Well, well. It must be summer time: The teenaged people are running about in their short-sleeved shirts, "cool" dark-colored glasses, and enjoying the newest in rock and roll music; the season's flowers are bursting forth in a cacophony of colors that puts the flowing robes of a gay man to shame; and, oh, another sign that summer is here: The unmistakable song of America's Liberal Media: "We are losing the war in Iraq!" a liberal pundit sings, "We must pull out of Iraq!" warbles another, "We must not support the Troops anymore!", "We love Saddam and how he tortures people!", and the newest one: "Iraq is another Vietnam!"

"Iraq is another Vietnam!":

Well, I hope so.

Because the Vietnam War was good.

That's right:

I said it.

Now, of course the priss—er, I mean "press"—wants you to think Iraq is another Vietnam: Because they're the ones who created the image of the Vietnam war being so evil in the first place!: Just like they do in our newspapers, TV broadcasts, and pornographic movies today, the Liberal Media sang in the 60s too: "Is It an Unwinnable War?" read one 1968 headline, "Oh! It's a Quagmire! We Should Have Never Started the Conflict! Oh!" read another, "Make Love and Grab Boobs and Thrust Your Parts Into Each Other, Not War!" probably read yet another.

Pronunciation: (kwag'mI^ur", kwog'-)
—n.
1. an area of miry or boggy ground whose surface yields under the tread; a bog.
2. a situation from which extrication is very difficult: a quagmire of financial indebtedness.
3. anything soft or flabby.

Two-thirds of the definition of the word quagmire does not even potentially apply to the Vietnam Conflict: A conflict, due to its intangibility, is not soft or flabby. A conflict is also, for the same reason, not an area much less one that is "miry." Mathematically, the Vietnam Conflict could at most have been one-third of a quagmire!

But that was enough for the media to call it one. Just like the Liberals: To them, the glass is one-third full.

Thankfully, heroic filmmakers such as Oliver Stone and Francis Ford Coppola showed the truth. They gave audience members as well as movie goers the only glimpse of the true glory of the Vietnam event. A glimpse that the Liberal Commune of newspapers, TV networks, and Hollywood were suppressing.

In "Platoon," as hero Tom Berenger's helicopter lifts off from the battlefield after a great victory against the Viet Cong, the movie watcher knows that the tears Martin or Charlie Sheen sheds at the end (at something he sees on the ground) represent that the war is completely right and necessary and that this enemy must be defeated and America is not wrong and that this war is not a quagmire.

Comparably, Marlon Brando's always played unsavory characters. One must then assume that the character he plays in "Apocalypse Now" likewise symbolizes Communism as a whole and how America needed to be in Vietnam, that affirmative action is evil, and that it (Vietnam) was not a quagmire. Martin or Charlie Sheen's character, representing America, defeats Marlon Brando at the end in one of Hollywood's greatest duels.

So, take that and put in your pipe and smoke it. You'd probably like something new to smoke anyway.  Right, Liberal Media? With your long hair and sandals.

But here's a question: why is the left-wing trying to deceive us?: Why is it that President Bush's choking on a pretzel is front page news, yet Clinton's extramarital affair with an intern and the fact that he lied in court about said affair was, for the most part, ignored by the press during his tenure in the White House?

I don't think I exaggerate when I say that it's because the Liberals want this country to become weak so that our enemies can kill us all in very painful ways.

Otherwise, does it make sense that the same group of people that likes to kill babies is so worried about saving the lives of those in the Axis of Evil? Haven't you ever seen "Lord of the Rings" or "Star Wars"?: When something is called The Evil Empire, or the Dark Side, something with "Black" in it, or the Axis of Evil, it is EVIL! You then go fight that evil! It's very simple, people!

Perhaps the Bush Administration should name the Iraqi war The First Trimester so that the Liberals will finally get behind the War.

The Liberals also claim to be all up in arms about Abu Ghraib and the "torture" there (if one considers it torture to be let out of your cell to hang out with your friends, get in a pep-squad style pyramid shape with them, and mingle with America women).

But don't the Liberals realize that their concerns make no sense?: The Terrorists hate freedom: That's pretty well established. But, then, when they're jailed and tortured, they complain about losing their freedom. Well, which is it gonna be, fellas? Freedom or not?

I vote for Freedom. But not for the Terrorists. But for America. And not for the Terrorists.