MyThoughtWorld.com

Let�s start with trivia of the last few days. Yesterday, the USC Trojans handily defeated the Michigan Wolverines. We can think of lots of reasons that Michigan lost (arguably one of these was uncreative play calling, another being rust); USC continues to be a dominant football program, a true dynasty. It is an important win for USC, but not a game to be remembered for the ages.

An amazing victory to be remembered for some years to come may, however, be Monday�s Tostitos Fiesta Bowl as Boise State with an amazing fake in overtime won with a gutsy two-point conversion making the undefeated #8 Boise State (13-0) winners over #10 Oklahoma (11-3) with a final score of 43-42. (Check out the YouTube link below to watch the OT)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kq7XdlSDzo&mode=related&search=

By now, you�ve seen and heard all the important retrospectives. Well, here�s one more. Every year, Life magazine has focused on the important people who have passed during the year. Half of them, most people if asked haven�t even heard of.

The passing of some of the most important and controversial figures of the year occurred right at the very end. For several days now, the focus has been on the passing of former Republican President Gerald Ford. To be honest, I know very little about Gerald Ford. I was alive during his presidency, but too little really to know anything about it. What I do know, is that he pardoned former Republican President Richard Nixon, which is controversial to this day. Many commentators have explained that the intent of this action was to help the nation move on. At any rate, Gerald Ford in the end will not be considered among historians to be one of the most important of American presidents, and will probably be subjugated to a middle or lower position in the overall list of American Presidents. We can only guess that the lowest position is enjoyed by former Democratic President Jimmy Carter.

This year it seems, the liberal media has been focused on how we are losing Iraq. If we were actually losing, we could offer most of the blame to the inept liberal media and the Democrats of congress. The Democrats have won an important victory this year. Now the question is, what are they planning on doing? I can only offer my opinion at this point that both parties are really in a state of disarray. The Democrats will be doing the leading soon, and the question is what do they really stand for? The same question must really be asked of the Republicans. Their lack of leadership in the past few years has ended their reign in congress, and it really is their own fault.

For a long time now, it has been trumpeted that the real war on terrorism should be focused on Afghanistan and the search for bin Laden, as well as the fact that there were never any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. My intelligence estimate on the situation is not one of an insider, but my opinion is as good as the journalist�s when it comes to this one. Does any journalist really know that there were never any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? I think a person would be gullible to think that Iraq didn't have some form of WMD.

However, our major concern for years has been the regime in Iraq which has been a force in working to destabilize the middle-east. Of course, I think the natural state of the middle-east is instability. You are welcome to disagree with me here, but in spite of our troop losses which really are terribly unfortunate, some major victories have been scored in Iraq.

Iraq has become a magnet for Al-Qaeda operatives and other would-be terrorists. It is probably now the foremost front on terror. Our troops have killed a lot of them. A few years ago Saddam�s terrible sons were killed. Saddam was also captured. Saddam is now dead, hung just a few days ago by his own people! And earlier in 2006, a major Al-Qaeda operative who had been wreaking havoc all over Iraq was killed, Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi.

If you still don�t think the war has been hugely successful, consider that through the war on terror, regime change in both Afghanistan and Iraq has taken place within a very short period of time. Folks, the world is better off without these ostracized regimes.

Through all of this, the liberal media�s enemy seems often to be America itself. The focus of this hatred is President Bush. Why? I believe that this hatred started even before the war. It began when President Bush won his first presidential election. It has been claimed ever since that he stole it. Since then, the media�s tireless rant has been against George W. Bush. I will admit, there are plenty on the Republican side�especially among conservatives who are no lovers of former President Clinton. I too would lay my thoughts on that presidency to rest, except that Mrs. Clinton will be an important force in the next presidential election, and that we ought to be reminded that another Clinton presidency would not be beneficial for our country. (I might also agree along those lines that a Jeb Bush presidency might not be healthy for our country either).

A note on the Clinton Presidency:
[I for one was very anti-political/apolitical at the time. It was my ignorant belief during his presidency that the president is nothing but a figurehead. The real power seems to be in congress. This only highlights both my apathy and ignorance during the Clinton presidency. The presidency plays a hugely important role in shaping American policy. It is my sincere belief that Clinton�s policies during his years as president were in many cases irresponsible and rather harmful to our country. Clinton�s legacy may well be that his presidency was stained by his ignominious actions in the Oval Office.]

After regime change and everything, I know the liberal media in their �impartiality� don�t seem to be too patriotic, but one of the humorous (or sad if you wish) side-effects of this situation is that it seems they are having trouble figuring out who they are going to root for now. Is it the insurgency? The militias? Iran? Syria? The Palestinians? Al-Qaeda? They love to use terms like �revolutionaries� and �freedom-fighters� but I think it's getting more and more difficult for them to figure out which ones those are. And now that Saddam has been executed, the breaking story is, �who leaked the execution?� Well, seeing that the liberal media types seem to have plenty of access to videos of the execution why the heck don�t they know? And now that the Iraqis are going to investigate this, why doesn�t our liberal media just help them out? Media lunacy continues.

Now, considering some final thoughts on Saddam and the trials. The whole process should remind us of the Nuremberg Trials of 1945. Recent pictures of the war criminals sitting in court in Iraq are not unlike those from 1945 of the Nazi war criminals. The biggest of the Nazis left to try was Hermann Goering, leader of the Luftwaffe, the Nazi air force. While 10 other war criminals were hung on Oct. 16, 1946, Goering committed suicide by a cyanide pill the day before, cheating his captors from carrying out the sentence. (Check out the BBC link below for more brief notes on the International Military Tribunals of World War II.)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/november/20/newsid_4356000/4356166.stm

Saddam too has gone the way of the tyrant. Unlike the others, either he did not intend to cheat the captors by committing suicide or he did not have the means to do so, but he is gone nonetheless. Saddam will never return. Regime change cannot be reversed. No longer will the people have to fear the return of Saddam. All things considered, the passing of an American President, Gerald Ford, and two infamous thugs�Saddam and Zarqawi make 2006 a significant year for change in the world. �Cal Samuel August

Categories: POP culture, politics
Tags: