Talk Back || Our History || Troop Support || Patriotic Days || Regional Recipes || Traveling America || Our Government ||

United States Flag   Stand Beside Her.com

WELCOME

HOME


FREE Newsletter!


Talk Back


Troop Support


Patriotic Days


Our History


Traveling America


Regional Recipes


Learning Resources


Contact Us


Democrats Suspend Pesky Free Speech Rights For Ambassadors
By Chuck Hyde, Editor of StandBesideHer.com

President Bush’s nominee for Ambassador to Belgium Sam Fox is being rejected by the US Senate, forcing Bush to instill him in a recess appointment. After the appointment the Democrats, led by John Kerry, Chris Dodd, and Bob Casey, are continuing to fight citing an obscure rule over pay. Since the ambassador was appointed under specific circumstances he cannot be paid. Mr. Fox has agreed to serve in the post without pay but the Democrats, ever mindful of following the rules, are trying to get the Government Accounting Office to block the appointment based on a rule that says that employees in jobs that have a mandated pay cannot serve as volunteers. So much for trying to cut the federal deficit. Next thing you know, they will try to sneak money for spinach farmers into a bill for funding the troops.

What dastardly deed did Mr. Fox commit that disqualifies him from serving as an ambassador? What did he do that has the Democrats up in arms and willing to go to such great lengths to protect the US from such an unqualified candidate?

Was Mr. Fox a federal judge impeached by the US Senate (controlled by Democrats at the time) for taking bribes to fix cases? No if he had done this he would be appointed to serve on the influential House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and, only in the bizarre universe of the Democratic Party, to serve on the House Rules Committee. So obviously he did something worse than Alcee Hastings (D, FL).

Was Mr. Fox caught with $90,000 of bribe money in his freezer at home? No, if he had done this he would have been appointed to the powerful House Ways and Means Committee and the House Committee on the Budget by the Democrats. You would think a member of these two financial committees would know of better places to keep his funds than in the freezer. So Mr. Fox did something worse than getting caught with cold cash like William Jefferson (D, LA) did.

Did Mr. Fox have sex with a male page? He did not. If he had he would continue to serve another 12 years in congress and be mourned at his death by high ranking Democratic Senators and Congressmen for his contributions to society and upstanding character. So clearly Mr. Fox did something far worse than Gerry Studds (who doesn’t love that name) (D, MA).

Did Mr. Fox “accidentally” drive a 28 year old woman into a pond and wait 10 hours to call the police? Did Mr. Fox generally lead a life of drunken loutishness? No, if he had he would be a highly regarded senior Democratic Senator for 43 years appointed to the Judiciary Committee and the Sub-Committee on Public Health and Safety. You can’t make this stuff up. No, by all accounts Mr. Fox has led a more respectable life than Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Senator Kerry’s fellow Massachusetts Senator.

So what exactly did Mr. Fox do that the American society needs to be protected from? Mr. Fox donated money to the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth campaign. This was an organization formed to highlight questions about circumstances surrounding John Kerry’s service in the Vietnam War. This group was very controversial and there were considerable charges on both sides on what the truths about their claims were. Some in the Democratic Party, including Kerry himself, have blamed the group for his loss in the 2004 Presidential race. While they may have had an effect, the greater culprit in the loss was Kerry himself.

The reality is that the only reason Mr. Fox is being blocked as the US Ambassador to Belgium is for exercising his right to free speech. He did not accept bribes, he did not molest and commit statutory rape against an underage boy, he did not cause the death of a young lady, he did nothing but make a campaign contribution. The Senators opposing his appointment are not even making an accusation about an improper contribution, by all accounts it was entirely legal. He simply had the audacity to offend a poor loser Senator who does not have the intestinal fortitude to look in a mirror and see the real reason the 2004 election was blown. That’s what’s on my mind.

About The Author: Chuck Hyde is editor of StandBesideHer.com. He is also a husband and father of two teenage boys and a younger daughter. His family lives in the northern Midwestern rural United States, where they enjoy camping, fishing, and other outdoor activities together. Chuck is a Registered Nurse in an inner city emergency room and has had a lifelong addiction to politics.

COMMENTS: Do you have a comment about this editorial? Email Chuck here to share it.

Remember 9-11

HOME || Troop Support || Our Government || Talk Back || Patriotic Days ||
Our History || Traveling America || Regional Recipes || Privacy Statement || Contact Us

Copyright 2007-2008 Stand Beside Her-Seeds of Knowledge -All Rights Reserved