Reader Comments

Editor: William F. Buckley Jr. --- My Lord, what a National Treasure !!! Jon Huber

Editor: Conservatives slothful? How can anyone argue with Bill Buckley? JPT

Editor: Re: Bill Buckley calls conservatives slothful, t hanks for sending it. This is GOOD STUFF! My very best for a blessed Christmas and a wonderful New Year. Charlie Gerow, Quantum Communications, Harrisburg, PA

Editor: William F. Buckley, Jr. is (lamentably) correct in his observations and comments -- as usual. An ongoing and recurring problem with the two Bush Administrations has not changed. Under the morass of words is a simple message. IRAQ strategy: declare victory and leave. Watch what they do, don't read lips: Jan 2004: 250,000 U.S. troops; 120,000 other coalition member country troops in Iraq; Dec 2005: 160,000 U.S. troops, 40,000 other coalition member country troops (nearly all from the U.K. and Australia) in Iraq. The 'strategic plan' unveiled last week just covers up the fact that there is not now, nor was there ever, a well thought out strategy for victory, the Administration is resorting to political attack ads. They'll work for now in the U.S., but they fool no one around the world. The defeat in Iraq will be called Bush's failure after 2008. Brian Lynch

Editor: Great commentary by Paul Weyrich! The GOP is split in to the moderate (money) and conservative (grassroots) wings. If the GOP loses in 2006, the moderates will blame the conservatives (with the liberal media's help, of course). They never learned the lessons of the Reagan and Gingrich revolutions. This is why a viable conservative party is needed- to keep moderates like the Bush's from muddying the waters either by losing their elections or getting on the straight and narrow. The Constitution Party has a chance if it develops a local agenda and can adjust its national priorities to some of the realities of today's life. Gary Haegerich , Westminster , MD

Editor: Right on Mr Weyrich about wimpy candidates. Now if only the National Congressional Campaign Committee could latch on to your thoughts and "get a life", we conservatives (aka Republicans) might still wake up.  Thanks for an excellent article.  Lee Sulander

Editor: Paul Weyrich hit it on the head!  Conservatives aren't the same as Republicans.  We should be getting a wake-up call if anyone is paying attention. TERM LIMITS would help. Larry Sloan

Editor: Excellent points for our elected Congressional RINO's (Republicans In Name Only) to ponder and digest (which they won't).  Conservatives have a real battle ahead to increase members of the U. S. Senate and House with RINO's fighting us, consciously or unconsciously, at every turn of the political spectrum. My suggestion is that Mr. Weyrich's editorial be furnished to each and every Republican in Congress; even the conservatives in Congress, though few, need an occasional dose of conservative values served to them.  Remind them, instead of President Truman's "The Buck Stops Here" slogan this editorial should be referred to as Congresses "This Is Where The Buck Starts". Keep up the excellent work.  Charles R. Gaddy

Editor: Not to worry. The Republicans will win again, for all of their left-leaning that you describe in your publication. OK, this time it will be by default! Dan Baker

Editor: Paul Weyrich is right on about Republicans losing by moving left. Vermont is a classic example, 40 years in the making. Ever since Philip Hoff (gentry-leftist) won the governor seat here in 1962, the VTGOP has been trying to be seen as more like them. The result, it is now a cartoon of its former self, frugal Yankee farmers dominated by aging flower-children. A nominally Republican governor and a few senators have adopted the protective coloration of "their friends on the left" (their quote, not mine.) Pity. Martin Harris , Brandon , VT

Editor: Just read the Viguerie piece on Bush and the 2005 elections. All I can say is "RIGHT ON". I hope so called conservative Republicans in my home state of NY have seen the article. Thanks, Don in NY

Editor: Just finished your article entitled "Democratic'06 Sweep" and I agree with your stand. I, for one, am appalled at the amount of money allocated for the bridge(s) in Alaska; if my memory serves me correctly, an amendment was submitted to reduce the amount allocated for these two projects but was defeated 84-12. Where in the world is all this money (I read $438,000,000) coming from?? Sen. Stevens threatened to resign if the money was not given for these projects. How sweet that would be. Why in the world do we need people of his ilk up in the Senate anyway??? Since the Alaskans won't vote him out, I urge the Congress to trash the project and remind him that we are waiting for him to submit his resignation which, in turn, would rid us of another big spender. Incidentally, please notice that I purposely used the zeros rather than the word millions. I do that for the effect. Using figures rather than words makes one realize how ENORMOUS a figure, such as $7,000,000,000,000, is. Lt. Col. Jay C. Pearson, (USAF Ret)

Editor: I have just read Mr. Tabor's article on the Miers nomination and can only conclude, unfortunately, that 2006 will be a landmark year for the Democrats. Jack C.

Editor: This young man, Nathan Tabor, articulates the conservative viewpoint eloquently. You should give him the podium more often. Arnold Goehring

Editor: My personal observations regarding Hillary's chances of winning the Presidential nomination. There seems to be 2 giant undercurrents in America that for the most part are being ignored. Americans are tired of seeing the good jobs (plants) going overseas to lower paying countries. Immigration Laws are not being enforced. Most Americans including many legal Immigrants are very concerned. If Hillary runs on these two issues she will win. Pass tariffs and put the military on the southern Border. Michael G Shrader

Editor: As a conservative in the military I have got to agree with Mr.Barr’s piece on military bureaucracy.  The Military is the essence of Bureaucracy, it is not structured for efficiency so much as it is structured for mass.  The greatness of our military does not lie in its finesse but it's sheer mass!  Not every problem that we (Americans) face requires a hammer to solve.  Our tendency to utilize the military and even New and Stronger Alphabet agencies should give us all a reason to pause and reflect.  What are we?  A Republic? An Empire?  Once we have reaffirmed (hopefully) or commitment to the Republic we must re-evaluate the manner in which we conduct ourselves.  This self evaluation must begin soon. Most Respectfully E.W. Grover  

Editor: I disagree with many of Mr. Barr’s conclusions found throughout his opinion piece. He has engaged in picking and choosing those entities that will complement his conclusion. While I am glad he is a pro-gun, I have to disagree with his current anti-Patriot Act stance. He is a paid consultant of the ACLU, which is now passionately opposed to the Patriot Act. Regards, Cyborg

Editor: I agree with Jill Farrell’s concern about a “power grab” by the federal government using the “pandemic” as a pretext. What can we do to stop the trend?  How do we stop it!!???? Shirley McMunn

Richard Walker: Great publication. I wanted to read the article about Clooney missing some Communists but I can't find it. My email like didn't bring it up. [You were not the only one confused by our layout. Sorry, it can be found at http://acuf.org/issues/issue49/051204med.asp.

Editor: I found “ Questions For Muslims” by Dennis Prager refreshing and intriguing.  I really do not know any Muslims.  I did send it on to all on my email list.  I also sent it to a professor friend of mine in Germany. Linda Berglund

Editor: The 5 questions asked by Dennis Prager's have been answered.  You might want to reference this.  See link: http://www.thewhitepath.com/archives/2005/11/five_answers_to_prager_about_islam.php

Sincerely, Mark Scheel , senior prose editor Kansas City Voices magazine