Archive for April, 2003
« Previous EntriesA More Appropriate Title
Monday, April 28th, 2003Hillary Rodham Clinton’s book is hitting the presses… It’s called “Living History”.
Is there anyone out there really planning on buying this?
Anyways, we all know this book is going to be completely fabricated crap, so I’d like hear any alternative book titles for this piece of fiction of Hillary’s.
Considering what this book is really setting out to accomplish, I feel it appropriate to name the book “Rewriting History”.
Lets hear your ideas.
It Could Be All Over Soon
Saturday, April 26th, 2003Talk about quick. Allegedly, next week President Bush will officially declare the war over.
So some people are asking about the WMDs. Well, the answer to that isn’t a quick one. Lets get one thing straight… Saddam Hussein had more than enough time since Res 1441 to hide, sell, or destroy what he had. It appears from various reports that maybe just days before we started bombing, Saddam had whatever he had left that was around destroyed… Which means he knew we were going in soon, so he had to hide what he could, and destroy the rest, so that if Coalition Forces didn’t stay long (which Saddam thought would happened - the “Black Hawk Down” syndrome) that once they were gone and WMDs were not discovered, that he would win in the Court of Public Opinion against Bush.
Some leftist might say “Well, he destroyed them didn’t he?” Even if some were destroyed days before the war started, all that means is that he thought he could deceive the world, even prevent the war from starting… So regardless, he was in violation of the UN Resolutions, and only destroyed some WMDS at the last second to cover his ass and eventually go back to his old ways - rebuilding his weapons once things calmed down.
But don’t worry, be patient. Don’t let yourself be a victim to Saddam’s game. As the protesters said before “Let the inspections work.” Well, if the UN inspections had to take time, so will those of the Coalition Forces.
Speech, Religion, and Church & State
Wednesday, April 23rd, 2003Why are people afraid of religion? Religion is a source of faith, morality, and community for many people. Yet, many liberals treat religion like it is a great evil. It’s funny how they think that bashing the President is an exemplary way to excercise freedom of speech, however, religion, or anything related to religion is an obtrusive and harmful. In a story reported on Fox News a teachers aide was suspended without pay for a year for wearing a cross. The article speaks for itself, but I think this shows just how ridiculous liberals are. If a student wears an anti-Bush or anti-American type shirt, that is healthy freedom of expression - however, the simple wearing of a cross is deemed worthy of the suspension of a teacher. Please… GOD forbid a teacher have gaul to wear a symbol of their faith in school.
There is a huge difference between separation of church and state, and the simple wearing of necklace with a religious symbol for a pendant. People don’t realize that separation of church and state is about the government establishing a state religion - it is not about banning the individuals right to practice a faith, or to express it.
The National Organization for Women
Sunday, April 20th, 2003Leave it to a radical left-wing feminist group to politicize a tragedy to further their own agenda. The Morris County chapter of the National Organization for Women (NOW) is trying to make the Laci Peterson murder case a catalyst for abortion rights… Think I’m kidding? The Daily Record reports that NOW opposes a double murder charge for Scott Peterson in the deaths of his wife Laci Peterson and their unborn child. Why do you ask? Because they say it “could provide ammunition to the pro-life lobby.”
Mavra Stark, Morris County NOW President, said, “If this is murder, well, then any time a late-term fetus is aborted, they could call it murder.”
Regardless of your stance on abortion, it is impossible to take this diatribe seriously. We’re talking about an innocent pregnant woman, carrying a child that she wanted, and the National Organization for Women devalues the life of her child - a human life.
What they are saying is that anyone can kill an unborn child and not be guilty of murder… just because they feel it blurs the line between late-term abortion and murder.
What’s the next step? Are they going to lobby for pardons for Susan Smith and Andrea Yates? Are they going to advocate post-natal abortions? The way leftists work, it’s probably headed that way. Katie Couric started a legal defense fund for Andrea Yates on the Today Show. It’s all headed this way.
Regardless of your feelings on abortion, to consider Scott Peterson, or any parent who kills a child (born or unborn) not liable… it’s just ridiculous and sick. It shows tremendous disrespect for human life.
The National Organization for Women has rightfully earned the second entry on my Liberal Idiots list.
Article on Affirmative Action
Thursday, April 17th, 2003I came across this article on affirmative action and thought I would post it here. If anyone is interested in posting their thoughts on affirmative action, feel free to do so here.
Winding Down
Tuesday, April 15th, 2003Well, everyone, the war is winding down. They’ve been saying that the majors battles have all been fought. A couple aircraft carrier ships (I believe) are coming back. We found 7 POWs. Jessica Lynch is back home. This has been a well planned and carried out war. We’ve captured several key people in the regime - some scientists in fact - who are being grilled now regarding the WMDs Iraq has.
There’s been a lot of talk like “Where are the weapons of mass destruction?” I would not be concerned about the lack of any confirms WMDs at this point. Think about it. Saddam has had not just 12 years to make them, but also plenty of time to hide them. Since Resolution 1441, Saddam has had ample time to hide, camouflage and sell the WMDs he had. I’ve been reading a book on Iraq and Saddam Hussein, and based on the way he’s conducted things in the past, it’s not unreasonable to suggest that he’s intentionally refrained from using WMDs in this war because he knows that the moment he uses them he’s got the entire world against him - so he’s gonna hold off until the last possible second, or never use them at all because Saddam Hussein spends a great amount of his efforts fighting in the court of public opinion - and he’s still fighting a PR battle against the United States.
Of course, that is, if he is still alive.
Nancy Pelosi
Friday, April 11th, 2003
The Honorary first entry to the new Liberal Idiots Category of MattMargolis.com goes to House Minority
Leader Nancy Pelosi.
Today, Pelosi defended her vote against going into Iraq, and as reported in The Wasington Times:
…Mrs. Pelosi praised the troops, she also said their success was owed “in large measure” to former President Bill Clinton.
“This best-trained, best-equipped, best-led force for peace in the history of the world was not invented in the last two years. This had a strong influence and strong support during the Clinton years,” she said.
Mrs. Pelosi did give President Bush credit for saying the United Nations should have a role in rebuilding a postwar Iraq, but she said the administration must make sure that it involves the international community.
Does anyone really believe that Pelosi genuinely feels that Clinton was responsible for strengthening the military?
Think about what Clinton did as Commander-In-Chief of our Military. Besides the fact his anti-military policies weakened not just morale, but strength and readiness, but he sold military missile technology to China and gave North Korea nuclear technology… He never retaliated the attack on the World Trade Center in 1993, or the bombins of our embassies in Africa, or the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole.
There has been no one more destructive to the military than President Clinton. We should be thankful that President Bush has been able to restore the military the past two years. Pelosi’s statement is utterly ridiculous. How can it be that a person can constantly defend their position against the war, yet praise the jobs of the troops, and give Clinton the credit for their good job???
Pelosi just couldn’t give Bush anything resembling a compliment.
It’s funny how Pelosi thinks that President Bush couldn’t have transformed the military in the two years since he’s taken office, but still blame him for an economy that was going into recession since 2000… before Bush was even elected.
Congratulations, Nancy Pelosi, you have earned the first Liberal Idiot Award on MattMargolis.com.
Response to Marcy Gotterbarn
Thursday, April 10th, 2003The statement I made on this website regarding the change of leadership in the University of Hartford Student Government got a bit of attention on campus. This is remarkable since I never sent the link out to any University of Hartford students. I only just became aware that the Editor-In-Chief of the Informer, Marcy Gotterbarn, actually wrote a story about it in the Informer.
This astonished me. I never would have thought that what appeared on my site would have incited a response or statement on behalf of any University of Hartford entity. Although the article is not political in nature, I’ve decided to write a response to it.
If you have recently been to MattMargolis.com and have scrolled down to the bottom of the screen you have seen the opinion of alumnus Matt Margolis on the recent change of leadership in SGA.
I was raised to believe that no one is perfect. Everyone has done something stupid that they are ashamed of or regret. It’s a normal thing. No one expects perfection from people, not even from those in leadership positions.
Perfection is certainly not expected from our leadership. However, if a “leader” has partaken in illegal actions and was caught doing so, that is certainly a justified reason to question the leadership abilities of that individual.
Every leader is going to step up to the plate and deal with some sort of harassment about his or her past. I am not saying that whatever trouble that person got into was right and didn’t set a good example, but I am sure they learned from the situation.
I wouldn’t give Amiel Hersh or anyone credit for learning from their past mistakes. Repeat crimes occur all the time, and college students are no less prone to recidivism than the general public.
However, they have to deal with the press “uncovering” things from their past because they have put themselves in the public eye.
Just for the record, I do not consider myself “the press” so to speak. I am certainly not a journalist. However, the intention of my statement on the SGA leadership was meant to give those University of Hartford students the opportunity to realize that as damaging as the arrest of T.J. Legg was to the University, that his replacement is by no means able to restore any dignity to the office because he had participated in similar activity – and was caught.
Margolis has decided to take on the role of uncovering things about those in the University of Hartford SGA. If you check out the page I am talking about, you will see Margolis uncovering something about our new SGA President Ami Hersh’s past. However, Margolis has no proof of this incident.
Because I am not a journalist, I did not take the time or the effort to “uncover” documentation or acquire affidavits regarding the incident. To say that I have no proof is to suggest that I have made up the story, or the information I learned regarding the incident was false – which just isn’t the case.
There is no report from Public Safety and no eyewitness to the event.
I would tend to believe from this statement that Marcy attempted to retrieve the information about the incident from Public Safety. It is highly unlikely she would have spoken to the correct person, or even been been able to get access to the report, because, in fact, a report does exist – I know because I had it checked – by my friend who was involved in the incident and knew which officer handled the case.
He was not there and, according to the editorial that he refers to, all he has is the word from his friend. The story that he refers you to on that site is an editorial and Hersh’s name is not even mentioned.
Well, I partially relied on the story of my friend. However, I was a witness to the incident, for my friend spoke to me when he was being bothered by the noise. He also came to me after being rudely turned away by occupants of that apartment when he requested they turn the noise down. I actually advised my friend to go to the Resident Assistant, who in turn reported the incident to Public Safety, and I personally observed Public Safety entering the apartment.
I was also present when my friend received a phone call from Amiel Hersh during which Amiel complained to my friend for turning him in because they “got in really big trouble.”
As far as the reason why Amiel’s name was not mentioned in that editorial, the reason is that it was made aware to me by the Editor-In-Chief at the time that it was not appropriate to name names in an article of that nature, for the Informer was not meant to be a forum for students to bash other students. So I honored that, and gave Amiel Hersh anonymity in the editorial. I do not see how omission of his name in that editorial is an issue.
Further proof that the incident occurred: Amiel and his roommates were not allow to “squat” that apartment for the following year. I am not sure if that was their only punishment, but nevertheless, Marcy, or anyone else in the Informer, or University of Hartford staff, faculty, or student body could look up records and find out that in the following year, different students occupied that apartment. I should know – I was friends with some of them.
With SGA elections just around the corner do not take what Matt Margolis has stated about SGA into consideration.
I don’t mind that Marcy advised the student body to not take what I wrote into consideration. However, I think the intent of her words were lost in the fact that all she did was call attention to my website, thus raising curiosity of those who had not known about the website or the statement on it – which ultimately happened for my website received 10 times as many hits than it normally does during the week that followed the publication of the issue of the Informer that this story ran.
People cannot run for SGA if they have violated probation or have been found guilty of a violation by the University’s Judicial Board.
There is no reason to research the candidate’s history, as that is taken care of before their name is put on the ballot. What I do think you should do is go out and vote for the people that you feel will represent us the best and will do the best job for us.
Obviously, the research done on a candidate is not performed adequately.
The people who win will represent the University of Hartford and are in the public eye, not only at our University, but also in Greater Hartford. We choose these people and I suggest you do so carefully. If you don’t want a relapse of this past year then get to SGA during the first week of May and vote. To find out who is running you can read the Informer on Mar. 27, the issue which will contain each candidate’s platform. In addition, the Informer will hopefully be endorsing an SGA President.
I agree with the above statement Marcy made. Hopefully, the University of Hartford will not experience another embarrassing incident within the SGA. Thankfully, Amiel Hersh’s time as SGA President is coming to an end very soon.
« Previous Entries