Loose Lips Sink Ships

Here's the headline for "The Blotter" at abcnews.com:

"Bush Authorizes New Covert Action Against Iran"

Do you see what's wrong with this?

This would never have happened back in 1941, folks. For some reason, in this age of instant information and reality T.V. shows, people think we have the right to know everything, and know it now. Apparently, journalists leave their scruples in the dorm room when they graduate, because I can see no reason for reporting on the world wide web that "The CIA has received secret presidential approval to mount a covert "black" operation to destabilize the Iranian government..." Does ABC News believe that the government of Iran has not yet discovered that a thing called "the Internet" exist and that the information on it is free and easy to obtain, unlike classified national security intelligence? What the hell is going on here, people, what eve happened to the words "top secret?" For crying out loud, the Iranian government doesn't even need spies, all they have to do is go to the front door and pick up the morning newspaper! ABC News is one of those organisations that is constantly reminding us how awful war is, and yet here they are reporting on intelligence that could cause an international incident! Aaaarrgh! Why don't they just change the name to the Al-Jazzira Broadcasting Company and be done with it? Even if you are against the war, any war, why would you feel compelled to put American lives in jeopardy by reporting this stuff? ABC goes on to say that "Still, some fear that even a nonlethal covert CIA program carries great risks." Gee. You think so? Maybe that's why it was supposed to be a SECRET, you JACKASSES! There used to be a saying in times of war; "Loose lips sink ships." It means, "keep your big mouth shut or you'll kill a thousand of our boys. Shame on you, ABC News. Freedom of the press is one thing, but irresponsibility in journalismis another.

Tin Ear? It's Called "Resolve."

The Speaker of the Blouse is at it again. According to an article on breitbart.com, Speaker Pelosi accused the president of having selective hearing by saying he has a "tin ear." I suppose she's upset because the president refused to compromise, and I could understand that if we were talking about anything other than the war. In war, there can be no compromise, you either win or you lose. Compromise in warfare would be like saying, "hey, I tell you what, we'll only kill you on Tuesdays and Thursdays if you promise not to use soccer balls and baby dolls as bombs." Yeah, right. Wanna shake on it? Anyway, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell gets it. "Look," he said, "we need to have a compromise if we want to get the job done before Memorial Day. We know how to get there. It's to take out the surrender date. Any kind of reasonable benchmarks on the Iraqi government I think are going to have broad bipartisan support. That's clearly the way to get there." You see? By "compromise," he means, "we get what we want, and you get hosed." I'm sick of hearing about compromise. We didn't compromise with Adolf Hitler. We didn't make a deal with Hirohito. We didn't "come to terms" with dictators the way the Speaker would like to do. No. We bombed them until they gave us an unconditional surrender. This is a problem for Pelosi, who says "when it comes to the war in Iraq, the president has a tin ear. He just cannot hear, except that which he wants to hear on it." That's because, Madame Speaker, he is the Commander in Chief of our armed services and he's trying to wage war on a deadly enemy! If she gets her way, all the enemy has to do is go underground, mark our surrender on their calenders, and wait. The president knows this, and, since it is his duty to win this war, he rejects any planned withdrawal date. That's not selective hearing, it's resolve. He refuses to lead by public opinion polls, and that's called having the courage of his convictions. I, for one, don't want a "deal." I want victory. Then again, my hearing's pretty bad, too.