Gail Collins, "The Luv Guv’s Last Stand": My House Is Hit by a Tsunami

What happened this morning? My daughter woke up early and turned on "E!". News of the Kardashian Family washed over the house like a tsunami and had me struggling against the giant wave, gasping for air, trying to avoid losing consciousness. Meanwhile, my youngest son had also risen, and instead of making sandwiches for school, he had turned on his computer and was back to online game playing.

I could feel my foot ensnared on the bottom and doubted whether I could make it back to the surface.

"Don't pay any attention to dad," my daughter said to my son, as she prepared me a cup of coffee, the only sedative occasionally known to work on this bedlamite. "He woke up on the wrong side of bed."

The wrong side of bed? Ordinarily we're talking about the wrong side of the floor.

In her latest New York Times op-ed entitled "The Luv Guv’s Last Stand" (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/02/opinion/collins-the-luv-guvs-last-stand.html?_r=0), Gail Collins decided to add to my anguish with a description of former South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford’s campaign for Congress. Collins tells us that Sanford has run "a full-page ad comparing himself to the defenders of the Alamo" and quotes this buffoon as saying:

"I’m outnumbered right now but will fight to the end toward freedom and financial sanity in Washington so important to sustaining it."

The Alamo? Travers, Crockett, Bowie and the other defenders of the Alamo will remain heroes for me until the day I die. Sanford would have us believe that he is a modern day Davy Crockett? Don't go there, Governor.

The tsunami is dragging me down again, hurling me into sunken debris and detritus.

Why did Gail feel the need to add to my emotional distress this morning with this piece of fluff, replete with sexual innuendo? Is there nothing else important to address from the pulpit of the editorial page of The Times? Gail explains:

"Right now in New York, we need all the guidance we can get on this point, since we’re facing the distinct possibility of having to live through an Anthony Weiner for Mayor campaign."

Gail should take Anthony's weiner elsewhere. Me? I'm troubled by something else.

The Obama administration systematically lied to the American people in its effort to portray the deadly attack on the Benghazi consulate as the consequence of a "spontaneous" demonstration, and now we are being told that it's ancient history.

More recently, however, it was leaked to us that the Boston Marathon bombing was the "lone wolf" work of two deranged brothers. Ignore Tamerlan Tsarnaev's trip to Dagestan. Ignore the DNA of others on pieces of the bombs. Ignore the arrests of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's friends.

A "lone wolf" terror attack? Poppycock. You don't believe me? Even Arnold, my Anatolian Shepherd, knows better.

Why does the Obama administration again feel the need to avoid addressing the ugly reality of Islamic fanaticism underlying this latest horror?

You certainly won't find an answer in Gail's frivolous opinion piece.

However, according to a new Pew Research Center survey of Muslims around the globe (http://www.pewforum.org/Muslim/the-worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-exec.aspx):

"Few U.S. Muslims voice support for suicide bombing or other forms of violence against civilians in the name of Islam; 81% say such acts are never justified, while fewer than one-in-ten say violence against civilians either is often justified (1%) or is sometimes justified (7%) to defend Islam. Around the world, most Muslims also reject suicide bombing and other attacks against civilians. However, substantial minorities in several countries say such acts of violence are at least sometimes justified, including 26% of Muslims in Bangladesh, 29% in Egypt, 39% in Afghanistan and 40% in the Palestinian territories."

Only 1% of US Muslims "say violence against civilians is often justified" and only 7% say that such violence "is sometimes justified"? How reassuring . . .