The Time Machine to Occupy Wherever

| Comments (1)

I am reminded of my Freshman year at UCLA, when I arrived on my 1980s campus one morning to find myself immersed in a crowd of hippies in leather fringe, bell bottoms and long stringy hair.  What the heck happened, I wondered, between the time I went to bed the night before and this bright morning? The filming of some movie, that’s what happened. So no, I had not been transported in my sleep back 20 years to the sixties, and thank God for that.

But now here we are in 2011, awakening to find ourselves immersed in crowds of retro protesters, not, this time, the products of Hollywood’s central casting, but real live sixties throwbacks calling for the downfall of the United States of America. Marching on Wall Street, Los Angeles, Boston, Tampa, Oakland, San Francisco, Phoenix, Portland, and everywhere in between, they call themselves “Occupy wherever,” and from what I have gleaned, I don’t think they have any idea what they are demanding, other than freedom from personal responsibility, freedom from employment, and freedom from basic hygiene.

Coverage of these protests reveals nothing but a flood of imprecision and generalities, punctuated by the catch phrases fed to the protesters by those who are organizing these latter-day love-ins: Down with the corporations. Tax the rich. Legalize Marijuana. Bush is a Nazi. All praise the hammer and sickle. We are the 99 percent. Death to the one percent. You get the drill…

One young woman I heard interviewed was asked just what she and her cohorts want. Like so many others handed the microphone, she couldn’t answer. The interviewer —  obviously not a member of the left’s mainstream media lapdog brigade — explained to the misguided “freedom” fighter that plenty ‘o politicians have sold their souls to the unions and other special interests in sweetheart deals designed to bankrupt the very cities where the occupiers are protesting. Plenty of fat-cat democrat donors, too. She knew none of that. Don’t you think that makes the opportunistic politicians responsible, too, for whatever it is you are protesting? I can’t speak for that, she said. But we’re discussing things, she said, and getting new ideas. What kind of ideas? she was asked.  Uh, well, I can’t really…I don’t….um….when we have talked about it, there will be really good ideas.  Like what? She didn’t care to speak anymore.

The mouthpieces for the protests – the mainstream lapdogs, leftwing politicians, various unions, hired thugs, and yes, even the president of the United States, tell us it’s all about jobs. I have yet to hear any of the protesters speak of jobs. The mouthpieces demand that we celebrate the audacity and purity of the protesters. Ignoring the filth and stench permeating the protest sites, the mouthpieces, by taking the side of the occupiers, are hoping we the people won’t notice that they are aligning themselves with calls for, among so many other issues, forced and universal veganism, the legalization of drugs, the communistic distribution of wealth, the abandonment of the usage of oil (both foreign and domestic), and the forgiveness of all debt (with those members of society who are responsible and productive footing the bill).

The left, including the media hacks and the president of the United States, would have us believe that these protestors, these occupiers, are America’s majority. Don’t believe it. We the people know who they are. And we are asking, rhetorically of course, why they are not marching on the White House. As for me, I keep thinking of the words of a favorite bumper sticker: “Our Founding Fathers would be ashamed of us for what we are putting up with.” And for what we have “put up with” for the last three years.

 

The Secret Longings of Useful Liberal Men

| Comments (1)

As someone constantly recognizing connections in the events that shape this world, I couldn’t help but find some rather illuminating links between news stories from the last few weeks.

The first involved Michelle Obama as she and her husband enjoyed their regal sojourn across the British Isles. The press followed the wannabe royals with slobbering idolatry, chronicling with mad, obsessive detail everything their beloveds ate, wore and said, all the while heralding them as legendary scions of style and intellect.

What captured my attention, however, was not the fabric that may or may not have adorned the first lady’s much-lauded arms and waistline, but rather comments she made to the young students at a girls’ school somewhere in Britain. In a nutshell, she confided to these impressionable young ladies that when she met her husband – to whom she said she was ordered to “mentor” – she got the feeling that he might be “useful” someday.

And that, in a related nutshell, sums up my personal perception of the liberal female view of men. Men are, after all, the root of all evil and, no doubt, the source of every awful event liberal women have ever experienced in their own personal liberal lives. But should a man pledge his allegiance to the most extreme liberal tenets and prove himself willing to sacrifice any hint of testosterone in favor of a progressive and feminized/metrosexual agenda, then that guy may just earn his way into the graces of liberal women, “useful” to their cause. Michelle here reminds us most brazenly of her own allegiance to the likes of Hillary, Janet, the Supreme Court’s Sonia, and the politically paralyzed/blinded National Organization of Women.

Think a moment about our nation’s current political climate. As entrenched and trembling republican men struggle to find their way through an angry American right, staunchly conservative women, such as Sarah Palin, Jan Brewer, Michele Bachmann, Dana Perino, Laura Ingraham, Liz Cheney and Ann Coulter are out there roaring from the rooftops, reminding Americans what this nation was and is meant to be.

What perplexes the left, particularly the men of the left, is that these women roar with a smile and a fearlessly feminine sparkle, extolling the virtues of joyful patriotism, love of country, and, yes, even a love of men.  Such messages simply cannot be lost on those useful left-wing male reporters sent out to vilify and destroy them. Following obediently the directive, do these men wonder beneath the vitriol slung by their side, what it might be like to enjoy the good graces of women who might actually value and respect the masculine for its own sake? Women who see men as more than simply “useful” servants? In their quiet moments, do they think back to a moment when, ignored or rebuffed by smart, confident, patriotic and right-minded girls in high school and college, they pledged instead to become “useful” to those other women? Do they ever regret the sacrifice? I don’t know, of course. Just a thought.…

As I have pondered these connections and the possible secret longings of liberal men, Doug Giles, conservative author of the book Raising Righteous and Rowdy Girls has posted another of his brilliant articles on the need for young women to learn to defend themselves to the death (an assailant’s death, of course). This time his inspiration is the alleged attack by the avowed socialist and “useful” French International-Monetary-Fund president on a hotel maid in New York City, resulting in Mr. Giles’ article, “Preferred Headline: IMF CEO Killed by Rape Victim.”

Whenever Mr. Giles writes about his passionate belief that young women should be trained as both expert martial artists and expert marksmen, I am inevitably drawn to the commentary that follows. The vast majority of his readers sing his praises, but far too many ignore the message in favor simply of blasting Mr. Giles for even suggesting that young women learn to fight off attempted rapists and murderers.

That women in general — or parents of either girls or boys — would oppose Mr. Giles’ belief in self-protection….well, I don’t know what to make of that and I won’t even venture a guess. But that liberal men would find female self-protection repulsive and unacceptable….perhaps that reveals a deeply rooted psychological phenomenon deserving of study. I’m no psychiatrist, but perhaps liberal men who have allowed themselves to be subjugated as “useful” to liberal women relish secretly, subconsciously, the notion of such women rendered weak and helpless. Perhaps it is simply that hobbled testosterone making one last gasp of protest. I’m no psychiatrist, but you never know.

Imagined Reflections on a Memorial in Tucson

| Comments (2)

He kissed her good-bye that morning. Gave her a hug and told her to have fun. Then he began his Saturday work around the house.

The phone rang. He picked it up. Yes, speaking. What? No, he hadn’t heard. Terrible. No. What?

Oh, God.

The next days were fog, thick and blinding. The shock. The pain. The casseroles. He didn’t know where he was. He barely knew who he was. He heard familiar voices around him, he heard their pain, but he didn’t register faces. The only face he wanted was hers.

Wednesday. A memorial. You need to be there, they told him. It will help. Closure. You need closure, they said. It’s too soon, he told himself. But he needed to be there, they told him. So he would be. For her.

They arrived. Right on time. Just as they were told.  Along with all the others. Right on time. Here? he wondered. A smiling young blond ushered him, them, in to the arena. An arena? he wondered. Didn’t seem right.

Someone handed him a t-shirt. No, not right at all. “No,” he muttered, shaking his head, pushing the item away. “Okay,” the someone said. “If you’re sure…” He was. He walked to the next usher. The next handler. The next smiling young blond. Here. Sit here. The front row, she said. That’s right. Perfect. “So exciting,” he heard her whisper to another.

He closed his eyes. Took a breath. And he waited. As the place grew louder with voices. Distant giggles. Shouts. A rumbling din. What you hear while waiting for a basketball game. At an arena.

Time passed. He opened his eyes. Crowds still streamed in. Smiling faces. Tens of thousands. Not one known to him. He waited. Until the applause signaled him to attention. And the cheering. It had begun. This memorial.

Enter the parade. A medicine man. Some music. Faces from television, from the news, from the nation’s capitol. He didn’t know them. They didn’t know her. They spoke. And they would point at him, smile at him. And the tens of thousands would cheer. More words. A disjointed blur. A disjointed slur. Thanks for coming…a great university…the creator…a letter from Paul…be civil…such a tragedy…be civil…be better. And they would applaud. Those tens of thousands. Applauding. Cheering. Whistling. So exciting.

And deafening. Pounding in his head. Echoing, vibrating from the seats high above. So exciting. And now they were standing. He guessed he should too. Right? More words. More applause. More standing. More whistles and cheers. He heard her name. And they were clapping. And looking at him, smiling. And crushing his ribs.

They stood again. It was over. Done. This memorial. You need to be there, they had told him. It will help. He followed them out. Those tens of thousands. Back to the car. Back to his home.

He walked inside. He looked around. She would not be waiting there. Now, or ever again. He looked at the faces around him. Faces known to him. And to her. Voices familiar. How wrong they had been. “What was that?” he asked. They had no answers this time. All they could do was shrug and shake their heads.

High Praise from a Guy Named Mark

| Comments (0)
In the midst of all the commotion of last week’s election, someone who said his name is Mark contacted me in response to a piece I posted several months ago.

According to this guy, Mark, I am a meandering, monosyllabic moron (a new, more clever way, I presume, of labeling one’s rightwing opposition as stupid).  In addition, I am to be ridiculed for my inability to understand the brilliant musings of the extraordinary man who currently  occupies the Oval Office, as well as my support of so-called “real men.” My correspondent went on to say that those “real men,” thanks to their own obviously monosyllabic natures, would naturally find the ramblings on my insipid website appealing.

In response, this meandering, monosyllabic GrizzlyMom says thank you, Mark, for noticing.

Indeed no one is likely ever to reverse my take on the man currently occupying the White House (actually at the moment traveling Asia in a style, says the British press, unseen since the days of the Pharaohs and the Roman Emperors), nor will I ever apologize for my affinity for the so-called real men certain individuals apparently find so threatening. These latter charges did not faze me when leveled against me by feminist college professors way back when, and they pack even less of a punch today.

But how lovely of this guy Mark to notice that affinity – and to assume that, for whatever reason, the men in question might in turn find something of value within my meandering, monosyllabic ramblings. I take it as high praise, as do, I am sure, my readers, men and women alike – regardless of the number of syllables that happen to pepper their speech patterns.

Trusting Our People

| Comments (0)

I believe in the American people. And for the last year and three months, they have not let me down. Every time they have been given the opportunity to let their voices be heard, to shout and scream – and vote – against the people who have made it their mission to destroy our country, the American people have not hesitated to shout, to scream, to vote.

From the summer’s town halls; to the special elections in Virginia and New Jersey; to a miracle vote in Massachusetts that saw a little-known republican claim a Senate seat all of Washington, and America, assumed was a Kennedy entitlement; to the congressional phone lines jammed yesterday and today by Americans scrambling not only to tell their so-called congressional representatives that they don’t want this atrocity of a health-care bill, but also to remind those so-called representatives that it is their job to represent their constituents, not a man in the White House whose dream is to see America reduced to a third-world dictatorship.

But this time, we the people are being denied the precious inalienable rights granted by the Constitution. Having met defeat after defeat at the hands of the American populace they so despise, the criminals in Washington have concocted a plan to bypass those ungrateful Americans and the Constitution they rode in on, thus ensuring that they, the criminals, can jam through any policy or crippling bill they “deem” critical to their transformation of the United States. In other words, this is only the beginning, folks. They jam this health-care atrocity through without a vote, without the consent of the American people, and the sky’s the limit. Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) so much as said just that yesterday.

Americans do not want this. Our founders did not want it either, and they did all they could to protect us from those who would try to destroy us from within. But cowardice and evil are reigning supreme in DC tonight, especially among those sniveling representatives who don’t want this thing either, but nevertheless kneel whimpering at the feet of the President, Pelosi and Reid.

Meanwhile I am filled with so much rage I can hardly talk. But I take some solace knowing that my rage is shared by the vast majority of the American people who have remained exactly who I have always believed them to be throughout this chaos. I look forward to the day when we will at last be able to channel the energy of that rage toward the rescue, protection and preservation of our nation once more.

NOW Breaks Its Code of Silence

| Comments (0)

March 3, 2010 | Comments

What a surprise it has been this week to hear the National Organization for Women break the code of silence they typically adopt under democratic regimes (a code made legendary under the last democratic administration when Bill Clinton’s shenanigans were making daily headlines).

Until this week, NOW has maintained the code, remaining mum, for example, when a government agency instructed women to stop conducting breast-cancer self-examinations and, because not enough women were dying to justify the cost, hold off on mammograms until age 50. The organization would also never dream of celebrating a self-made woman like Sarah Palin, who, unlike a certain Secretary-of-State we could name, reaped political success all on her own, without benefit of a husband’s coattails.

NOW broke its sacred code this week, however, as hints began to circulate that New York Governor, David Paterson, allegedly influenced a domestic situation involving his staff. Though the details remain murky, NOW called for the democratic Governor’s head — given the go-ahead, no doubt, by the democrat community at large. The dems long ago abandoned this Governor, who has repeatedly defied his party’s mandate that he not seek reelection – even when it was issued by the President of the United States.

The Governor’s defiance evaporated this week, when he announced, for whatever reason (I envision closed doors, threats, and private calls from Washington), that he will not seek reelection after all. Not good enough, screeched NOW. He needs to step down! If only the organization had issued a similar call back in 1998, when the most powerful man in the world was preying upon a young intern in the White House. Had they chosen to break the code then, maybe I’d be less inclined now to believe that their defense of women is purely political, and thus, purely hypocritical.

Betsy Siino | Comments

Scott’s Pickup Truck: The President Joins Coakley to Bash America

| Comments (0)

January 18, 2010 | Comments

First Martha – or “Marcia” as Patrick Kennedy (D/RI/Teddy’s-Son) likes to call her – Coakley labels Red Sox star Curt Schilling “another Yankee fan” because he supports her opponent in the upcoming Senate special election. Now, not to be outdone in the out-of-touch arena, the President, campaigning for Coakley last night in Massachusetts, chooses another American institution to bash: the all-American pickup truck.

You see, Martha’s republican opponent, Scott Brown, has been driving around Massachusetts campaigning from his GM pickup, only to hear the President demean him during his whistestop for Martha/Marcia last night, stating that “everybody can buy a truck.”

Of course the many millions who have found themselves jobless in the Obama economy might beg to differ with that comment. Yet that has not stopped this President from criticizing a symbol that we can bet has just as much to do with Mr. Brown’s rising poll numbers as the President’s own hostility toward a symbol – the America pickup truck – that is embraced by those same people who “cling” to their Bibles and their guns (and are thus equally despised by the President).

I have a feeling this will play just as well as Martha’s Curt Schilling fumble. Indeed just as Curt responded that he is anything but a Yankees fan (“Check that, if you don’t know what the hell is going on in your own state….”), Scott Brown has not allowed the President’s slam at America to go unchecked either, responding:

“Mr. President, unfortunately in this economy not everybody can buy a truck. My goal is to change that by cutting spending, lowering taxes and letting people keep more of their own money.”

Scott, we who cling to baseball, mom, apple pie, American pickups — and, yes, guns, Bibles and kids and country, too – are praying that you and Massachusetts make it happen tomorrow! Here’s hoping the Bay State gives us another shot heard ‘round the world.

Betsy Siino | Comments

Out-of-Touch Coakley Does It Again!

| Comments (0)

January 17, 2010 | Comments

Two days ago, as part of my post on the tight race between Martha Coakley and Scott Brown in the upcoming special election for Ted Kennedy’s vacated Massachusetts Senate seat, I included bonehead comments Coakley has made during her rather incompetent campaign of entitlement. Well, on Friday night, she did it again.

Friday night during a radio interview in Boston, Coakley dismissed Curt Schilling, beloved Boston Red Sox pitcher and World Series star, as “another Yankee fan” — her brilliant comeback to interviewer Dan Rea’s comment that Schilling is supporting Scott Brown in the election. In the wake of the interview, highlighted by Rea’s perplexed reaction to the insipid comment and Coakley’s fumbled attempt at recovery, the candidate’s spokesperson claimed that it was Coakley’s attempt to make a joke (the left once again taking the American people for fools).

All this American can say is: Talk about being out of touch with one’s constituents! Come to think of it, though, I guess she would fit in perfectly with this administration, this Congress. I just hope the people of Massachusetts are listening.

Betsy Siino | Comments

Redistribution of Donations

| Comments (0)

January 5, 2010 | Comments

I read an article yesterday lamenting the GOP’s lack of funds needed to finance Congressional elections in 2010. The left, no doubt, will run with that, giggling their “we told you so’s,” completely misreading the facts.

Allow me to clarify this for my left-wing friends. What this story failed to mention is that there is still plenty of conservative money flying around out there, only now the donors are being very selective about who their political benefactors will be. After the fiasco in New York’s District 23 last November, when the GOP endorsed a woman ranked as one of the most liberal politicians in one of the nation’s most liberal states, simply because she put an “R” next to her name and proceeded to endorse the democrat when she dropped out of the race, conservatives just don’t trust the republican party to distribute their precious funds in the right direction. Myself included.

Like so many conservatives I’ve heard from, I have been receiving solicitations from the Republican National Committee. I have in turn informed them that, for the time being, my political donations will be sent directly to those bonafide conservative candidates throughout the country who will be opposing the left-wing tyrants – on both sides of the aisle – who are ignoring the will of the American people and gutting the Constitution of our United States.

I am not talking third party here, for I think that would spell disaster for our conservative efforts and our country – and that is exactly what our left-wing opponents are hoping to see happen. No, I am talking aggressive action that will further our efforts and send a clear message at the same time. In the months to come, I will be sending my donations to any true conservative anywhere in the country who opposes the likes of Harry Reid (NV), Olympia Snowe (ME), Mary Landrieu (LA), Ben Nelson (NE), Barbara Boxer (CA), Kirstin Gillibrand (NY), Barney Frank (MA), Nancy Pelosi (CA), Dick Durbin (IL), John Murtha (PA), Chris Dodd (CT), Alan Grayson (FL)….you get the drill.

If en masse we conservatives take this tact, I have confidence the RNC will get the message and get back in both word and deed to the fearless conservative principles that make this country exceptional. In the meantime, we must keep reminding them: You have failed to represent us and our Constitution, dear RNC, you have thrown away golden opportunity after golden opportunity to carry our flag, so we are doing it ourselves. You’re welcome to come along, but we will gladly leave you in the dust if you continue to preach touchy-feely moderation and liberalism. And we’ll take our money with us.

What we have learned from our life under the current, and very oppressive, regime, is that the votes of everyone in Congress, whether or not they represent our own districts or our own states, affect us all more dramatically than we ever dreamed possible. You may live in Florida, but the vote of a Senator in Nebraska can sentence your family and our country to bankruptcy. I may not in any way be represented by my Congressman and my Senators – and believe me, I am not – but I can take action to help ensure that people are elected in other districts and other states, who will directly represent my beliefs and the well-being of my country, my family and my children.

So this is our challenge in 2010. It will take time and effort and research, but together we can take our country back from those who seek to “transform” it forever. We have our work cut out for us, but we can’t let that transformation occur. And we won’t.

Betsy Siino | Comments

Christmas Eve Massacre

| Comments (0)

December 24, 2009 | Comments

You’ve heard of the St. Valentine’s Day Massacre, when, on Valentine’s Day, 1929, Al Capone’s Italians faced off against Bugs Moran’s Irish in Chicago, and seven ended up dead. Today, in honor of that infamous day in America, the United States Senate, inspired by the Chicago mob currently dominating the White House, executed the Christmas Eve massacre, passing the Senate’s version of the health care reform bill that will plunge our beautiful nation into a tailspin from which it might never recover.

For years now the left has waged war against Christmas and all it represents, but that they would consciously choose Christmas Eve as their moment to cast our nation into abject poverty, despair and fascism is unforgiveable. Indeed they have fired yet another shot against all who love and revere this country. All I can muster to say in my fury is: How dare they! But how many times do I have to say that? It’s getting so, so very old. When will it stop?!

Nevertheless, what we need to let these alleged “respresentatives” know (as if they ever listen) is that we will not go quietly into that soft Christmas Eve night. They have made it abundantly clear that they have no intention of ever listening to the vast, vast majority of Americans who oppose this vile bill, the vast majority who have raised their voices in unison to make that opposition known. And with these votes, we will make it abundantly clear that they have only strengthened our resolve.

But we know they won’t listen. With the exceptions of those Senators who have listened, who have demanded that the thousands of pages of this horrible piece of tripe be read aloud on the Senate floor, they don’t care. For their own insidious reasons, they have jammed this bill through, initiating all the necessary payoffs to individual Senators who pretended they would do what was right and inevitably fell in line, goosestepping in perfect unison as demanded of them, not by their voters, but by this administration and the party leadership. Next step: a co-mingling with the House bill, more bribery, more payoffs, more false promises (and here we thought that, for the most part, prostitution was illegal in the United States). Then on to the President’s desk for signature and another choreographed photo-op. Oh, happy day.

But we who love this country will not be defeated. As we celebrate this Christmas Eve, we will in unison pray that this dual assault on both our nation and our most holy night will result in the ultimate massacre of the careers of all who have dared to vote for it. They have declared war upon us and on our country, and we will not take it lying down.

God bless us, everyone!

Betsy Siino | Comments