Skip to comments.W'S FOES FLIP OUT
Posted on 12/02/2003 12:11:07 AM PST by nickcarrawayEdited on 05/26/2004 5:17:35 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
IT might be best for President Bush's opponents to drop the subject of his Thanksgiving trip to Baghdad. The more they talk about it, the longer it will remain in the public eye - which will only benefit Bush. But some on the increasingly loony Left just can't help themselves, because their compulsion to rant and rave and spew conspiracy theories overwhelms any practical political common sense they may once have possessed. On the Web site Counterpunch, edited by the veteran leftist journalist Alexander Cockburn, a man named Wayne Madsen announced on Saturday in a piece called "Wag the Turkey" that the whole trip was a fraud because he had figured out the president actually landed in Baghdad at 5:30 a.m. on Thursday. "Our military men and women," Madsen complained, "were downing turkey, stuffing, cranberry sauce, pumpkin pie and non-alcoholic beer at a time when most people would be eating eggs, bacon, grits, home fries and toast."
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
I disagree with the comparison of Bush haters to Clinton haters. We Clinton "haters" only pointed out his illegal activity and the abuse of power. He was impeached for goodness sakes.
I don't remember GOP Congressmen making the over the top statements about Clinton. Did Pat Robertson say stupid things? Sure. But so does Al Franken against Bush.
The "right" was ticked off with Clinton and his scandal after scandal after scandal. He broke the law. Nixon never was convicted or held in contempt of court. Clinton used the IRS and the FBI against his enemies. Nixon only vocalized his wish to do the same.
Clinton did things illegal and got a pass, Bush has not and gets the blame from idiots that would put on knee pads for Clinton.
And when he walks out of a Church with a Bible in his hand with his family, it's not a phoney prop while he gets a BJ that afternoon from a bimbo that is infatuated and fearful of his power.
Oh, I can almost hear the angry screams from Democrat cloakrooms now: Can't these Fedayeen Saddamites do anything right?!?!?! First, these idiots lose both Gulf Wars wars (the Washington Post says losing the war was really Saddam's Master Plan all along, but Democrats, stunned by Saddam's crushing defeat, aren't sold on that), now this?!
U.S. troops, despite being terribly demoralized by Bush's policy of fighting terrorism (see Reuters), massively creamed at least 54 Iraqi Fedayeen Sunday, using tank and cannon fire, repulsing a series of coordinated ambushes in the northern city of Samarra, a hot-bed of anti-U.S. anger almost as fierce as in Hollywood or Boston. Media reports are a little confusing, though: First they reported this as a 'MASSACRE OF INNOCENT CIVILIANS BY BUSH!!'. These innocent civilians were so innocent they were wearing Saddam's Fedayeen militia uniforms (Halloween, maybe?) while innocently unleashing a barrage of automatic weapons fire, mortar shells and innocent rocket-propelled grenades. Later, the media -- fearing nobody'd believe these 'innocent civilians' were 'innocent', or that the whole thing could make Bush look good -- changed tactics, claiming there was no massacre at all, or that there was a massacre but that it was Massacre Lite, with only 6 Iraqis killed. Later the media changed tactics yet again, claiming that 'BUSH DELIBERATELY TARGETED 6 CIVILIANS, LEAVING BRAVE FEDAYEEN FIGHTERS UNSCATHED!!'. (Stay tuned for the next minor revision: BRAVE HILLARY LEADS U.S. TROOPS IN FIERCE BATTLE, SIMULTANEOUS AMBUSHES BY HALLIBURTON EXECUTIVES SUCCESSFULLY REPULSED!!').
Look, I'm not questioning Hillary!'s patriotism here. I understand that, with Democrats, patriotism is like going to church -- happens, by accident, once every lifetime.
Okay, that wasn't fair. Especially since Democrats have a 'Don't ask, don't tell' policy when it comes to patriotism. Don't ask questions about my patriotism, I won't tell or say anything patriotic. Just because Democrats don't act patriotic doesn't mean they're not patriotic. They just can't serve openly as patriots in the Democrat Party.
(To be fair, Democrats deny they hate America. They say they really love America -- really! Next thing they'll tell us is how much they love Fox News.)
The Sunday firefight came as a heavy blow to Democrats, already reeling from Bush's surprise Thanksgiving visit with U.S. troops in Baghdad. (The press, which accused Bush of being a coward on 9/11, accused Bush of risking his life for a photo-op). Till Sunday, the Democrat Party -- a French possession -- crowed that November had been the deadliest month in Iraq for Coalition troops. They said it was all Bush's fault for invading Iraq in the first place, then refusing to enact the Hillary! Plan (invade Iraq even more by sending more troops; U.S. forces there now are doing a crummy job, says Gen. Hillary!, so send more U.S. forces to help them not do such a crummy job; wait longer to handover power) or the Wesley Clark Plan (don't wait longer to handover power -- do it now, then blow up the Chinese embassy and say out-dated CIA maps made you do it) or the Dennis Kucinich Plan (find a wife, ship her to Iraq, have the stunning Helen Thomas look alike scare U.S. troops out) or the John F. Kerry Plan (whatever Dominque de Villepin-head says) or the John Edwards Plan (release Gitmo inmates, file lawsuits against the Patriot Act -- which Edwards voted for but says he didn't really mean it or didn't really read it -- address the needs of average, hard-working Fedayeen) or the Dick Gephardt Plan (universal health care for all Iraqis) or the Al Sharpton Plan (Sharpton's plan is stuffed in a garbage bag, smeared with dog feces, and 'I hate Jews as much as Saddam does!' scrawled on it) or the Carol Moseley Braun Plan (Iraq was a diversion from the War On Terror; Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11! We need to go after the Saudi royal family in North Korea!) or the Howard Dean Plan -- The prescription for dealing with all foreign enemies (take 2 tablets of appeasement and see me in the morning.) In Iraq, Dean's the favorite candidate of Fedayeen guys with grenade-launchers in their pick-up truck-bombs.
