty time out in the villes helping the docs, the chaplains and the Combined Action companies win hearts and minds. He was good at it.

Afterward he joined the squadron recovery crew, an unsung group of Marine heroes if ever there was one. Their job was to go the sites where our helicopters had been shot down or crashed, and retrieve whatever equipment was salvageable, smash what wasn't, retrieve or disable the machine guns, and last, but certainly not least, bring back the bodies - or what was left of them.

It was a tough job. We'll get back to that in a minute too.

Smitty spent a lot of years after the Marines fishing in the Bering Sea, working the fleets that once were a mainstay of the port at Half Moon Bay, and even tried his hand in the retail fish business. He is somewhat retired now, hence his cross-country trip. (I say somewhat because he has worked for himself, as opposed to corporate America, nearly 100 percent of the time since we came home from Vietnam in 1969. So, if he decides to do something else he will, and if not, he won't.)

Back in the 60s Smitty was considered a liberal, although that label wasn't thrown around much. He didn't want to kill people, but he would risk his life to save or help people. Back then I thought that was an admirable trait, and I still do.

Along the way Smitty became a conservative. His change in political point of view isn't remarkable. He has lived and seen life and death up close, and he knows reality versus theory. He still cares very much for people, and still will go out of his way for someone who needs a boost, although he has lost patience with loafers and manipulators.

He has no use at all for liberal celebrities who shoot their mouths off about the environment or government or war without having any real knowledge of either. People who earn millions posing as someone else, and quite often have neither life nor educational qualifications, usually end up costing working people their jobs, he maintains, and he has seen the results of their bombast up close.

Smitty had driven 7002 miles on his quest to find America when he parked in my driveway for the last time this morning, just before he headed east to photograph the Rhode Island coast. He left California, went up the northern route to just below the Canadian border then drove east, through the mountains and the prairies to the Great Lakes, the Amish country, then here.

He met a lot of people along the way, and occasionally stopped to visit one or another of the Marines who had served with us in Vietnam. I thought to myself that as much as Smitty is looking for America, he also is looking for 161, at least what remains from the squadron as it existed nearly 40 years ago.

Maybe he's searching for himself as well, that part of him that made for one of the most incredible paradoxes of personality I have ever encountered - a loving, caring, gentle United States Marine who knew the guitar chords to a host of Peter, Paul and Mary songs as well as he knew the parts to a Browning M-2, fifty-caliber machine gun.

On the second day of his visit I got enough breathing room from my various money-earning occupations to take him to the local veterans' post to quaff a few root beers and reminisce. After a couple of drinks - he favors Tanqueray Sterling vodka flavored root beer, but the post only had Popov Red Label so that sufficed - we got talking a bit about some of our friends who were lost in Vietnam.

Most of us didn't see what Smitty saw - how they died, the condition their bodies were in when the recovery team finally reached the site where they went down. There are things that are done and said, or not done and said, to save the families and loved ones back home from the specifics of combat deaths. It is enough that they have lost the person they loved so much, they don't need their grief compounded by that much detail about how it all ended.

But Smitty and the other members of the recovery crew weren't spared. He related how they had once spent three days and nights in the jungle to recover an entire crew of our friends who all died together on one especially horrible day in that war. The recovery crew was freezing in the high jungle land, soaked from the near constant monsoon rains, ever fearful that communist troops would reach them before the Marine infantry would. The cloud cover was too thick for a quick extraction once they had made it to the ground.

Smitty was the first one down the hoist when the helicopter wreckage was found that day, and as he told his story it was obvious that the condition of the bodies has forever been etched into his memory. He was the first to see them, friends of ours one and all, and I could tell that those images will go to the grave with him.

Each time he got to describing how he found a body, he would look down and chuckle, as if he was retelling a funny story about an old friend with whom we had shared many good times. In fact they all were old friends, and we had shared many good times with them, but this wasn't a funny story, and he really wasn't laughing.

I think he chuckled when he got to the hard parts to keep from crying. We do that you know. We meaning Marines. Even all these years later, we keep these things to ourselves and it takes an experienced eye to see when a door to the inner soul has been opened, even if only a crack. It goes with the territory.

But it hurt him then and it hurts him now, and all of his friends hurt for him too, because we know of the burden he has been carrying all this time.

Smitty always looked younger than his years back then, and he still has a bit of the old boyishness about him. But while the families and the loved ones were spared the specifics, I think every memory left its mark etched on his face. And behind the self-effacing humor there is a hardness in his eyes that I didn't remember from long ago, before he spent a lifetime working the fishing boats and crewing combat helicopters.

Such is the price young men pay when they go to war - a price that so many Americans know nothing of and seem not to care too much about either.

Speaking of America, Smitty told me two things that my readers in Washington should heed.

He said he met people from all walks of life, ranchers and farmers in the western mountains and plains, factory workers from the once-strong auto industry in Michigan, Amish farmers, the lady at the bakery one town over from here who charmed him, and burly carpenters who shared breakfasts at one of our local eateries and then stood in a circle out in the parking lot to say a morning prayer before starting the day's tasks.

What he didn't see, or hasn't thus far, was illegal immigrants doing the work that "Americans won't do," as the politicians are so fond of saying. It didn't matter whether he was talking to skilled blue collar workers, white collar professionals, or folks just doing the menial tasks that must be done and all too often are taken for granted by the rest of us. They were all legal Americans, some immigrants, most native-born, who were doing the jobs that needed doing, and for which they received a day's wage.

The were from all races, creeds, colors, religions, and both genders, and they universally don't like what is going on in Washington, D.C., with all this immigration business and the incessant drive to let people into America with no regard to the laws that are supposed to protect us.

