"This strategy memo lays bare what we've started to see for some time: an orchestrated effort by Democrats at a time of war to improperly use an intelligence investigation as a weapon against President Bush, said Sen. Jon Kyl (Ariz.), chairman of the Republican Policy Committee."
"This is the key." ~ jmstein7
Exactly.
3-21-03:
Saddemocrats--It's time to rename some Leftist Democrats "Saddemocrats - FrontPageMagazine ^ | 3-21-03 | Lowell Ponte
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/870922/posts FrontPageMagazine.com | March 21, 2003
WITH WAR ONLY HOURS AWAY, THREE DEMOCRATIC “Progressive Caucus” members of Congress on Wednesday via television hookup addressed the European Union Parliament and shared Left-eyed views with their fellow socialists across the Atlantic.
Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D.-Ohio) preached that President George W. Bush’s “case for war is a sham” based on “untrue, unfounded and disproven allegations.” This presidential aspirant, whose loony Leftist eccentricities this column recently documented, wants America disarmed and our Department of Defense renamed “the Department of Peace.”
“We [who advocate no war against Saddam Hussein] are severely punished inside the borders of this country through the media,” said Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D.-Ohio) Kaptur has refused to retract or apologize for her recent speech favorably comparing 9-11 mastermind Osama bin Laden to George Washington and America’s other revolutionary founding fathers. Leftist House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D.-California) refused to punish Kaptur for these pro-bin Laden remarks.
“We have not seen a propaganda campaign in the world like this in about 70 years,” said Rep. Jim McDermott (D.-Washington State) to the European legislators. “This government has controlled the media and it does not allow a voice to be raised.”
McDermott six months ago visited Baghdad, embraced fellow socialist Saddam Hussein, and declared from the Iraqi capital that President George W. Bush was a liar. He received tons of media coverage, both here and abroad.
Accompanying McDermott was Rep. David Bonior (D.-Michigan), who did not seek re-election last November. Paul Sperry of WorldNetDaily.com this week reported that Bonior as a leading congressional Democrat used his influence prior to September 11, 2001, to stifle an FBI investigation into potential Arab terrorists in Detroit, and that Bonior as Democratic Whip in the House of Representatives pocketed thousands of dollars from Arab donors with links to terrorist groups.
Other leading Democrats have been equally eager to support Saddam Hussein by attacking America’s Commander-in-Chief.
Rep. Pete Stark (D.-California) told his and Rep. Pelosi’s local newspaper, the San Francisco Chronicle, that the Bush policy towards Iraq was “extreme terrorism” and that going to war with American weapons would be “a terrorist act.”
At the time of the 1991 Gulf War, Rep. Stark reportedly put special blame for the war on his “Jewish colleagues,” especially then-Rep. Stephen Solarz (D-N.Y.), describing him as “Field Marshall Solarz in the pro-Israel forces.”
For remarks no more anti-Semitic than this, Rep. Jim Moran (D.-Virginia) was recently stripped of his very minor post of party leadership. It might be worth asking Rep. Stark if he now recants his own anti-Semitism, now increasingly fashionable among Left-wing fascists.
“I’m saddened, saddened that this President failed so miserably at diplomacy that we’re now forced to war,” said Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle days before war began, “saddened that we have to give up one life because this President couldn’t create the kind of diplomatic effort that was so critical for our country.”
Sen. Daschle might have been better advised to condemn his Democratic colleagues such as Kucinich, Kaptur, McDermott, Bonior and Stark whose words and actions encouraged Saddam Hussein to believe he had strong political support inside the U.S. Congress.
The defects in Daschle’s reasoning are many. Even Leftist commentators have generally agreed that France and Saddam Hussein are to blame for diplomatic problems, not President Bush, and that a diplomatic success would also have led to war.
But Daschle’s stupidity is exceeded by his hypocrisy, as Jonah Goldberg of National Review Online discovered in a 1998 Daschle speech defending a preemptive strike against Iraq by Democratic President Bill Clinton:
“Look,” said Daschle in 1998, we have exhausted virtually our diplomatic effort to get the Iraqis to comply with their own agreements and with international law. Given that, what other option is there but to force them to do so?…. This is the key question. And the answer is, we don’t have another option. We have got to force them to comply, and we are doing so militarily.”
Playing politics to gain petty partisan advantage is tawdry enough. Playing politics in ways that encourage Saddam Hussein to defy both United Nations demands and an American President’s ultimatum could lead to war and to American soldiers dying – and that is clearly what Mr. Daschle has done. No wonder that so many thousands of South Dakotans call their Senator “Tom Dashole.”
Daschle’s words attacking the Commander-in-Chief come “mighty close” to giving comfort to U.S. enemies,” said House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert.
“I think Senator Daschle clearly articulated the French position…. I, frankly, don’t even think that’s how most Democrats here in the United States Senate see it,” said Senator Rich Santorum (R.-Pennsylvania).
“In expressing his views, Tom Daschle is being patriotic,” said House Minority leader Nancy Pelosi. “The Republican leaders are being partisan.”
In the shell bursts of this conflict, we can see clearly illuminated a large faction of the Democratic Party that shares the French desire to weaken, belittle, damage and perhaps destroy the United States.
This faction deserves a name to distinguish it from the waning number of Democrats of a party founded by Thomas Jefferson who still love America.
Saddemocrats is what I call these clearly anti-American Leftists who attack President Bush and are as eager as the French to keep Ba’athist socialist Saddam Hussein in power.
Some will dismiss them as a fringe, the loony extremist wing found in any political movement, and if we look only at wacko egomaniacs such as Kucinich and McDermott this seems apparent.
But if the Democratic Party is not the Saddemocratic Party, why are its congressional leaders Saddemocrats Nancy Pelosi and Tom Daschle? