Letter to the Publisher??

 I subscribe to The American Spectator. There are always some great articles to read, but nothing is perfect and sometimes there is something with which I disagree. Usually, I just let it pass, But every once in a while, something grabs my attention and raises my ire. Yesterday was that day. An article by Jed Babbin, an Undersecretary of Defense in the George H.W. Bush administration, sent my blood pressure somewhere close to stroke level. So I sent an e-mail to Melissa MacKenzie, the publisher of The American Spectator. Below is my dispatch to Ms. MacKenzie. I will let you know if she responds.

Good evening Ms. MacKenzie,

I started reading American Spectator in the early 1990's and was a subscriber for a period before the Y2K debacle fizzled. A few months ago, I gave up on the chance to have a stroke while reading "social (?) media"  or watching the news and spent my blood pressure med money on a subscription to the American Spectator. I really enjoy your publication even though I don't always agree with it. I enjoy the writing of Ben Stein, Dov Fisher, Scott MacKay and many others. I like to read the daily email from Daniel Flynn, even though I have realized that he is some Yankee who hates Trump and listens to some kind of music that I despised back when I still had hair. And having lived in Central Florida for many years, I am accustomed to enjoying Larry Thornberry's writing.

Enough of the praise, let's move on to the source of my displeasure. I just finished reading Jed Babbin's thoughts on why Trump should not veto the NDAA. His three reasons are the renaming of military bases, the continuation of the war in Afghanistan, and Section 230. I don't even want to discuss Section 230 as I believe that the repeal of that is so obviously needed that Congress will never address it.

Moving on, for more than thirty years Rep. Howard Coble was my Congressman. In 2013, he spoke at my church at the time on a Wednesday evening dinner program. During the question and answer question, I asked Howard "Why do we still have American soldiers in Afghanistan? What in Afghanistan is worth a single American life?" After stammering for a few seconds, Howard finally responded, "Gilbert, I just don't know." Since then, I have asked scores of people that same question and have never received a satisfactory answer. It might have been one of your writers, but I loved a piece that said we were there because the generals realized that it is a honey hole. They are probably right.  It is a place for the military to test new weapons, tactics, and systems. It is a place to send officers to get in their "combat zone" time to move them up the promotion list. It's a never ending war game with an acceptable (to the military) level of casualties. It is a place to create bogus heroic images such as Bronze Star recipient Cal Cunningham here in North Carolina. Cal got a Bronze Star for basically practicing law in a war zone. That rivals the legends of John Kerry and his Purple Hearts in Vietnam. Our record on "nation building" is horrible. Let's face a simple fact, Democracy is not right for everyone. There are states in this country to which that would also apply. Babbin's time as a Deputy Under Secretary of Defense, in the George H.W. Bush administration is clearly affecting his ability to reason clearly.

The biggest issue is Babbin's willingness to change the names of military bases. Mr. Babbin wrote that the Confederates had broken their oath of allegiance and made war upon the United States. Babbin needs to pop open a history book and read it. I suggest "Midstream, Lincoln the President" by J.G Randall. Confederates thought that they had a right to leave a relationship that they had willingly joined. Apparently, Yankees viewed it as some sort of Muslim marriage where the man must give his consent for his spouse to leave a failed relationship. Given that Lincoln raised armies and had them invade the southern states makes Mr. Babbin's claim that the Confederates "made war" upon the United States laughable. It's easier to believe that they acted in self defense. 

I have had the following discussion with scores of friends and enemies. What liberals and neoconservatives are trying to do is judge people of more than 150 years ago by our morals and standards of today. How does one meet a standard that does not even exist when you are living? When did we decide we were going to set race relations or gender relations as the standards by which we will measure greatness? When did we decide that  how one interacts with women is the standard of greatness?  What is so bad that it will overrule all of the good that you accomplish in life? They hung the last perfect man on a cross. I am so old that I remember when we believed in redemption and forgiveness. 

Here's my last point in the "Confederate" discussion. In 2027, the Martin Luther King FBI files will be unsealed .I will close with questions with which I torment my liberal acquaintances. If the government allows this to happen, what will happen if there is evidence of behavior by King that is immoral? What if King abused women or was an episodic alcoholic? What if he cheated on his wife? What if he engaged in sex with followers? What if he hated homosexuals? What if he voted Republican? What if he used funds improperly? The possibilities are endless. If there is evidence of any of those things, what then?  Will the King statues be torn down? Will MLK Day be stricken from the calendar? Will the streets and buildings be renamed? Are the files being doctored as I write this question?

Thanks for reading. I will still be a Spectator subscriber tomorrow. I will even read the morning mail from Daniel Flynn, But periodically we are all reminded that not everyone sees things as we do.  Mr. Babbin's column was that reminder for me. This note is my reminder to you and your writers.

Thanks,

Gilbert Jones