Beyond the immigration issue, the Americans Smitty met are sick to death of the divisiveness that goes on in Washington and in the media. They want to know the truth about our country because they want to rejoice in the good and they have total faith in our collective ability to fix the bad.

They understand that there is a toll on our military from the War on Terror, but they want to know about our victories as well, and they are damn well aware that by withholding the good news the media and anti-war politicians are trying to manipulate our votes.

They don't like the attack dog mentality from the Political Action Committees that have been non-stop in their criticism of all things Bush and Cheney. Even people who voted for someone else want to see Congress united when we are faced with so many difficult problems.

Smitty said it didn't matter where he went, he heard the same issues being discussed, and the same level of frustration and growing anger from the public. Washington would do well to heed his informal polling of the body politic. I believe Smitty's travels have revealed far more of the real mood of America than any pre-arranged professional telephone poll ever could.

It took a long time for Smitty to hit the road this morning. I had the feeling that he was anxious to get on with his journey, but not that anxious and he was torn about leaving. After a while it reminded me of the series of "final" scenes in the last movie in the Lord of the Rings trilogy.

When his car turned out of the driveway and headed off to find Route 2 and the road to the Rhode Island beaches it was like the moment when the Elfin ship finally pulled away bearing Bilbo and Frodo to another life. I didn't want to spoil the moment though, so I didn't tell him that I wasn't going to start this column until he was gone.

It is a bit too personal and when I write about matters that are this close to the heart I prefer to do it alone.

Smitty is probably in Rhode Island now, and I'm sure he will meet some more great people and take some great pictures. Then he is heading north to New Hampshire to meet the changing leaf colors coming down. From there it may be to the interior of New York State, then down the Appalachians to see the great Smoky Mountains.

Ultimately he'll meander across the southern route heading back home. Members of 161 who live in the general area, be alerted, and make sure you have some of that special root beer on hand. Smitty will appreciate it.

I had the feeling that Smitty took his time getting back to his journey because he may fear that this is the last time we'll see each other. The years have been creeping along and the truth is, many of those tough young Marines we served with now have health problems, some of which are serious.

But hey, I just took one of those Internet life expectancy tests and it says that barring unforeseen circumstances I should live until I'm 99.8 years old. That gives me enough time to save up a few bucks and make my own journey west. There is plenty of America that I would like to revisit and plenty I haven't seen yet.

Who knows, maybe in the not too distant future, if Smitty takes it easy with his Tanqueray flavored root beer, and I take it easy on the Glen Morangie flavored root beer, I'll show up in Half Moon Bay and he can take me fishing.

We could go down the coast to the Los Angeles area and see if we can hook an exotic species, like the big-mouthed celebrity blowhard that once was rare but lately has been making a comeback. I think I'd like that.

Do you think Boone & Crockett would consider adding a new category for records in that species?

The Gathering of Eagles III rally in Washington, D.C., last Saturday featured a mix of male and female speakers, including Melanie Morgan and Buzz Patterson from Move America Forward, Pete Hegseth from Veterans For Freedom, Republican California Congressman and presidential hopeful Duncan Hunter, Deborah Johns whose Marine son has served three tours in Iraq, and Debbie Lee whose son was killed fighting the terrorists.

Filming and reporting the event as she did in March was the syndicated columnist and television hostess Michelle Malkin.

But I noticed during the program that virtually all the male speakers had direct ties to the military. When I expanded that concept to the wider world of media that had actually given us some help in our efforts to publicize the event and draw supporters to it, the same connection appeared.

Among the few male conservative commentators who were helping us out for instance, was G. Gordon Liddy, a former Marine who needs no introduction.

But the bulk of the publicity prior to the event came from female sources - Morgan and Malkin in a huge way, as well as Ann Coulter and Laura Ingraham who made sure to mention us.

But, as in March when we first travelled to DC to confront the pro-communist, pro-terrorist group ANSWER that had threatened to deface the Vietnam Memorial as it had done in January to the Capitol, there was a noticeable and remarkable silence from the big guns of conservative talk radio.

Back then, as in August and September, I was called on by organizers to publicize the pro-troop rallies and explain the reasons why veterans and other troop supporters were being called to DC. Then, and now, although I sent out literally hundreds of news releases, which by the way, I do for a living, usually with excellent results, the major media outlets totally ignored us.

Last time, our contact person was contacted only by the Russian media. This time, by the Japanese media. American media doesn't want to admit that there is a counter-voice alive and active that isn't buying into the 'abandon and abuse' tactics that were used in the 70s to sentence millions of Southeast Asians to death by the communists.

We understand that. We expect that. We plan for that, and we act accordingly.

This time we took different approaches and were able to get some notice in areas where people of a similar mindset are likely to see it. Internet talk radio shows interviewed organizers as did local conservative radio stations in some decent-sized media markets across the country.

Human Events the conservative print and Internet media outlet, published numerous articles by people associated with the September 15 pro-troop rally, Gathering of Eagles III.

Human Events was one of the few media sources that made note of the defacement of the Vietnam Memorial on the night of Sept. 7. Although a caustic and extremely difficult to remove substance was spread on a 60-foot section of the memorial obliterating names and marring the surface, the media virtually ignored the incident.

The National Park Service downplayed it and said only that it was "investigating" until the Sept. 15 event had come and gone, then announced that it was indeed "vandalism." The freaks who couldn't get past the vets and pro-troop supporters in March resorted to a sneak attack when no one was around on the evening of Sept. 7 to show that they are indeed sub-human, mouth breathing, knuckle-dragging Neanderthals.

But apparently it didn't really happen because not only did the mainstream media not mention it, neither did the mainstream conservative media.

When I first heard of the incident, early on Monday morning, Sept. 10, I immediately sent an email to Melanie Morgan who was just starting her morning radio show on KSFO in San Francisco. She immediately broadcast the outrage.

I expected it to be picked up by Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, since their producers were alerted to the incident, but instead we got silence.

Which brings me back to the point of this article. The biggest names and biggest noises in conservative American media are males, but by and large it was the women, not the men who were carrying the torch.

Not one word on any of this did I hear from Fred Barnes, not a word from Hannity or Limbaugh.

Thus, as in March, I have to ask, why?

The people who came out for both pro-troop rallies and vigils are the very people who listen to conservative talk radio and watch Fox News on cable, and read conservative print and online news. The outrage over the defacement of The Wall spread slowly through the veteran community, ignored until the very last minute by the major veterans organizations like the American Legion, and ignored by the big noise conservative hosts who can inform millions of Americans in a matter of minutes, but who chose instead to remain silent.

I am not surprised that patriots like Pete Hegseth and Duncan Hunter not only supported and publicized the Gathering of Eagles, but attended and spoke there. They are veterans and taking an active role in ensuring America's freedom is second nature to them. They are cut from the same cloth as the thousands of others who volunteered to take time out of their lives, travel great distances, and stand up for the troops and our country in DC.

But I also am not surprised that the very people who could have helped so much, with so little effort, and did nothing instead, are not veterans. Hiding behind the effort of others, and making money while the vets are sacrificing, seems to be a time-honored tradition with some people.

During the pro-terrorism march by ANSWER I saw a young woman carrying a sign that said Fight the Rich, Not Their Wars.

I chuckled at first, but then the realization hit me that maybe she isn't that far off. I have never bought into the radical left's claims that those of us who physically stand up for freedom and liberty are tools of some great unseen conspiracy.

I get up every morning and do exactly what I want to do with my day, every day, and I don't have to ask anyone's permission, fill out a form, or sit across from a gray humourless bureaucrat explaining myself before I go about my business. If I want to spend every waking second accumulating wealth, and become part of "The Rich" I can, and many Americans, native born and recent immigrants, do just that all the time.

But I also couldn't help but ponder on the great fortunes amassed by the Limbaugh's and Hannity's of our generation. Hell, Limbaugh brags about his wealth all the time, almost as much as the Clinton's, albeit tongue-in-cheek.

But my Irish immigrant grandmother used to say "Truer words are said in jest" and that adage fits nicely here.

I don't envy Limbaugh or Hannity or any of the other icons of modern conservatism their wealth. But the fact is, they got their wealth because those of us who physically stood up to communism in the 60s, and are manning the barricades standing up against communism and Islamo-fascism today, tune in to their shows, creating a huge listener and viewer base, which in turn increases the amount their stations can charge advertisers, which in turn increases their income.

So why, I must ask again, could we not get even so much as a second of air time from these people? Are they the Nouveau Riche, the New Elitists who have forgotten their roots and now can't be bothered associating with the "rabble" who take to the streets?

Have they suddenly become so insulated and isolated from their base that they have forgotten that we can take away as quickly as we giveth? Think not? Check out O'Reilly. I don't care how you package his ratings, people are turning away from him in droves and Michelle Malkin has far more support when she fills in for him than O'Reilly does. Betcha.

Maybe I'm being too harsh here. Maybe Barnes and Hannity and Limbaugh couldn't give us a few seconds of their time because they are too busy saving democracy. Maybe the time they spend getting manicured, and coiffed, and making sure their makeup is just right so their foreheads don't reflect the overhead lights when they are on camera is time well spent in the pursuit of freedom.

And of course, after the manicures and coiffing there are the trips to the tailor for just the right type of expensive clothes to give them that authoritative look, and then to the real estate agent so they can be sure to live in exactly the right house in exactly the right neighborhood. Oh, and don't forget the calls to their brokers! We couldn't want our most visible conservatives missing any action in the stock market.

Image is everything!

Then there are the meetings with the interior decorators to get the right furniture, and drapes, and doilies. And travel, and golf, and cigars. We can't forget any of that. Maintaining an image as a leading conservative commentator takes a huge investment in time.

But I wonder if maybe they could spend some time at an orthopedic surgeon's, getting a backbone installed.

Do you think they might get the sense of an insult here? Do you maybe they'll read into this that I am in their faces, pissing them off, calling them out?

Good. That is exactly the impact I wanted. Because American conservatives were let down by their icons this past week, and this wasn't the first time.

I'll tell you one more thing before I go. A revolution is brewing in America, and it is brewing on the conservative side, fueled by anger over continually being sold out by the people who say they represent us, but repeatedly use their positions to feather their own nests, and then abandon, disregard or take for granted their supporters.

If this revolution erupts it will sweep away everything before it, including the old rich and the new rich. It won't embrace communism or Islamo-fascism, but it sure as hell won't sit still and let this country be sold off piecemeal by people who won't secure our borders, unleash the full ability of our military on our enemies, or take a few minutes of their oh-so-precious and oh-so-expensive time to boost the efforts of the real fighters in the battle for freedom.

Maybe that young lady's sign wasn't that far off at all. Maybe we just have different definitions of just who constitutes "The Rich."

Republican Presidential candidate Duncan Hunter, flanked by outspoken troop supporters like Melanie Morgan, Michelle Malkin, and the families of dozens of Americans who were killed fighting terrorism, stood tall on the National Mall Saturday, speaking on behalf of our troops and the magnificent job they are doing in the War on Terror and the Battle for Iraq.

The third installment of a Gathering of Eagles again saw thousands of patriotic Americans stand their ground in support of our country, backing the offensive currently underway in Iraq, backing Gen. David Petraeus, and making a solid point that the only real way out of Iraq is through the victory that is within our grasp.

