It's True: 'Liberals' Wanted Saddam to Beat U.S.

Newsmax.com ^ | April 18, 2003 | Newsmax.com

[RetiredArmy]

It's True: 'Liberals' Wanted Saddam to Beat U.S.

Gary Kamiya, executive editor of the left-leaning Internet journal Salon, confirms what some Americans have suspected: Liberals were cheering for the enemy in Iraq, the Washington Times pointed out today in an item headlined "Cheering the enemy."

"I have a confession: I have at times, as the war has unfolded, secretly wished for things to go wrong," Kamiya wrote. "Wished for the Iraqis to be more nationalistic, to resist longer. Wished for the Arab world to rise up in rage. Wished for all the things we feared would happen. I'm not alone: A number of serious, intelligent, morally sensitive people who oppose the war have told me they have had identical feelings."

But surely, you object, these "serious, intelligent, morally sensitive" liberals couldn't possibly favor a mass-murdering, torture-loving dictator? Surely they couldn't agree with "Latino studies" assistant professor Nicholas De Genova, who told a cheering crowd of appeasement activists at Columbia University that he "would like to see a million Mogadishus." Think again.

More dead American troops would have been preferred to the "larger moral negative" of a victory that boosted President Bush's chances for re-election, according to the Salon big.

"Many antiwar commentators have argued that once the war started, even those who oppose it must now wish for the quickest, least-bloody victory followed by the maximum possible liberation of the Iraqi people," Kamiya wrote. "But there is one argument against this: What if you are convinced that an easy victory will ultimately result in a larger moral negative — four more years of Bush, for example, with attendant disastrous policies, or the betrayal of the Palestinians to eternal occupation, or more imperialist meddling in the Middle East or elsewhere?

"Wishing for things to go wrong is the logical corollary of the postulate that the better things go for Bush, the worse they will go for America and the rest of the world."

Thus goes the reasoning at Salon, which is moderate compared to the hateful rantings of some U.S. leftists.

How ironic that the more these "liberals" reveal themselves to America, the more they boost a president they so despise.

[XBob]

50-"I have little faith in the Republican Party. I think they will blow the 2008 election, and when the Clintonistas get back in they will make sure they are NEVER out of power again. I do not think I am alone in that assessment, thus my prediction that we will have it out militarily with these slime bags around Inauguration Day, 2009, when it becomes brutally obvious that there is no alternative. I am not particularly optimistic that right will prevail in that struggle. I fear that the whole concept of an armed citizenry being the reset button on the Constitution has been overtaken by events and technology. "

===

I agree. Xlinton set up all the mechanisms and put them in place for Y2K, and thank goodness it didn't happen, as he was entirely prepared to become dictator. (We had numerous discussions of PDD's (Presidential Decision Directives) he put into place at the time, to do away with congress, etc.

I do not know of any which have been revoked by Bush 2, so we must start to prepare now to prevent Hitlery's election in 2008.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

But I don't think she is stupid enough to try to order the US military to attack Americans.

The Branch Davidians were Americans. Did you think those were FBI tanks? She has done it before and gotten away with it.

[des]

Prayers for your loved ones.

[nopardons]

Won't happen; you're delusional and worse. Get help...quickly...you need it !

[des]

Same pukes who whine about the tax cut--bitchin' to high heaven on 4/15

[Cannoneer No. 4]

They managed to blow the 1986, 1990, 1992, 1996, and to some extent 1998 elections.

So if you are waiting for 2008 for the next time the GOP 'blows it is a good sign' - that means 3 1 good election s in a row - 2002,2004,2006.

I'm talking Presidential elections. You have done little to dispel my scepticism.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

What would you recommend, Doc? You must be one helluva shrink to be so confident of your diagnosis. Imagine predicting future conflict! Why, that's just crazy! Say, Doc, your name isn't Napoleon by any chance, is it?

[nopardons]

I'm not a shrink, but you are a classic case and your problems are easily diagnosed by anyone with a modicum of common sense,knowledge, and persipication.

There have been others, on FR, before you ever joined, who spewed the same sort of tripe. It's juvenile and patently ridiculous ; not to mention irrational and illogical. Always spouted ny political naifs, and those who neither know, nor understand history, facts, people, and reality.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

Well, hero, your baiting and attempt to start a flame war has failed. No reply is necessary. You said nothing of value.

[omronnie]

These are people you know: Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Lee, Maxine Waters, Henry Waxman, etc. These people are the malignant cancer that's metastasizing through the body politic. They intend to achieve totalitarian revolution--and will likely do so--without having to fire a shot.

______________________________

Bingo ! Omronnnie

[DBtoo]

I totally agree with you.

[KSCITYBOY]

bump

[MeekOneGOP]

When they changed that pic on me, another FReeper gave me the new URL for their hateful/violence-advocating/murder-advocating picture, and told me the site was FR friendly. I think he meant they wouldn't change it to some other hateful anti-war/anti-Bush agenda picture.

[MeekOneGOP]

And in a quick scan of their site, I think he's probably right.

http://www.fairpress.org/

[XBob]

Too often, data, files, and links are lost, not to purposeful damage, but just to normal housekeeping.

John, do we have a copy of the picture on FR, or just a link? My new IExplorer keeps copies of the images on the files I save, but discards to 'temp' and then trash, images from websites I just visit.

This is a question I have been wondering for a long time, how safe are our observations (including links)?

[TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!]

[autoresponder]

some of these nutty traitorous statements are made to TV cameras or open mikes

Carl Limbacher nailed Slick with a tape recorder at his speech telling LI dems he let OBL go when he was offered to him

Been played on Hannity's WABC 770am NYC and nationwide radio show

Sound quality is lousy but Clinton can be heard on it

Short .wav clips of this garbage need to be made up

I embed them "autostart" bgsound on my emails I send out and it gets around the US and the globe fast

WE know andhear this stuff, but most Americans are horrified when they here this as my NYC lib sister was

911 made her very pro military but she still "hates" Bush and Cheney and their bigoil.com conspiracies

Put the Clinton Confession .wav (added parody in it too) on my FR Home Page below Clinton Denial

Check it out and listen, upload to your URLs and spread them out

Anyone got any Hillary screaming rant .wavs?

College grad speech in CT was great, voice raised higher, went nuts

Love to loop that .wav file over and over on my emails to FL, NC, PA, etc

Any sources on the web would be great