Why do Dems oppose war?

The Washington Times ^ | Bob Beckel

[FairOpinion]

I have been a card-carrying liberal Democrat all my life, and proud of it. I've always believed that one of the great foundation blocks of liberalism is that we are committed to helping those who cannot help themselves. From Selma, Ala., to Capetown, South Africa, liberals have been at the forefront of the war against racism. From the picking fields of Florida, to support for Mothers of the Missing, liberals have waged war against the oppression of children.

[metesky]

Isn't this also the guy who was trying to "turn" electors in the 2000 election?

[OldFriend]

LIBERALS ARE A BUNCH OF AMERICA HATING LEFTISTS

[8mmMauser]

OK, I have one for you.

Democrats are socialists. Can anyone deny this??

Ba'ath party are socialists. Can anyone deny this??

Socialists are socialists. I rest my case.

[randita]

They all agree that Saddam Hussein is evil, but believe that thousands of Iraqi civilians will be killed by our troops and bombs.

I absolutely do not buy this. If it were truly the case that the left opposes this war because they don't want civilian casualties, why didn't they come out in force against the wars in Bosnia and in Kosovo? I predict that in the end, far, far more civilians were killed by us in those wars than will be killed by us in Iraq.

The bottom line is that the left intensely hates Bush and as a reflexive action, will oppose vehemently anything and everything Bush does or stands for. The hate is visceral and defies rational explanation, despite Beckel's attempt to dissect it.

[Snowy]

The Dems oppose it because they are envious that Bush is running the war instead of their guy. If the war happened under a democrat administration it would be touted as a victory for human rights, and the media would be playing right along.

No more calls! We have a winner!

[wgeorge2001]

Liberalism is not a political movement; it is sickness of the heart and mind and betrays ALL who are deceived by it. It potrays tolerance but manifests intolerance; it potrays love and goodness but manifests hate and cruelty.It claims the high ground of morality but manifests immorality and death to children(abortion)and adults( sexual diseases and suicide). It is rooted in the dead soil of deceit,lust and self indulgence at mankind's expense. It is a blind movement led by blind leader's who hope to build a utopian empire on the quicksand of man's concept of man. It is godless,hateful and intolerant of Christians; I know. I was a young liberal once,until I came to the truth. Jesus Christ is truth. Read the bible starting in the N.T., find the truth.The basis of liberalism is the worship of self and always produces facism, communism or totalitarianism. Begin by realizing just one thing;
"The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked:who can know it?" Je.17:9
The lies of liberalism are based on the false concept of the heart of man as being good. This is a lie that has destroyed many good people. No lie is of the truth. Saddam is a killer and evil butcher of men;his time has come and God has sent an avenger of blood on Saddam; when a man murder a man; by man shall he be killed; God created man in his own image.

[Roscoe]

The reference to 'Shrub' was an attempt at humour

Horsecrap.

[dfwgator]

Liberal Democrats oppose this war for one thing and one thing only. Bush!!! When Clinton called for regime change in Iraq, the Democrats agreed with him, they agreed with bombing Iraq. When Bush is in the White House, suddenly Saddam is a hero to them.

[saminfl]

The wrong reasons? Some sort of wooly-headed warm-and-fuzzy revenger for September 11 - when there appears to be no logical nexus between the two events.

But you don't know if there is "no logical nexus between the two events." I suggest you cannot make that claim because you lack sufficient data to do any analysis. Remember, intelligence data sometimes has to be limited because to reveal it would also reveal the source. I don't think you can make an arbitrary judgment as to whether there is or is not a "logical nexus" because your data is limited.

In my case, I preferto trust President Bush because he appears to be a man of great character after we had eight years of a man with no character and who would not know the truth if it hit him in the face.

[Protagoras]

Our enemies will learn to fear us. The lessons have begun.

Saddam Hussein

[bmwcyle]

Beware of wolfs in sheep clothing. Time will tell if he really believes what he says.

[Roscoe]

Drawing a moral equivalence between the United States and Saddam Hussein? How special.

[jriemer]

The author misses the point. The reason why liberals and leftists alike despise the War on Terror and the War on Iraq is because it is the Right Thing To Do (TM) and is the brain child of a President posessing intellectual honesty and moral certainty. These factors terrify the left moreso than tumbling skycrapers and airplanes hurtling into the ground. They cannot advance their cause without the corruption of our hearts and minds. Their agenda cannot stand the scrutiny of a sound intellect, an honest heart or a moral conviction.

We experienced the exact same behavior from the left during the the Reagan administration. There was outrage and bluster that Reagan would take us to the edge of nuclear war with the Soviets. Anti-nuke (anti-American) protestors marched throughout Europe and parts of American cities just like today. The Berlin Wall fell. The Soviets splintered. The protracted ideological war between American conversatism and the leftist world continued.

Nothing has changed if you happened to be a President with intellectual honesty and moral certainty. In the end, victory will be certain but it may not be swift.

[Protagoras]

Drawing a moral equivalence between the United States and Saddam Hussein?

Drawing a moral equivalence between you and Saddam Hussein.

The statement was never made by any person who represents this country. It therefore has it's proper attribution, YOU.

[Roscoe]

Drawing a moral equivalence between you and Saddam Hussein.

Gee, I haven't gassed any Kurdish villagers lately.

[jpl]

Beckel is also the same guy who admitted that the television networks' early and erroneous call for Gore in Florida (when voting was still going on in the panhandle), cost Bush between 8,000 and 10,000 additional votes.

[Protagoras]

Gee, I haven't gassed any Kurdish villagers lately.

Only because you haven't had the opportunity.

[Michael.SF.]

I've been here far longer than YOU have been ! This is a CONSERVATIVE forum; primarily for AMERICANS ; neither of which you are. It has NEVER been all that " civil " a plave, as you've noted ; however, we tend to join together and oppose ALL Liberals.

I have to voice my disagreement with the above statement. Although I am relatively new here, I do find it to be a Forum which is in general, more receptive to those who respectfully voice dissent, something not allowed on the Liberal boards (DU, DTR).

I posed for a short time as a "blue Dog" style democrat on the DTR board and soon was outed for the conservative that I am. The vile anger and hate that was directed at me by those "open minded" Liberals, put anything I have ever seen here to shame.

Although I oppose the Liberal agenda, there are some Liberals who can be respected. One that comes to mind is the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan. He was a man of character and ideals, but he was also one willing to diasagree with the leftists, when it made sense.

What is really an embarrassment to the Liberal movement, beyond the fact that the ideology of Liberalism has never and will never be fully successful in its implementation as a governing entity, is the total lack of character and integrity displayed by the Clinton's combined with the party's continued support of them. This support, which has now morphed into rabid hatred of George Bush, defies the original intentions of Liberalism itself.

As far as I am concerned, sadim, your opinions are welcome here, but your Molly Ivinesque 'shrub' reference is both insulting and unoriginal.

I would also add, that any reference made to Bush as being "unelected", will only serve to illustrate a rabid Anti Bush sentiment and a total lack of a grasp of the facts concerning the election of 2000 (if you wish to discuss that subject, then I would invite a private mailing).

[Roscoe]

Wow, you're really shoveling it this morning, Protagoras.

[Ditter]

RE: post # 21 Every liberal I ever knew considered himself/herself superior in every way to conservatives.