Opposing them were tens of thousands of mostly very young, very loud and incredibly unclean terrorism supporters chanting the usual Democratic talking points and espousing the virtues of Hillary Clinton. They were there courtesy of ANSWER a coalition of pro-communist, pro-socialist, pro-terrorist organizations that are working together to bring down capitalism and our democratic form of government.

The level of courage shown by Melanie Morgan, Michelle Malkin, Deborah Johns, whose Marine son has spent three tours in Iraq, Debbie Lee whose son was killed there, and dozens of other family members is a welcome counterpoint to the silence by many in the conservative community, including the rest of the GOP presidential field.

As one veteran said when we were facing off against the ANSWER forces across the barricades on Pennsylvania Avenue, "Can you imagine what the response would have been if McCain, Giuliani, or Fred Thompson showed up here."

True, they are the marquee stars of the GOP primary race. But Duncan Hunter's family has a tradition of serving our country, and the only break is that Hunter served in the Army, while both his dad and son served in the Marines.

Hunter knows his facts about terrorists and how to defeat them. He made that very clear when he spoke to the Eagles.

Those who went to Washington to stand up for our troops and our president were very appreciative of Congressman Hunter's visit. They were just as aware of the absence of Giuliani, McCain, Thompson, Tancredo, Huckabee and the rest of the field.

Why is it, once again, that the people who count on the votes of the veteran community, take us for granted? We didn't expect Congressman Hunter to man the barricades with us - we understand the dangers. His presence at the Gathering of Eagles rally site more than a mile from the ANSWER rally site was welcome and sufficient.

It will be very hard in the coming months to take seriously the claims of any presidential candidate who says he supports the troops and the veterans, but couldn't give even a passing nod to those of us who are taking so much time out of our lives to show America that the ANSWER position on the war is not the ONLY position.

McCain was in South Carolina, on his No Surrender tour, of all things, playing to crowds of a couple hundred, when just a few hours north he could have been speaking to a crowd of thousands. Someone made a significant miscalculation there.

Unfortunately for America, the pro-terrorism forces understand the significance of their appearance in D.C., and pulled out all the stops to get a massive crowd there, although an analysis of the participants reveals a significant weakness in their support.

First, there were NO Democratic presidential candidates marching with the Great Unwashed, although signs and even a near life-sized puppet of Hillary Clinton showed she was the odds on favorite of the pro-communist crowd.

After I had yelled myself hoarse at the moonbats and anarchists, and mugged for the truckload of degenerates who were taking pictures of the patriots on the march route - as though we care - I spent time just observing the marchers. I noted that the crowd was made up overwhelmingly of very young people, some of whom appeared to be of high school age, many of early college age.

Noticeable for their absence were the late twenty-somethings and middle-aged Mom and Dad voter blocs.

Elections aren't decided by too-young-to-vote, impressionable kids who are just mouthing what they have been told by manipulative adults.

What I saw in D.C. on Sept. 15 was that ANSWER brought a collection of children and useful idiots to town, in a noisy, smelly, but ultimately failed effort to make a point. Even the much ballyhooed "die-in" that was supposed to take place on the Capitol steps was a bust.

The steps to our Capitol were off limits this time, after ANSWER affiliates defaced them in a rally last January. So a bunch of kids prostrated themselves on the lawn, holding small and unidentifiable photos, ostensibly of fallen warriors.

When that stunt was ignored, some of the anarchists in the crowd jumped the barriers to confront the Capitol police, who were in no mood for anarchy and promptly arrested about 200 of the little dears.

Wow! Are you as impressed as I am? Good, I didn't want to keep this all to myself.

No, the kids were cute and well rehearsed, but man when that big block of some 10,000 or so went between 10th and 11th streets and were all in one spot at one time, the stench was overwhelming. I was talking to a couple who appeared to be in their 50s or so, who weren't counter-demonstrating, just watching, and the gentleman referred to them as "The Unwashed Majority."

I liked that line. Even the cops remarked on the stench of unwashed human bodies. People were even checking their shoes to see if they had stepped in something foul on the sidewalks.

I understand that these are brainwashed tools, but what happened to personal hygiene?

A couple of other points need review, first, the numbers of participants on both sides.

During the GOE rally I walked off the area in front of the stage. I was there with a group of vets from Connecticut, just as I was in March, but I didn't speak on the formal program this time.

My friends John, an Army Vietnam vet and former Military Policeman, and Danny, a Navy Vietnam vet and 3rd degree black belt in karate, and I, were having a blast ejecting moonbats who kept coming to our area to start trouble. (They had to walk more than a mile from their rally point to ours to try to start fights, so you know it wasn't just incidental. And it went on for over two hours.)

Anyway, the area in front of the stage was was jam packed with people. I calculated that area to be 105 feet (approx.) by 240 feet (approx.) = 25,200 square feet. (This is not the total square footage of that grassy area, just the part where the people were standing.)

I took an arbitrary figure of 6 square feet per person, and divided that into the total square footage. That gave us 4200 people right in front of the stage.

As the program progressed a dividing path between grassy sections on the mall filled up (roughly 10ft by 240) as did about half of the next grassy section that was of the same size as the section where the stage was located, but of course without the stage.

The crowd was of approximately the same size as that in the original section I measured, perhaps a bit less, so overall, I estimated about 7500 maybe 8000 people at the stage during the formal program.

BUT - not everyone went to the program. Pennsylvania Avenue was already barricaded and many people went straight to the barricades, especially in front of and across from the Lone Sailor statute. (The statue was defaced, allegedly by ANSWER supporters in January and people made sure to protect it this time.)

When the formal program was over people migrated to the barricades, and more continued to come who hadn't gotten there for the rally. At the height of the demonstration I estimate, and I believe this is a very reasonable ball park figure, that there were up to 10,000 pro-troop supporters lining the barricades.

We were lined up solidly along a three block section, both sides, in some cases four and five deep.

BUT, the ANSWER crowd outnumbered us four or five to one. There were lots of them. Lots, but no where near the 100,000 they claimed. Perhaps 30,000 to 40,000 in all.

The news reporting on the numbers on both sides has been dismal. Fox News Sunday reported "several thousand" ANSWER protesters, and "a small but vocal" group of counter-demonstrators who FOX said rallied several blocks away. They showed a very narrow picture of about eight pro-troop folks who actually were among the thousands on Pennsylvania Avenue waiting for ANSWER.

That was just plain inaccurate, on both sides of the issue.

More important than their numbers was who was missing from the ANSWER crowd. Notable due to their near-absence, compared to the group ANSWER put together in March, were the droves of anarchists, at least those in their black "uniforms" with the Palestinian terrorist headdress. Several were there, but not hundreds.

Only about a dozen had the checkered towellette over their faces, and another few had them wrapped around their necks, but not tight enough for me. And I guess ANSWER's people took too much heat over the Che Guevara, Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez and anti-capitalism signs from last time because they were gone too - although there still was plenty of profanity in writing.

Code Pink had eight 'ladies' and I use that term loosely, and the Iraq Vets Against the War had about 12 although there was no way to confirm if they really were vets, or just guys wearing cammies. Many in the vet community believe the IVAW has only a couple traitors as front people and the rest are posers similar to John Kerry's Vietnam vets against the war.

One of the many very bright spots in the day was the presence of a contingent of College Republicans from George Washington University. I came across them at the intersection of 11th Street and Pennsylvania where they would be the first to encounter the ANSWER marchers. I met a young man named Brand Kroeger who was there with several of his friends, all wearing sharp blue shirts with a logo identifying them.

Aside from the fact they were on the scene, which is significant seeing as how so many older Republicans were nowhere to be found, they also were clean cut, enthusiastic and knowledgeable. Brand thought it was great that we came from Connecticut to oppose ANSWER while his group had only had to travel a few blocks.

But in many ways, considering the attitudes on many college campuses, it may have been much more difficult for our young Republicans to stand up and be counted, than it was for some of us veterans.

Nonetheless it was a really pleasant surprise to see them there, ready and capable of opposing the people who are bent on destroying America. I liked that a lot and I hope it is the beginning of things to come. Maybe next time some older Republicans will join the Young Republicans.

One last point. In addition to the snubbing by most GOP presidential candidates, a big issue at the GOE rally was the deafening silence from the top tier of conservative talk show hosts.

There were many who mentioned us this time including Morgan, Malkin and G. Gordon Liddy. But they were out there in March too. I may have missed a couple others and if so it wasn't intentional. But the big names again were silent.

Perhaps they didn't jump on the bandwagon in March because a gathering of this nature hadn't happened in recent memory and they may not have wanted to commit themselves until we proved ourselves, which is a reversal in roles.

But we were peaceful last time and peaceful this time. Most vets believe it was ANSWER anarchists who defaced the Vietnam Memorial last week, and it sure as hell was the ANSWER kids who were arrested at the Capitol on Saturday.

But some in the conservative community who are living high on the support of people like those who were in DC Saturday. I hope they have invested well. Because they may not think they need us anymore, but their ratings can drop as precipitously as Air America's did, and their broadcast futures can end as sharply as Al Franken's.

This issue deserves more discussion so I'll get to it later this week. For now, it is sufficient to repeat that the absence of the big names in American Conservative politics was noticed in a negative way, every bit as much as the positive response Duncan Hunter received from standing up and standing tall for America.

It has been a brutally hectic two weeks, hence the absence of timely updates to this blog. In this time I have been handling press for the Eagles Landing group, headed by Col. Harry Riley, US Army retired, who was one of the primary organizers of the original Gathering of Eagles.

If you recall back to last March, tens of thousands of veterans flocked to DC on March 17, the date of a pro-terrorism march and protest by the likes of Jane Fonda, Ed Asner, Cindy Sheehan and others who want the United States taken over by communists or Islamo-fascist terrorists. Only Sheehan and a relative handful of similar minded nut cases showed up.

Our purpose then was not to prevent these useful idiots from making fools of themselves once again by acting as puppets for worldwide communist and terrorist leaders, but to prevent them from desecrating the Vietnam Memorial and other monuments as they had threatened.

We were successful then, but unfortunately, last Friday, a person who we can reasonably regard as a member or sympathizer of the ANSWER organization spread some form of substance on the memorial that as of late Wednesday was still not cleaned off. National Park officials said they hadn't identified the substance, but were working diligently to clean it up. They still are reviewing video tapes to see if they can spot the perpetrator.

By this time tomorrow I'll again be in DC with thousands of veterans. Although we can't prevent what already occurred in the dark of night, the act of a coward, we can pay back those who stooped to desecrating the memories of our war dead. So payback will be the order of the day. This time the ANSWER forces are promising nearly a hundred thousand protesters to make up for their poor showing in March.

In my absence this past week I have sent out hundreds of press releases, most of which were ignored by the mainstream media, and have written four major articles, one of which made it to the pages of Human Events.

I will share it with you. Below is my unedited article for Human Events.

Damaged Vietnam Memorial Has Park Service Walking on Eggshells

By Ronald Winter

Washington, D.C. - It would be hard to find a better example of the tenuous relationship between the U.S. Park Service and groups using National Parks to protest or support our government than that resulting from the recent defacement of the Vietnam War Memorial.

