When Harry Met Veto
by JohnHuang2
Democrats woo voters with Bush attacks, read the AP headline, bringing the stunning news that Democrats at their state convention in California last weekend attacked Bush. The nut gathering attracted most of the party honchos running for president, most of whom think the ticket to looking ‘presidential’ is to stand very close to Dennis Kucinich. Media reports say all 2,000 delegates were wild over Barack Hussein Obama — which makes this the largest gathering of Hussein loyalists since Saddam’s last convention.
Speaking at the kook gathering, Obama denounced Bush’s conduct of the war and “vowed to ‘turn the page on this Iraq disaster.’” Obama was trying to turn the page on that other disaster (a real one) — his debate performance last week. Asked by Brian Williams how he’d respond if America got attacked by al-Qaeda again, Obama said his first decisive act would be to “make sure we’ve got an effective emergency response.” Yes, check in with FEMA.
At the convention, ‘centrist’ Hillary Clinton “denounced President Bush’s conduct of the war,” screaming that Bush’s decision to launch the Iraq war she voted for was based on faulty evidence and will go down in history as “’one of the darkest blots on leadership we’ve ever had.’” And when it comes to presidential stains, Hillary knows what she’s talking about.
In response to repeated terrorist attacks by Islamic radicals, Bill Clinton fixed the problem by going after the Serbs in Yugoslavia, so it’s a wonder we still have terrorism in the world.
Hillary insists on a ‘timetable for withdrawal’ of troops, just as she insists on a timetable for withdrawal of her maiden name from campaign press releases every time an election’s around the corner. One report says Hillary Rodham Clinton now “identifies herself as ‘Hillary Clinton’ in campaign (material) and on her website,” which book author Laurie Scheuble says is just Hillary “conforming to the social norm.” Hillary ‘conformed’ suddenly in ‘92, again in ‘96 and now that she’s almost hit 60. Homicidal Islamic maniacs are trying to kill us so Hillary’s action plan is a name change.
At the convention, Chris Dodd walked up to the podium and stunned the crowd when he . . . denounced Bush’s conduct of the war. Also doing a lot of Bush denouncing was Dennis Kucinich, Bill Richardson and John Edwards, who squeezed his speech in between appointments at the beauty parlor.
Every one of the Democrat presidential contenders are constantly denouncing Bush like this, and if this drumbeat goes on much longer, Bush will be out of office in 2009! Forget a third term.
But it’s not just the nuts the Democrat Party is running as “serious” candidates for president doing the denouncing. John Murtha said Sunday on CBS’s Face the Nation that one way to pressure Bush to surrender in Iraq is by impeachment, which means if Bush doesn’t surrender you’d get 8+ years of Dick Cheney, so good luck with that. Murtha’s winning war plan is for the U.S. to ‘redeploy’ troops from Iraq to surrounding areas, like Okinawa. Murtha’s lunacy is so obvious, Democrats noticed it, which prompted them to pick Steny Hoyer as majority leader to avoid further embarrassment. Democrats thought they had stuck a fork in Murtha, but little did the Murtha forkers know he’d still be touting himself as Napoleon.
Murtha was apparently inspired by that other Frenchman, Harry Reid, who recently declared that “this war is lost and the surge is not accomplishing anything.” Hours after his upbeat assessment, Reid ‘clarified’ his remark on the Senate floor by saying he disagreed with himself, noting that the war is lost only as long as Bush keeps ignoring Reid’s fabulous war plan. Chuck Schumer a few days later clarified Reid’s clarification further, taking out of mothball that old chestnut that Democrats really, really do “support” the war, so long as it’s just against al-Qaeda in Tora Bora, even though all the facts show the Democrats’ Tora bros in Iraq ARE al-Qaeda.
Liberals love to hear themselves complain about a mythical “civil war” in Iraq. And they want us to surrender. Who should we surrender to? The Sunnis? Aren’t the Sunnis civil warring against the Shiites? Should we surrender to the Shiites? Or how about a compromise — surrender to both Sunnis and Shiites?
If you look at the big picture, Bush’s “failed” war has ended up with Sunnis and Shiites and Kurds in a government formed by Sunnis and Shiites and Kurds, after warring for thousands of years. In Anbar Province, almost all Sunni tribes have joined the Great Satan in kicking the crap out of al-Qaeda, exactly as the experts said they wouldn’t. The Democrats’ masterful plan is to “redeploy” the bombs-for-virgins terror in Baghdad to the streets of New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, etc. Better to fight ‘em here than over there! Yeah, that’ll work.
Another “argument” is that Iraq is just like Viet Nam. America lost over 58,000 troops in Viet Nam, most at the hands of those darling communist “guerrillas” (the only gun owners Democrats ever had the hots for). America has lost roughly 3,300 troops in Iraq over the last 4 years. At this rate, Democrats would have to wait over 70 years to get their new Viet Nam in Iraq. It’s noteworthy that Harry Reid is a former amateur boxer in his late 60s who looks like a former amateur boxer in his late 90s, so hanging on for another 70 years is not an option, so he pushes the Iraq White Flag funding bill through to bring on surrender beginning no later than October 1, 2007. But the only certainty here is that it certainly faced a veto.
As noted in published reports, 3,000 people were killed by 19 Sunni “insurgents” in New York, Pennsylvania and America’s capital on 9/11, and while Democrats can’t recall any details of the episode, Bush certainly can. Five years on, no terrorist attack on U.S. soil, just a series of rollicking attack videos bragging about Michael Moore is all the Jihad boys can muster here these days, no doubt the result of warmonger Bush’s “failed” flypaper strategy in Iraq and Afghanistan. Al-Qaeda never got the Reid memo that they’re winning. But Reid is about to get the Bush memo which says, ‘Go ahead, punk. Make my day.’
Anyway, that's...
My two cents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
~~~~~~~~~~