Proof in pictures!

Video courtesy of Skye at MidnightBlue.com

EVERY YEAR around this time, I survey my 11th-grade students to see what they remember about Sept. 11, 2001.

And, naturally, every year they remember less because they’re younger and further removed from the terrible events of that day. This piece is for them – and the generations after – so they never forget.
 

I so clearly remember Sept. 11, 2001.

There were big puffy clouds in the Pennsylvania skies and temperatures were in the high 70s. New Yorkers enjoyed the same pleasant skies, as did residents of Washington, D.C.

The day started routinely enough with Fox News on the TV as I readied myself for another eight-period journey of shaping young minds in my high-school English classroom.

I remember the urgency in my principal’s voice as he came over the PA system during second period with the shocking news that terror had come to our shores in the form of commercial jetliners hijacked by people we would later determine to be radical Islamists seeking the death and destruction of innocent and unassuming Americans in New York, Washington and, fatefully, western Pennsylvania.

My country was under attack.

I remember the tears on the faces of fellow teachers and the chaos and confusion even among the network anchors on TV as they scrambled to piece together the magnitude of this terroristic sucker punch to our nation’s financial and legislative capitals.

I remember watching on TV with utter dismay and disbelief that our borders had been so unsuspectingly breached – violated by an enemy we’d ignored or dismissed until that fateful morning when 2,993 Americans never returned home to their families. What did they do to provoke such wrath, such fury?

I remember images of desperate people dangling from the skyscraping windows of the World Trade Center, ironically escaping the towers’ collapse by desperately jumping to their certain deaths below as panicked New Yorkers in the streets ran for their lives to escape the devastation and bedlam of a city under siege.

I remember President Bush bowing his head in humble prayer to ask for the Almighty’s intercession in the face of such terror, and I remember fervently joining him in that desperate petition.

I remember the dust cloud that blurred the New York City skyline for weeks after 9/11, and the gaping hole in lower Manhattan where the towers once loomed as a symbol of our economic pre-eminence, proud beacons of our capitalistic energy and financial stability engendered from the convergence of toil and opportunity that is uniquely American.

I remember watching Howard Lutnick, CEO of Cantor-Fitzgerald, weep uncontrollably as he explained to a journalist that, simply because he’d taken his daughter to her first day of kindergarten, he was the sole survivor of his 658-person office occupying five of the top floors of One World Trade Center.

I REMEMBER, as my shock and sadness subsided along with the powdery grime in lower Manhattan, that my anger raged like a furious inferno.

Jihad had rattled my patriotic cage. I wanted retribution, justice for the unforeseen kick in our homeland’s gut. Eight years have quieted my rage somewhat, but time won’t ever erase the scars of America’s wounds.

And as our nation marks another 9/11 anniversary eight years later, I remember so that generations to come won’t ever forget.

Jane Gilvary is a student in the graduate writing program at St. Joseph’s University and a public-school teacher.

After all the rhetoric is put aside, one principle ran through President Obama’s speech tonight: that increased government involvement in health care can solve its problems.

Many Americans fundamentally disagree with this idea. We know from long experience that the creation of a massive new bureaucracy will not provide us with “more stability and security,” but just the opposite. It’s hard to believe the President when he says that this time he and his team of bureaucrats have finally figured out how to do things right if only we’ll take them at their word.

Our objections to the Democrats’ health care proposals are not mere “bickering” or “games.” They are not an attempt to “score short term political points.” And it’s hard to listen to the President lecture us not to use “scare tactics” when in the next breath he says that “more will die” if his proposals do not pass.

In his speech the President directly responded to concerns I’ve raised about unelected bureaucrats being given power to make decisions affecting life or death health care matters. He called these concerns “bogus,” “irresponsible,” and “a lie” — so much for civility. After all the name-calling, though, what he did not do is respond to the arguments we’ve made, arguments even some of his own supporters have agreed have merit.

In fact, after promising to “make sure that no government bureaucrat …. gets between you and the health care you need,” the President repeated his call for an Independent Medicare Advisory Council — an unelected, largely unaccountable group of bureaucrats charged with containing Medicare costs. He did not disavow his own statement that such a group, working outside of “normal political channels,” should guide decisions regarding that “huge driver of cost … the chronically ill and those toward the end of their lives….” He did not disavow the statements of his health care advisor, Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, and continuing to pay his salary with taxpayer dollars proves a commitment to his beliefs. The President can keep making unsupported assertions, but until he directly responds to the arguments I’ve made, I’m going to call him out too.

It was heartening to hear the President finally recognize that tort reform is an important part of any solution. But this concession shouldn’t lead us to take our eye off the ball: the Democrats’ proposals will not reduce costs, and they will not deliver better health care. It’s this kind of “healthy skepticism of government” that truly reflects a “concern and regard for the plight of others.” We can’t wait to hear the details on that; we look forward to working with you on tort reform.

Finally, President Obama delivered an offhand applause line tonight about the cost of the War on Terror. As we approach the anniversary of the September 11th attacks and honor those who died that day and those who have died since in the War on Terror, in order to secure our freedoms, we need to remember their sacrifices and not demonize them as having had too high a price tag.

Remember, Mr. President, elected officials work for the people. Forcing a conclusion in order to claim a “victory” is not healthy for our country. We hear you say government isn’t always the answer; now hear us — that’s what we’ve been saying all along.

- Sarah Palin

Jones claims that he didn’t realize what he was signing when he put his name on the 9-11 petition. Does he really think that anyone believes that? And even if we could believe Jones on this, do we want someone with the judgment of a 10-year old making decisions for our country? What I mean to say is, do we want yet another person with the judgment of a 10-year old making decisions for our country?

The White House did not ask for Mr. Jones’ resignation; at least not that we know of. If they had, it would have at least provided the appearance that Mr. Obama had wanted to distance himself from such a radical. Van Jones tendered his resignation in martyrdom. In his mind, and sadly in the not-so-stable minds of others, he is a victim. But if we are to put all of this in it’s proper context, by his outrageous statements and actions, Mr. Jones’ temerity allowed us to see his transparency. And for that, conservatives are grateful.

I have never heard a better explanation of what conservatives want than what Grover Norquist articulated at the RightOnline Conference in Pittsburgh, PA.