Last Friday evening an oily substance that has proved extremely difficult to remove was splattered along an approximately 60 foot section of the wall, defacing panels bearing the names of the deceased as well as ornamental stones along the base. Mainstream media coverage has been sparse.

Veterans immediately attributed the defacement to anti-war groups that have threatened the memorial in past months, have defaced monuments and memorials nationwide, and are gathering in Washington this weekend to protest the War on Terror.

The outrage in the veteran community is palpable to the point that some who sympathize with the anti-war group ANSWER that is coordinating this weekend's protests, have issued bogus news releases stating that there was no damage to The Wall. This led many veterans to speculate that ANSWER is hoping to convince veterans to avoid Washington this weekend.

Nonetheless, the Park Service has stopped short of labeling the incident as vandalism.

"The United States Park Police is investigating the matter. Until this investigation is completed, it is premature to speculate whether any intentional act was committed," is the official statement.

Bill Line, NPS Communications & Tourism Officer for the National Capital Region adds that although crews have been working since Saturday to remove the substance, they don't even know what it is, much less who splattered it on the memorial.

But one thing is certain. Despite the claims that were later retracted when discrepancies were noted, the incident most certainly does NOT appear to have been caused by an accidental spill of cleaning fluid by a park ranger. Park rangers are not involved in cleaning or maintenance of the memorial, Line confirmed.

The Park Service is hopeful, but not certain, that when the material is finally removed it will not have left any permanent damage.

Line says The Wall is constantly monitored by video cameras, and the tapes are being reviewed for evidence. He adds that the Park Service legally can't claim vandalism or terrorism without all the facts at hand, thus it is proceeding cautiously.

But there is another issue at work behind the scenes that seems to be keeping the issue under wraps - the perceived reaction of the veteran community.

When we went to DC in March to confront ANSWER and its communist, Islamo-fascist organizations head on, neither the mainstream media, nor the top tier conservative talk shows made note of our vigil.

Even after a huge showing of veterans and supporters that far outnumbered the ANSWER forces, the conservative talk circuit was nearly mum. The primary exceptions were Melanie Morgan, chairman of Move America Forward and co-host of the morning drive time show on KSFO in San Francisco, and national columnist Michelle Malkin who participated in and filmed the March Gathering of Eagles vigil.

Many vets speculated that the media blackout was caused by a lack of trust and confidence in us by the very people who are supposed to be our staunchest supporters. Fearing an outbreak of violence for which we, and thus they, would be blamed, they were silent.

But no violence occurred in March, and we showed we were more than equal to the ANSWER forces, which were arrested in droves as a result of physical confrontations with police.

Now we are wondering why the conservative talk circuit is mum once again, with only a few speaking of the next Gathering of Eagles on Sept. 15, or of the incident involving The Wall.

Malkin and Morgan again are at the forefront and providing steady coverage of Gathering of Eagles III. Morgan's Move America Forward again is hosting a nationwide caravan that will arrive in DC to join the Gathering of Eagles Saturday, and which is experiencing an outpouring of support from mainstream Americans as it crosses the country.

"The crowds and especially the passion of those along the route have been exceptional," Morgan said. "People have opened their hearts to the message that our troops are winning."

Being ignored by the mainstream media is not new. Being ignored by the conservative media is baffling.

Vets are justifiably outraged over the defacement of the Vietnam Memorial and concerned that other memorials will be in for similar treatment by ANSWER this weekend. But to consider that we will automatically resort to the violence we eschewed in March is to be grossly uninformed about our capabilities and our beliefs.

The surest way to prevent further defacement to our memorials is to expose the deeds of those who defaced the Vietnam Memorial. Ignoring such incidents will only insure that further acts of desecration will follow.

Line declined to say whether the National Park Service is taking any extra precautions to protect the war memorials this weekend, noting the ANSWER protests are scheduled to take place between the White House and the Capitol several blocks away.

That may be a consideration. On the other hand, we should also consider that there were no protests planned in D.C., on the night of Sept. 7 when someone slipped up to the Vietnam Memorial unnoticed and spread a caustic fluid along 60 feet of its panels, disparaging the service and memories of those who died in that war.

And even if the Park Service is ultimately successful in cleaning the surface of the memorial, it is unlikely that the substance which has seeped into the unpolished surfaces of the wall will ever be totally removed, much as yet another scar on the hearts of more than two million Vietnam veterans will ever fully heal.

The first stop on Move America Forward's nationwide caravan to Washington, D.C., outside Sen. Majority Leader Harry 'Choose-To-Lose' Reid's Nevada office was a huge success Monday, while a counter-protest supported by the national Democratic Party fizzled miserably.

Move America Forward personnel reported their Labor Day event drew hundreds of pro-troop supporters, while the counter-protest that had been widely publicized and supported by organizations including the national Democratic party, drew tens of anti-troop, terrorism supporters.

The MAF caravan is heading across country with stops in more than two dozen cities before reaching Washington, D.C, on Sept. 15. There MAF will join veterans and pro-troop forces who will stand vigil to protect our monuments, show support for victory in the War on Terror, and support Gen. David Petraeus who will be reporting to Congress on the military progress in Iraq.

Among the groups working on the D.C., event are Eagles Landing, Move America Forward, Military Order of the Purple Heart, Vets For Freedom, Gathering of Eagles, Free Republic and many others.

The Labor Day event in Carson City, Nevada, is remarkable on at least two fronts. First, that MAF was able to draw a decent sized crowd on the last holiday of summer when so many people are headed home or getting in one last day at the beach is a testament to the organizational skills of MAF personnel, and the validity of the pro-troop cause.

Speakers at the event included Buzz Patterson, author of War Crimes, Melanie Morgan, co-author with Catherine Moy of American Mourning, Gold Star Mom Debbie Lee, Blue Star Mom Deborah Johns, and Republican presidential candidate Duncan Hunter. By all accounts all gave truly inspiring speeches, and were very, very well received by the crowd.

The scene was repeated in Sacramento, after a trip through horrendous Labor Day traffic, and again in San Francisco.

The second remarkable facet of the event was the dearth of counter-protesters. The Sept. 15 gathering in Washington has been targeted by ANSWER a coalition of pro-communist, socialist, Islamo-fascist groups that rally around an anti-war theme but in reality are anti-democracy and anti-capitalism.

The ANSWER group has called for protests against the administration, surrender in the War on Terror, impeachment of the president and vice president, and some of its participating organizations are calling for renewed efforts to deface memorials in D.C., especially the Vietnam War Memorial - The Wall. Attempts were made to deface the memorials on March 17 but the first Gathering of Eagles pro-troop and pro-veteran vigil provided tens of thousands of veterans and supporters that effectively blocked ANSWER, headed at that time by Cindy Sheehan.

Considering the vehemence of the ANSWER forces, their hatred for the military and their intent to convince politicians to force a withdrawal from Iraq regardless of the military successes, it is surprising to say the least that they couldn't get more of a turnout in Nevada. To put this into perspective, the MAF rally specifically brought a message to Reid, who has declared the war lost, and the ongoing offensive in Iraq dubbed The Surge, a failure even before it got started.

Just about everyone else in the world who has had any opportunity whatsoever to objectively review the situation in Iraq disagrees with Reid, and his House of Representatives counterpart, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a California Democrat.

Reid obviously was not happy with a pro-troop rally outside his home office, and wanted to show up the MAF forces with a vengeance. He failed, MAF succeeded.

I remarked back in the winter, prior to the Gathering of Eagles in March, that the numbers we attracted were less important than the message we were bringing to D.C. Our message then was that the Silent Majority would be silent no longer and would speak up for the troops, speak out against the pro-terrorism forces, and stand up to protect our monuments.

As it turned out, pro-troop forces in March vastly outnumbered the ANSWER demonstrators, even though many of the ANSWER protesters are paid in one form or another to protest, and the pro-troop forces were volunteers.

It is wonderful to see large numbers of pro-troop supporters, and we should continue to call for as many as possible to turn out either locally or nationally. But the message is still the key, which brings me to the second part of this essay.

Far too many Americans who should be standing up and speaking out are still far too silent. This includes many in both major political parties who depend on the veterans and pro-troop supporters to elect them. It is way past time for the fence-sitters to get down off the fence and take a stand.

Many people in this country have been living off the sacrifices of the troops, their supporters and their families for way too long, and taking for granted the many freedoms we are guaranteed by our Constitution. They seem to have forgotten that these freedoms are guaranteed only so long as we stand up for them and fight when necessary to keep them.

It is a sad truth that you can live in America, think only for yourself, pursue your lifestyle, education, and career objectives without ever contributing one scintilla of your time, your abilities or effort to the nation. It isn't required and since fewer than 10 percent of all living Americans have ever served in the military, it isn't even socially necessary to actually enlist and go away to defend our country.

But there should be a sense of moral obligation to at least put something into defending and preserving our form of government and our way of life. There should at least be a sense of conscience that this isn't a free ride, and if you aren't going to participate in keeping America strong, then you can at least show up and stand on a sidewalk waving an American flag for a few hours on one day to show the people who are doing the heavy lifting that you support them.

Far too many people are sitting on the fence, waiting to see which way the war will go before they declare they are supporting or opposing it. All the while they are going about their lives blithely unaware of just how much effort is going into giving them that sense of security.

September 15 would be a great time for Americans from all walks of life to take a few hours, go to D.C., stand on the sidewalk with the Eagles, wave a flag and let Congress know that we won't tolerate anything less than victory in the War on Terror.

I made the point many months ago, before the Surge started, before it was even announced, that if we gave the troops the support they needed to do the job they train for, they wouldn't let us down. Time has shown that to be absolutely true.

There may be political objectives still ahead in Iraq, but militarily, the job is getting done. President Bush went to Iraq for Labor Day and was so impressed with the progress made on the ground that he was able to at least broach the subject of troop withdrawals.

If you can't make it to D.C., at least check out the MAF website and see if the caravan will be coming to a community within driving distance. If so, go there and stand tall. If not, send a check, help pay for a tank of gas or a meal for one of the people who are taking so much time out of their lives to support our troops.

It is time to get off the fence and get on the bandwagon. When all is said and done and victory is secure, it will be far too late to suddenly start waving the flag. Fence sitters can't expect to reap the rewards of hard-fought victories if they don't take part in the effort.

Besides, the only consistent reward for consistently sitting on the fence is splinters in the ass.

The Democratic Party on the national and state levels, especially California and Nevada, is marshaling forces to oppose the cross-country caravan sponsored by Move America Forward that will arrive in Washington, D.C., on Sept. 15 to join a massive show of support for our military and Gen. David Petraeus.

First stop on the journey that starts Monday is Carson City, Nevada, outside the offices of Senate Majority Leader and chief proponent of the Choose to Lose the War on Terror faction, Harry Reid. Reid has advocated cut and run ever since the terrorists first raised an eyebrow, would love to be a handmaiden for Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and will treated to the spectacle of Move America Forward grilling chicken right across the street from his office if he has the intestinal fortitude to look out the window.

But Dems from California, Nevada and the national party want a counter- demonstration that will shut the MAF rally down!

We have to ask ourselves WHY?

Why is it that a party that continues to claim it supports the troops but not the war, and thus by all measures should be supporting an organization that by its very definition exists to support the troops, instead is rallying its forces to create a blocking force?

Hypocrisy should suffice as a one-word answer. Liars might work as well.

The truth from this vantage point is that while there really are many, many Democrats who support the troops, just as there are many, many Republicans who aren't too keen on the War in Iraq, the leadership of the Democratic Party is defined more by extremism, anti-capitalism, anti-patriotism, anti-Americanism, and anti-democracy philosophies, not pro-troop philosophies.

While the motivation behind the Dems opposition to Move America Forward's caravan is subject to debate, the issue that should be of paramount importance now is, "What to do about it?'

For its part, Move America Forward is mounting a massive public relations campaign to let pro-troop Americans in on what is happening with the anti-troop, pro-terrorist forces. MAF is getting some help on the Internet from organizations such as Eagles Landing which also is mustering forces for the Sept. 15 gathering. The blogosphere is weighing in, as are some conservative columnists and commentators.

Unfortunately, in many cases, these folks are preaching to the choir and their audiences already visit the Move America Forward website www.MoveAmericaForward.org and are aware of the Dems' efforts to thwart the pro-troop caravan.

In their Internet exhortations to rid themselves of these devilish pro-troop Americans, the Dems are labelling them as out-of-state, pro-war interlopers, who should be tarred and feathered and ridden out of Nevada and every other state they visit on a rail! So much for the constitutional guarantees of freedom to assemble and freedom of speech.

Look closely children, and you will see the future of America under the total eclipse of a Democratic presidency with Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress. In other words, a police state.

But anyone who has been watching these hypocrites with anything more than an occasional desultory glance for the past four or five decades is not surprised that the Democratic Party is really a front organization for world wide communism.

What I really want to know is - where the hell are the Republicans?

What a terrific opportunity to turn around the bashing the GOP has been taking for the past three years! Catching national and state Democrats with their pants down - er, let me rephrase that - with their guard down, showing themselves to be anti-military, anti-troop, anti-American pseudo patriots, on the very first day of a nationwide caravan that is 100 percent devoted to the troops?

So what if these cheese brains are claiming Move American Forward is a Republican front group? If you have ever, ever heard MAF's chairwoman, Melanie Morgan, and especially her co-host Lee Rodgers on their morning radio show at KSFO in San Francisco bashing the hell out of the Republican Party leadership you will know that is a flat out lie.

But don't run from it. Use it! California Congressman Duncan Hunter has figured it out and will attend. Are there more who also can see the opportunities?

What a disgrace, eh? An organization that the Dems consider closely aligned with the GOP is supporting the troops. Oh, the humanity, the shame, the devastation!

Where are the state GOP chairmen for Nevada and California? Where is the GOP chairman for Carson City?

Why have they not seized this opportunity and jumped on the bandwagon, with advance publicity, boots on the ground, and maybe even a little casharooni?

What is the matter with the Republican Party? Has it gone to seed? Is it populated by creaky, cranky relics of a bygone era who still think it is beneath them to actually get off their dead asses and move out into the streets with the rest of us?

It appears so.

I have a suggestion. Do you want to rid yourself of the scandals of the very recent and relatively recent past? Do you consider the latest scandal involving Idaho Sen. Larry Craig another smear on the party? How about Congressman Mark Foley (R-FL) who was caught trying to get more than chummy with teenage page boys just last year, just before the national elections in which he helped the GOP LOSE CONTROL OF BOTH HOUSES OF CONGRESS!!!

Were you even the slightest bit angry? Were you even the slightest bit embarrassed that this is the best public face you can put on the Republican Party? Are you the kind of whining wimp that curls up in the fetal position and sucks your damn thumb when someone says a cross word to you instead of getting up and smacking them dead upside the head?

You are? Then you deserve every last bit of disdain the American voter can heap upon you!

But if you aren't then it is time to stop sulking, stop whining, stop finger pointing and stop sitting alone in the dark thinking sullen thoughts and plotting where to put your money when the housing market crashes.

Get up right now.

Log onto the Move America Forward website www.MoveAmericaForward.org for those of you who are motivationally challenged. Get directions to the rally in Carson City and figure a way to get yourself there, on time, on the side of the street where the real Americans, the ones who serve honorably and support those who serve honorably will be cooking Harry Reid's chicken.

Are you running for President of the Untied States of America as a Republican? Then you or your designated representative should plan on being at that rally to help MAF offset the planned Democratic onslaught.

I sure hope Gov. Jim Gibbons can take a few minutes out of his day to say hello and support his fellow veterans. I can't think of anything else that is more important to a man who makes a point of being a strong supporter of the military, a decorated combat veteran, and a strong advocate of a secure homeland.

And since the caravan across country will be going on until it reaches Washington, D.C. on Sept. 15, I strongly recommend each GOP presidential candidate find a spot where you can stop by and say a few words of encouragement to mainstream America. They won't be hard to find; these folks were waving American flags before the Democratic party figured out that they might be a good prop for photo ops.

Remember this. There are some 25 million veterans in America, and while we represent all different political factions, the vast majority of us support the troops and the military in general. We also want a win in Iraq, big time. We really go for victories.

When you take our raw numbers, and add one spouse or significant other whom we most likely have a major impact on, especially in the voting booth, and throw in one other person we influence, you suddenly find the biggest voting bloc on the national scene.

We really don't like candy asses and whiners. And we don't like people who claim to serve the people but hide behind their venetian blinds peeking out at the world when they should be visible and vocal.

If you are a party official get moving right now and get your troops out there too. If you are a candidate, find a way to support this movement.

Heed what I say and you have a chance to win back what was lost in 2006. But remember, if you decide we aren't worth your time and ignore us - it will cost you far more in the long run if we decide you aren't worth our time and ignore you.

Heed this warning, and you have a shot. Ignore it, sneer at it, or deride it at your own political peril.