Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

3.3.02 | Mia T

Posted on 03/03/2002 7:42:38 PM PST by Mia T


By Mia T, 3-3-02

It is obvious to anyone who bothers to remove his political blinders. It is so patently obvious that even those whose political blinders are a permanently fixed fashion statement -- that is to say, even Hollywood -- can see it. (Just ask Whoopie Goldberg...) Bush's poll numbers are a reflection of this self-evident truth.

What is manifestly obvious and confirmed on a daily basis is the plain fact that Democrats are, by definition, constitutionally unfit to navigate the ship of state through these troubled, terrorist waters. Democrats were unfit pre-9/11, but few could see it then. It was 9/11 and its aftermath that made this truth crystal clear even to the most simpleminded among us.

The unwashed masses, the uninformed, the disinformed can see it now. All America can see it now. Self-preservation is kicking in, trumping petty politics at every turn.

And this is why Democrat demagoguery and stupidity and sedition are achieving new lows...

We are witnessing the last grasp of a political relic. The Democrat party is not merely obsolete. As 9/11 and clinton-clinton-Daschle action and inaction have demonstrated, the Democrat party is very dangerous.

We must now make sure that this fact, too, is obvious to all...

TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Editorial; Extended News
KEYWORDS: napalminthemorning; wot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-32 next last

NOW, in our time of crisis, helpfully comes former President Jimmy Carter to pronounce that the current president - this would be the president who actually has the job at the moment, as opposed to the president who set a record for incompetence...In the opinion of the man who presided over 400-plus days of "America Held Hostage," President Bush's description of Iran, Iraq and North Korea as an "axis of evil" was "overly simplistic and counterproductive." Added the man who was once attacked by a rabbit, "I think it will take years before we can repair the damage done by that statement."

It is tempting to accept Carter's verdict as all the proof needed that Bush is solidly on the right track. But the argument needs to be addressed, not because it is not foolish but because it is the fashion among fools. And, as the great political novelist Ross Thomas once pointed out, when you've got all the fools in town on your side, you've practically won.

"The reviews are in, and they are bad," recently declared Mark Lilla, who is a professor of something called social thought (presumably, there are professors of antisocial thought too, but no one knows who they are since they won't answer the phone). "President Bush's characterization of Iraq, Iran and North Korea as an 'axis of evil' has been met by our allies' puzzled annoyance and by massive rallies in Iran that only strengthened hard-line elements there."

This is a fair summation of the fools' position, and it is almost entirely wrong.

First, the suggestion in the adjective "puzzled" is that "axis of evil" describes nothing valid, since Iran, Iraq and North Korea are not - in the World War II sense of Germany, Japan and Italy - an axis.

Right. As the French Foreign Minister Hubert Vedrine noted to Washington Post columnist David Ignatius, "axis of evil" was intended not as literal description but as evocative shorthand for an abstract but real concept - something akin to John F. Kennedy's "New Frontier."

...Prior to Sept. 11, U.S. policy toward regimes such as those in Iran, Iraq and North Korea - regimes that were indeed fundamentally evil, that were avowed enemies of the United States, that aggressively sought to acquire weapons of mass destruction and that supported anti-American terrorist groups - was this: We can live with them.

The Bush administration's post-Sept. 11 policy is: No, we cannot. Not anymore, not with 3,000 dead.

The reality is terribly changed and we must deal with that change. We must do what we can to limit the threat of a second Sept. 11.

And what we can most effectively do is to strike where we can find something to strike at: to destroy or coerce those regimes that arm and support and hide the transnational terrorists who would wage long-term guerrilla war against the United States. Do-nothingism - Carterism - is no longer an option.


New York Post




March 3, 2002 -- Instead of criticizing President Bush's description of Iran, Iraq and North Korea as an "axis of evil," Jimmy Carter should consider how his own policies were partly responsible for Iran becoming part of the axis ("Fools for Evil," Opinion, Michael Kelly, Feb. 27).

When the Shah of Iran was faced with growing radical Islamic revolution in his country, Carter pressured him not to crack down because of his concern for the human rights of the Islamic radicals.

As a result, the Shah was overthrown and we are now faced with a regime that is trying to overthrow Hamid Karzai's government in Afghanistan and is supplying vast quantities of arms to terrorist organizations in the Middle East.

Looking back on the fall of Iran, the Shah said "I should have never listened to Jimmy Carter." I hope the American people have enough sense not to listen to him, either.
Gamaliel Isaac

This is the president who did nothing while our hostages sat in Iran for 400 days. This is the president who gave us 18 to 20 percent interest rates, which drove small-business owners like me out of business.

Carter should continue to build houses for the poor. That's the only thing he knows how to do.
Dolores Kurtzer
Fort Lee, N. J.

Carter's criticism of the present administration is a pathetic attempt to show his own failed presidency in a better light.

Carter has become Ted Turner with more class and less Bourbon.
Andrew Romanic
Garden City

Thanks, Michael Kelly. I couldn't have said it better myself.

These comments are not only idiotic, but downright un-American.

Did Carter forget that most of the nuclear technology that North Korea has today came gift-wrapped from the Clinton administration?
Rich Pardo
Nutley, N.J.

1 posted on 03/03/2002 7:42:38 PM PST by Mia T
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Gail Wynand; looscannon; Lonesome in Massachussets; river rat; Freedom'sWorthIt; IVote2; Slyfox...

Q ERTY4 + Q ERTY6 = rodham clinton REALITY CHECK!

Clinton's failure to grasp the opportunity to unravel increasingly organized extremists, coupled with Berger's assessments of their potential to directly threaten the U.S., represents one of the most serious foreign policy failures in American history

Clinton Let Bin Laden Slip Away and Metastasize



Bill Clinton may not be the worst president America has had, but surely he is the worst person to be president.*

---GEORGE WILL, Sleaze, the sequel


Had George Will written Sleaze, the sequel (the "sequel" is, of course, hillary) after 9-11-01, I suspect that he would have had to forgo the above conceit, as the doubt expressed in the setup phrase was, from that day forward, no longer operational.

Indeed, assessing the clinton presidency an abject failure is not inconsistent with commentary coming from the left, most recently the LA Times: "Clinton Let Bin Laden Slip Away and Metastasize."

When the clintons left office, I predicted that the country would eventually learn--sadly, the hard way--that this depraved, self-absorbed and inept pair had placed America (and the world) in mortal danger. But I was thinking years, not months.

It is very significant that hillary clinton didn't deny clinton culpability for the terrorism. (Meet the Press, 12-09-01), notwithstanding tired tactics (if you can't pass the buck, spread the blame) and chronic "KnowNothing Victim Clinton" self-exclusion.

If leftist pandering keeps the disenfranchized down in perpetuity, clinton pandering,("it's the economy, stupid"), kept the middle and upper classes wilfully ignorant for eight years.

And ironically, both results (leftist social policy and the clinton economy) are equally illusory, fraudulent. It is becoming increasingly clear that clinton assiduously avoided essential actions that would have negatively impacted the economy--the ultimate source of his continued power--actions like, say, going after the terrorists.

It is critically important that hillary clinton fail in her grasp for power; read Peggy Noonan's little book, 'The Case Against Hillary Clinton' and Barbara Olson's two books; it is critical that the West de-clintonize, but that will be automatic once it is understood that the clintons risked civilization itself in order to gain and retain power.

It shouldn't take books, however, to see that a leader is a dangerous, self-absorbed sicko. People should be able to figure that out for themselves. The electorate must be taught to think, to reason. It must be able to spot spin, especially in this age of the electronic demagogue.

I am not hopeful. As Bertrand Russell noted, "Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so. "

Mia T, hillary clinton blames hubby for terrorism

(SHE knew nuttin')

Meet the Press, 12-09-01



*George Will continues: There is reason to believe that he is a rapist ("You better get some ice on that," Juanita Broaddrick says he told her concerning her bit lip), and that he bombed a country to distract attention from legal difficulties arising from his glandular life, and that. ... Furthermore, the bargain that he and his wife call a marriage refutes the axiom that opposites attract. Rather, she, as much as he, perhaps even more so, incarnates Clintonism

Q ERTY3 co-rapist  bump!
it won't s-p-i-n
CLINTON-WAS-AN-UTTER-FAILURE Containment Team Scheme Fails Again
Ollie North Laughs Ann Lewis Off Stage
clinton Positively Reinforces 9/11 Terrorist Acts
Helen Thomas Syndrome: THE SYMPTOMS
Will Riefenstahl-esque "editing to perfection" resurrect the clintons?
Frankenstein, The Sequel:
'Black Hawk Down' Was Set to Blame Clinton for 9/11
hillary's head revisited:
hillary clinton's brain (such as it is) II
Buddy Death Report Raises More Questions Than It Answers
Fraudulent Democrat Scheme Fails as Bush Soars
BUSH: NATIONAL SECURITY 1st PRIORITY. . ."I will not wait on events, while dangers gather."
hillary clinton, Congenital Bottom Feeder, Cowers Below Network Radar,
Continues to Subsist on Cozy Clintonoid Interviews of Colmes Kind
"The Daschle Scheme"
Analyzed and Annotated
Can the President Think?
Mindless rhinestone-studded-and-tented kleptocracy
The man is an artist: He's not just 'Slick Willie' anymore
Hey, what a party!
New Year's at the White House
Senator Dim Bulb by Gary Aldrich © 2001
Annotated by Mia T

2 posted on 03/03/2002 7:44:24 PM PST by Mia T
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
3 posted on 03/03/2002 7:45:57 PM PST by My Favorite Headache
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
Everytime somebody bad-mouths "the greatest living ex-President," I need to remind them of Jimmy Carter's most positive legacy for which I'll always be grateful:

Helping to elect Ronald Reagan twice.

4 posted on 03/03/2002 7:53:08 PM PST by Vigilanteman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
Thanks for the ping.

Do you know of any articles on FR that relate the story of a heckler at a dinner/speech in NYC being hauled off?

The heckler stood up to differ with a terrorist comment by the dinner speaker. Needless to say, the speaker was IMPEACHED sick willy, a typical democrat.

5 posted on 03/03/2002 8:10:55 PM PST by Graewoulf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
6 posted on 03/03/2002 9:03:09 PM PST by Slyfox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Comment #7 Removed by Moderator

To: seamole; NorCoGOP; Mia T
What fun to read some honesty written by the Brown Journalist -- thanks for the ping for your artfully worded selections Mia -- and to seamole for the link for those like me who don't linger too long here anymore and had this chance to read that great article posted by NorCoGOP!
8 posted on 03/03/2002 10:22:15 PM PST by AKA Elena
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

Comment #9 Removed by Moderator

To: Mia T
Never underestimate the stupidity or overestimate the attention span of the average American voter. Voters such as these elected Bill Clinton. Twice.
10 posted on 03/03/2002 10:34:33 PM PST by Bush2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000
11 posted on 03/04/2002 12:32:12 AM PST by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

Donate Here By Secure Server

Or mail checks to
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794

12 posted on 03/04/2002 12:33:37 AM PST by Mo1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
** - Democrats are, by definition, constitutionally unfit to navigate the ship of state In the beginning, the Democrats had a good foundation. Inspired/&?founded by Thomas Jefferson, and wanting a strict interpretation of the Constitution. What is the history, of were the Democrats went wrong?

FYI - On the Democratic side, I just received an email from Chuck Pineda, who is on the Dem ballot opposing Gray Davis. He stated, "I support traditional values and the right to bear arms."
For California DEMOCRATS! Email Subject:   VOTE * Chuck Pineda, Jr. * for Governor!
* Encouraging Democrats to Say NO! to G.G Davis on March 5th!
Democrats, let's rally around the name ** Chuck Pineda, Jr. **, who is on the Democrat ballot for Governor! It is time for Democrats to work for restoration and reform in the Democratic Party! email:
Also FYI - Visit:
A Political/Cultural News Forum - Search for: Golden Gate

13 posted on 03/04/2002 1:15:17 AM PST by Golden Gate
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mia T,dixie sass,chesty puller,antivenom,bigun,smallstuff,pocat,sunshine,jd792,stanleypie,joan_30
14 posted on 03/04/2002 1:35:29 AM PST by ATOMIC_PUNK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman
Could you explain that? Which one was which elections and what are the red states, those that Jimmy " the killer rabbit" carried? Thanks.
15 posted on 03/04/2002 1:59:05 AM PST by Leisler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Leisler
The top one is 1980,Reagan vs. Carter.The bottom one is 1984,Reagan vs. Mondale.
16 posted on 03/04/2002 2:13:31 AM PST by John W
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Mia T

As usual.


17 posted on 03/04/2002 3:45:52 AM PST by M Kehoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
Good morning & bttt
18 posted on 03/04/2002 3:50:26 AM PST by firewalk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: seamole
Thanks for the link, sea! And Mia T - I hope you're right about the American people. I'm still dubious about our situation. I fear the vast majority could still be duped by the mainstream media and whines from the Left that work in tandem. I wish I could have more faith in my fellow-countrymen, but I'll never forget that they wanted 8 years of Clinton and many of them wanted Gore as well.
19 posted on 03/04/2002 5:06:13 AM PST by anniegetyourgun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Golden Gate
Would that we could put clinton in Jefferson's petri dish Q ERTY6 rodham clinton REALITY CHECK BUMP!
Two hundred or so years ago, we had Jefferson, Washington, Ben Franklin and Tom Paine, and there were four million people. Today we have more than 220 million, and look at our leaders...Darwin was wrong."

Mort Sahl, 1998

contingency principle
by Mia T


A trait or strategy that is successful at one time may be unsuccessful at another. Evolution is not progress. Populations are simply adapting to their current surroundings. Populations do not necessarily become better in any absolute sense over time.
Take RAPE. It may have been an evolutionary imperative for Homo erectus in the Pleistocene Epoch, but one can hardly argue that it is adaptive behavior for Homo sapiens in the year 2000, Boy Rapist-President notwithstanding.

This contingency principle was demonstrated experimentally (Paquin and Adams) with a yeast culture that was maintained for many generations. Occasionally, a mutant strain would arise that increased reproductive success. These mutant strains would crowd out the formerly dominant strains. Samples of the most successful strains from the culture were taken across time. In later competition experiments, each strain would outcompete the immediately previously dominant type in a culture. However, some earlier isolates could outcompete strains that arose late in the experiment. (Would that we could put clinton in Jefferson's petri dish.) Competitive ability of a strain was always better than its previous type, but competitiveness in a general sense was not increasing.

Any organism's success depends on the behavior of its contemporaries. (If you doubt this, just ask David Schippers.) For most traits or behaviors, there is likely no optimal design or strategy, only contingent ones.

Mort Sahl: No desire to meet clinton: "With no morality, there's nothing there"

20 posted on 03/04/2002 5:15:33 AM PST by Mia T
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-32 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson