Gino Piroli – 1/24/05

This page was last updated on March 2, 2005.

AARP call to act is curiously late; Gino Piroli; Beaver County Times; January 24, 2005.

It’s been about 3½ months since Mr. Piroli’s last President Bush and/or Republican-bashing opinion piece.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject column.

“The presidential inauguration took place last week, and I received a few messages to remind me that my choice did not win.

“When I wrote back, I commended those who made legitimate arguments against my opinions. For those who made personal attacks, I let them know that I’m not a forgive-and-forget person.”

[RWC] His “columns” include public personal attacks, yet Mr. Piroli appears to be upset when people do the same to him in private e-mail notes. As a note, review Mr. Piroli’s columns and you’ll routinely find complaints about personal attack e-mail.

I find it predictable for someone who relies on personal attacks to be offended when on the receiving end. Check Mr. Piroli’s columns over the past couple of years and you will find his columns have referred to President Bush and his administration as court appointed, dishonorable, dumb, incompetent, “geniuses” in a derisive context, liars, obsessive, and so on. Not once did the columns cite credible and verifiable evidence to support the name-calling.

Mr. Piroli is in famous company in believing he’s a victim. If you paid attention to the news last week, you learned Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) repeatedly called Dr. Condoleezza Rice a liar during her confirmation hearings for Secretary of State. Dr. Rice strongly – but politely – defended her honor and said she did not lie. Dr. Rice made no derogatory comments about Ms. Boxer. Unbelievably, Ms. Boxer was on the weekend news shows claiming that Dr. Rice attacked her! I doubt anyone believed Ms. Boxer who saw the hearings. Ms. Boxer’s behavior was so egregious that Saturday Night Live based a skit on her performance.

“My biggest mistake in the campaign was overestimating the intelligence of the voters. However, credit must be given where credit is due - the brilliance of the Republican strategy. They managed to have an election of an incumbent without campaigning on his performance in his first four years in office. They concentrated on issues totally unrelated to the state of our nation and those responsible for this mess we’re now in.”

[RWC] Above the column complained about personal attack e-mail, yet in the next paragraph it implies the voters were stupid. Actually, Mr. Piroli probably believes only the 60+ million voters who voted for President Bush were stupid.

When the column claims President Bush didn’t campaign on his performance, it confuses President Bush with John Kerry. President Bush couldn’t have run from his record even if he wanted to. The Kerry-supporting press wouldn’t let him. Heck, they even put words in President Bush’s mouth and then criticized him for them. Perhaps Mr. Piroli forgot the press was constantly trying to get President Bush to confess to mistakes, but instead he defended his decisions and policies.

Did you hear the Kerry campaign run on anything Kerry did in his 20+ years as a senator? Did you hear the press touting Kerry’s achievements as a senator? For that matter, do you remember any of Mr. Piroli’s columns supporting John Kerry based on his Senate record and detailing that record? No, check Mr. Piroli’s columns. There’s a reason. Quick, name a Kerry achievement during his Senate years.

“Despite our differences, as good Americans, we should unite and hope that the next four years will make us a stronger and better nation. I’m sure we will because we did that even while questioning the legitimacy of the 2000 election.”

[RWC] It’s clear Mr. Piroli really does believe we’re stupid because he believes we forgot the actions of the liberal elite for the last four years. Does Mr. Piroli really believe ranking Democrats calling President Bush a crook, liar, Nazi, and so on for four years helped unite us? They even attacked President Bush with forged documents in an attempt to bring him down.

Let’s see if Mr. Piroli’s unity claim rings true. As mentioned above, Sen. Boxer (D-CA) constantly referred to Dr. Rice as a liar. That wasn’t enough, though. Throwing a temper tantrum, Democrats – led by Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV) – led a meaningless delay of Dr. Rice’s confirmation as Secretary of State even though the Foreign Relations committee approved Dr. Rice 16-2. The two dissenters were Democrats Barbara Boxer and John Kerry. During the nine hours of “debate” – a.k.a. a temper tantrum – in the full Senate, we heard Democrat after Democrat pick up Ms. Boxer’s claim that Dr. Rice was a liar. The delay’s purpose was simply to attack President Bush via Dr. Rice and to diminish Dr. Rice’s stature in the eyes of the world. Even baseless accusations have an impact if repeated enough. What amazes me is that Democrats saw no problem with a former KKK member and organizer – Sen. Byrd – delaying the confirmation of a black nominee. As recently as 2001, Sen. Byrd continued to refer to blacks as niggers.¹ In the end, the Senate confirmed Dr. Rice by 85-13. The 13 no votes were the most since 1825. The most in recent history was only seven (Dr. Henry Kissinger during the Nixon administration). For reference, President Clinton’s nominations for secretary of state (Warren Christopher, Madeleine Albright) were confirmed unanimously.

The process for President Bush’s Attorney General nominee, Alberto Gonzales, appears to be even worse. All eight Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee voted against Judge Gonzales, just as they did in 2001 when they all opposed John Ashcroft.

It appears Mr. Piroli’s hope that “we should unite” hasn’t reached his party’s leaders.

I can’t believe folks like Mr. Piroli are still trying to sell the “Bush lost in 2000” myth.

“Now that it is clear and apparent who won, we will support any efforts that will improve the state of our nation and its citizens. I sincerely hope and pray that this president will lead us to a better, more unified, more peaceful and prosperous nation.”

[RWC] Believe this paragraph and I have a bridge to sell you. The last thing the Democrat elite want is a better United States because their agenda feeds on bad news. President Reagan helped lead us to a better America and liberals continue to vilify him. Even as President Reagan was nearing the end of his battle with Alzheimer’s, liberals produced a movie (The Reagans) portraying him as little more than Mr. Magoo.

“If he does, I might change my opinion that after living through 14 presidents, he is the worst of them all. Seeing and hearing his agenda for the next four years, I doubt very much that will happen.”

[RWC] If you believe Mr. Piroli was sincere when he wrote, “I might change my opinion that after living through 14 presidents, he [President Bush] is the worst of them all,” I have a second bridge to sell you.

With Presidents Carter [military impotence, stagflation (double-digit inflation, interest rates, and unemployment), and giving away the Panama Canal], Clinton (unchecked terrorism and extracurricular activities in the Oval Office), Johnson (Medicare, Vietnam escalation, and the not-so-Great Society), and Roosevelt (the rise of communism, Japan, and Hitler; Socialist Security; and an inability to end the Great Depression) among those 14 presidents, I’m at a loss to understand how Mr. Piroli can claim President Bush is anywhere near the worst. Oh, I forgot. The currently sitting Republican president is always the worst.

---

“While on the political scene, the AARP that I used to belong to sent its millions of members written petitions addressed to the president and, in our case, U.S. Sens. Rick Santorum and Arlen Specter, and U.S. Rep. Melissa Hart.

“They wanted us to sign the letters to the officeholders urging them to improve prescription drug programs. I sent the unsigned petitions back to the executive director, Bill Novelli, asking him how he had the audacity to ask AARP members to support these efforts when he didn’t ask the membership to do this before the election.”

[RWC] A little history. The AARP supported the Medicare prescription plan in defiance of most other liberal organizations. Immediately after the legislation’s passage, the AARP let it be known that it viewed the plan as no more than “the camel’s nose in the tent.” Mr. Piroli and the AARP are on the same page except that he’s angry the AARP didn’t do more to bash President Bush during the time leading up to the election.

“Politicians are most vulnerable at election time, and that is when you should exert your clout to enact legislation that would protect Medicare and Social Security and come up with a prescription drug program. He instead endorsed the much-maligned $400 billion administration Medicare plan that placed the prescription plan in the hands of the drug companies.”

[RWC] Where’s the information to back up the claim that “the much-maligned $400 billion administration Medicare plan … placed the prescription plan in the hands of the drug companies?” This is no more than a Democrat/socialist talking point.

FYI, I opposed the drug prescription plan and I let my representatives know it. I suspect Mr. Piroli and I differ on our reasons for opposing the plan. I opposed it because I oppose nearly all socialist programs. I could guess as to Mr. Piroli’s motivation, but I won’t.

“The Veterans of Foreign Wars is another group that I belong to and have supported that was rather silent during the past election on the administration’s program for veterans benefits.

“Now they are beginning to scrutinize and criticize the plans for military veterans of this nation. The plans include cuts in benefits, heightened restrictions on aid to veterans and the closing of seven VA hospitals.”

[RWC] Mr. Piroli failed to mention the following.

· VA funding is now higher than at any point in the past ten years, and it’s going up twice as fast under President Bush as under President Clinton.²

· Funding for veterans in the first four Bush budgets increased 37.6%. If President Bush gets what he proposed for the 2006 budget, the total increase will be 40.6%. That’s 40.6% in five years compared to 31.6% during Clinton’s eight years.

· The number of veterans receiving health benefits went up 25 percent under President Bush’s budgets through 2004.² No, it’s not because of the Iraq War.

“Most seniors and veterans aren’t aware of the small print of the programs spelled out for them and expect AARP and the VFW to do that and act in our behalf and not be swayed by outside interests.”

[RWC] AARP is an outside interest itself dedicated to gouging the American taxpayer for “senior” welfare programs, that is when it is not busy selling insurance and other products. I don’t believe for a second that AARP’s business interests don’t affect their lobbying interests. I keep getting requests to join AARP, but I find AARP’s economic and political agenda way too socialist for me.

“After reading the letters to the editor, it should be apparent that the younger set doesn’t have much sympathy for any efforts to improve programs for seniors or veterans.”

[RWC] My newspapers must have those letters excised before I receive them. Seriously, though, I can’t recall ever reading a letter to the editor disapproving of fair treatment of veterans. As with all topics, I’m sure some kooks have written – and will write – letters saying “screw seniors and veterans,” but it would be a mistake to confuse kooks with most of us.

“They don’t believe they’ll ever get old.”

[RWC] It couldn’t possibly be that “the younger set” has more faith in their personal ability to provide for their retirement than in government’s ability to do so, could it Mr. Piroli? This is part of a common thread in his column that you are stupid if you don’t agree with Mr. Piroli.

The fact is, many of us baby boomers and later understood a long time ago that the probability was high that Socialist Security and Medicare could not meet their stated obligations in their current form. All Ponzi schemes fail. Many of us concluded we needed to take retirement responsibility into our own hands. That’s why my retirement depends not on whit on Socialist Security and Medicare or sticking my hand in the pockets of young wage earners.

1. It’s OK for Democrats to Use Racist Terms; Mike Gallagher; NewsMax.com; March 5, 2001.

2. Special Report – Political Grapevine; Brit Hume; Fox News Channel; February 23, 2004.