07 February 2005

AirSick America

The things I do for you people

So anyway I’m on the road out in the boonies and I’m hitting the “Seek” button on the radio and I stumble across Air America.


The hostess was screeching on and on about some leaked Pentagon memo that Donald Rumsfeld wants the “bunker buster nuke” program protected in the new budget and demanded that the program be funded to the tune of $10,000,000. She screeched and screeched and screeched for like fifteen minutes without taking a breath. Poorly paraphrased, she said something to the tune of “How can this country, who tells everyone other country in the world who can and who cannot have nucular weapons, go on and develop this bomb?” or some such pathetic drivel.

“.....this country.....” hmmm. Please see previous. Curious.

My thoughts ran somewhere along the following lines:

· $10 million? Is that all? What a bargain. Can we get two?
· If we pony up $30 million, can we have the bunker buster nuke three times faster?
· Isn’t $10 million the same amount that Air America has bilked it’s affiliates out of?
· Can we get 5 of them for $40 million? Volume discount and all.

To the Air America screech-ette, the answer to your question is:

Because.We.Can. And.We.Should.

Ann Coulter opined recently that “.....international law is whatever the United States and Great Britain say it is.....” Danm right.

We can tell the rest of the world who can and who cannot because saying so is In.Our.National.Interest., and quite frankly, our National Interests (and to a slightly lesser degree, the interest of our staunch and unwavering allies. All three of them.) are the only interests with which we should be concerned.

Maybe I lack the Davos-centric sensibilities of the world crowd, but the concept of “you’re either with us or against us” works for me, kinda like how I intuitively understand what is meant by the line “.....the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Straight talk will always triumph over nuance.

My question to the screech-ette is this: Exactly what part of “provide for the common defense” do you have issue with? Hear me now and believe me later: we put forth a strong defense (bunker buster nukes included) meaning we decide who can and who cannot have nucular weapons, or you’ll be doing you Air America program whilst wearing a bhurka. Clear enough?


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home