Regarding the Surrender at any Cost Democrats and their Demands to Declare Defeat in the Face of Overwhelming Victory.
Here’s a novel idea: let’s win this war, OK? Let’s stay until we finish the job.
For the last few weeks the constant drumbeat among the chattering class has been for the United States to set an artificial timetable when we could bring our troops home. Beside being a terrible idea for Iraq. (Imagine our enemies planning sessions: “let’s just wait until _______, the withdrawal date, then completely destroy the fledgling democracy the Americans have wasted lives and treasure to create. Mohammed, you look like you need a vacation, why not meet me here a month before the pull out. I’ve always wanted to go to Disneyland.”)
And, isn’t it appropriate when that weasely socialist Dennis Kucinich appeared on Neil Cavuto’s show and said the withdrawal would be modeled on the pullout from Vietnam. The Democrats love to talk about Vietnam because it’s the only war they actually ever won. America lost, the Left and the Democrats won that one by blaming it on Nixon and calling it unwinnable because we didn’t have the will to fight a full-scale war and because we were under constant attack from our own Fifth Column: Jane Fonda, John Kerry, Tom Hayden, Walter Cronkite and the 1970s-era pro-Communist Democratic congress.
The Democrats are so fond of us losing. They want to humiliate American -- again --by declaring defeat in the face of victory. It’s a great way to diminish our standing in the world and blame it on Bush.
The Democrats crave humiliation, especially humiliation of our armed forces. They’re also into bondage too: pressing America to cede our sovereignty to supra-national institutions and treaties. Pretty kinky party, if you ask me.
To Kucinich and his ilk, our humiliation could be a way for us to atone for make a guantanamo psychopath detainee miss meal and defecate on himself.
I think it funny that we have to flagellate ourselves because some Muslim murderer defecated on himself. They do it all the time. As I understand it, the Sharia, the Muslim guide to the Promised Land prescribes under their rules governing hygene.
They say they support the troops, but what does that really mean if they don’t support the foreign policy. The calls for immediate surrender and withdrawal when we have accomplished so much are outrageous. I’m shocked that anyone would take them seriously.
It’s time someone called them on the tactics and their motives. I wish the White House would, but it’s not happening there.
The only solution is for us to help the Iraqis finish establishing their security and routing the terrorists. It’s a battlefield on the larger War on Terror, or as I like to call it War on Islamic Terror. But, Kucinish wants us to lose that one as well. He and his buddies on the hate-America Left don’t even believe there is a War on Terror. They put in in quotation marks as if to say (like a valley girl): whateva.
I’ve got an idea, let’s take the Democratic leadership and detain them for treason, is sedition still a crime? I can’t remember. At their private Tribunal, let’s also point out that they’re wimps, cry-babies and very much like the French and.
But, let’s not send them to Guantanamo, let’s build something with walls, where reporters can’t take pictures. How about in ANWAR, this way they can witness the oil drilling and see who actually keeps America working.
Thanks for letting me rant....
Greg, you are truly the sound of one hand clapping...
ReplyDeleteI don't really know what that means, I just wanted to say something
I too have nothing to say, but somebody had to say it.
ReplyDeleteI find your opinions to be some of the most un-democratic, frighteningly fascist ones i've had the misfortune to encounter. You fashion yourself a neo-con which seems to be a synonym for neo-mccarthyism.
ReplyDeleteI love america and everything it has stood for since its inception. What is one of the most basic tenent that the founding fathers worked for us to maintain? DISSENT! You ramble about communists yet you are advocating a zombified approval of an administration that has lied to the public over and over, with documented PROOF, no less. The dowing st. memos, anyone? Leaky Karl Rove?? All of this to start a war that was both illegal and unjustified, not mention the fact that tens of thousands of innocent lives have been lost and continue to be lost every day. Do you feel safer from terrorism? I sure don't. But still it is your right and the right of every american to support bush's foreign policy and his war. And it is also the right of every american to get angry, to protest, and to work for change. Yet, you think that asserting these basic rights means that you hate america. Tell me, how do your views on how people should be governed differ from that of the evil, totalitarian dictators you claim to hate?
Yes, america is being destroyed. Destroyed by "neo-cons", who equate freedom and liberty with fascism and hypocrisy.
There's a time for dissent and there's a time for elections and there's a time to accept that you might not have all the answers. To have faith in the system. I never felt that Clinton was a bad man, why has Bush been so demonized by your side? It's outrageous. If he walked on water tomorrow, the headline would be Bush fails to swim.
ReplyDeleteThere's also a time when protesting a military action just hurts the troops and the mission. Why not accept that you may be wrong and fight to change the power structure at the next election? I mean, it's not like Bush suspended the elections or anything, we held elections during War (I mean War on Terror) and your side lost, get over it.....
BTW, some of us believe that Iraq was a just war, because they were in violation of the 91 cease fire agreement. Some of us also believe that Bush did not lie and I can cite chapter and verse....even Joe Wilson, testifying before the 9-11 commission changed his tune, the Iraqis were looking for yellow cake in Niger. But, that's a pointilistic detail. Your mind is made up, and since you quote from Michael Moore, it's obvious you don't do much research, therefore arguing with you is pointless. BTW, did you ever wonder who Judith Miller is protecting in her jail cell? Hint: if it's not Karl Rove, it must be Joe Wilson.
Oh, and BTW, it was Howard Dean that drove me so far to the right. When he said: "George Bush is not my neighbor," I knew he did not embody basic, Ameican, democratic values.
Best regards and thanks for commenting
Greg Contreras
I know you're a nice guy greg and i don't mean any animosity.
ReplyDeleteYes, both our minds are made up. I could pick apart every sentence of rant if i had the time or desire and you could then do the same to me. So i will not comment any further on your views. I will just say that i did not quote michael moore and I too hate howard dean and am disappointed with the democratic leadership. But that doesn't change my core beliefs about right and wrong which can be found in the words of the right wing's savior jesus christ.
"You fashion yourself a neo-con which seems to be a synonym for neo-mccarthyism."
ReplyDeleteWell before we start using big-boy terms like neo-mccarthyism, I would suggest you do a little reading on the facts of McCarthy and indeed how liberals have turned an American Patriot into a virtual Nazi. Half of the things McCarthy has been accused of have been refuted and tossed out over and over. The negative connotation attached to Joe McCarthy is an ongoing liberal myth pure and simple.
When we speak of dissenting, we fail to realize the gay elite's loving acceptance of dissent from leftist radical activism (yes that was a joke). The fact is any conservative, let alone a gay one, is branded from the get-go with the typical leftist labels as "hater", "racist", "stupid", or "oppressor".
The left started this war of dissent in the first place by characterizing every conservative argument as an attempt to bring back slavery - and starting back with Joe McCarthy, as you see the first thing liberals will say to conservatives in a weak attempt to devalue productive conservative debate, is by labeling it "McCarthyism", thus excusing them of drumming up coherent debate to any issue specifically.
How about some new terms for ya: "Coulterism", "Horowiczism", "Bushism". As untrue as the context in which liberals will use such terms will be, it will at least create some fun new color to the table of unproductive debate. "McCarthyism" is getting a bit boring.
Dissenting from leftist activists or leftist agendas(or as known to liberals "McCarthyism") is simply a statement of "I don't agree with the opposition." But dissenting from your country's war efforts is another ball game and everyone knows it, sadly few admit it.
Steve
Chicago, IL
By the way when Jesus Christ is rejected by the ACLU or any far leftist organization, it ceases to be a situation in which the right wing claims possession of him, it's called a gift from the left who seems to want nothing to do with him or his doctrine whatsoever.
ReplyDeleteSteve