(On Hardball with Chris Matthews Monday night, Dean denied being the candidate of anger. His candidacy is based on hope, he says. The hope that people get angry enough to vote for Dean and vote Bush out).
Don't get me wrong. Howard Dean has a very compelling personal story to tell. He says he didn't serve in Vietnam because his back hurt, but that wouldn't keep a young Howard Dean, profile in courage, from serving his country, spending 80 days skiing heroically up and down Aspen Mountain, Colorado, immediately after getting deferment. Braving a bad back, he defended Western values along the slopes of Ajax Mountain, doing hazardous guard duty from a Hotel balcony, watching for enemies, with nothing more than a wood-burning fireplace, a stereo system, private bath, spacious living room, washer/dryer, a breakfast bar, private parking. Dean still relives those moments of heroism and hardship even today, 3 decades later. That grueling 80 mission was seared into his memory. What a remarkable, uplifting life story!
(By the way, in case you haven't heard, John F. Kerry, who served in Vietnam, also served in Vietnam).
Surging at 4 percent in New Hampshire, Wesley Clark says he has the best Iraq plan, by far. The Clark Plan would end suicide bombings in Iraq (would be nice if he'd share such dazzling brilliance with Israel, Turkey, etc.) Appearing on CNN's Late Edition Sunday, Clark said 2 years ago some top Pentagon guy told him of a 'grand strategy' in the Bush administration to go after states like Syria, Iran, Sudan, Lebanon. How silly of Bush -- as if terrorism were a global phenomenon. Al-Qaeda never spread beyond Afghanistan, say Democrats. Clark was so concerned the Pentagon guy was divulging top-secret information, he wrote everything he heard from the Pentagon guy in his book (which keeps the top-secret information top-secret since no one's reading Clark's book).
What he heard, Clark told Wolf Blitzer, who interviewed him, "was an insight ... into the kinds of policy discussions that were going on. And it was a chilling insight...I realized that this was an administration which was still focused on the idea of going after states, going after states instead of terrorists." (Again, how silly of Bush to bomb Serbia! As if the once ruling Taliban there had anything to do with bin Laden and terrorism; we know it was Slobodan Milosevic of Afghanistan who plotted 9/11...oh, wait). Clark added that Bush administration policy was to go "after states with conventional military power instead of using the combined agencies of the law enforcement and intelligence to go after terrorists." (Knock, knock. Cave door swings open. Mr. bin Laden, we have a search warrant.)
"General," said Blitzer, "you make it sound as if states don't finance, support, work with terrorist organizations."
It was then that brilliant Welsey Clark recalled a country called Iran. "But Osama bin Laden really is not a state-sponsored terrorist," observed the genius Clark. Bin laden, he added, "hasn't been sponsored by a state..." It was then that brilliant Wesley Clark recalled a country called Afghanistan.
Afghanistan, the Taliban, al-Qaeda, Tora-Bora -- it all began to come back to him. Clark still can't remember getting canned, though. Other than that, a truly superb mind!
(Next you'll hear Clark say that since the 9/11 hijackers came from Saudi Arabia and Egypt, we need to attack North Korea. To be fair, Clark has a footing on foreign and defense matters, but his foot is stuck in a quagmire.)
Small wonder this guy's still in retirement.
My two cents...
Nah, they're too steeped in anger and irrationality to notice.
You know, although a lot of us hated Clinton, there was a fringe group of nutty Clinton-haters that went over the edge. Those were the people who thought he was going to ship us all to reeducation camps, etc. (Not that he wouldn't have LIKED to do so, but the idea isn't practical.)
I think this article is a good one because the left has far more of the nutty group than we do. For non-political types, the lunacy is a turn-off. This is why my daughter can't stand Howard Dean.
We have a winner!
You are so right about that. I guess you can say Dean's a Left-winger from the Left-wing of the Left-wing Democrat Party ;-)
I did not start out 1992 or even 1993 hating the man I dubbed Little Big Fraud-- rather, it was earned by him one step after another as he "held" office- or as Rush used to put it, "America Held Hostage..."
I started out one of my canned rants against the Clintons this way:
Like the chains on Marley's Ghost
That "clinton legacy" has been forged...
by sordid link....
...because that is the way my dislike was earned- one sordid link at a time.
The very best thing for Bush would have been not going while Hillary was there. What was overshadowed was her lack of welcome due to his enormous welcome.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.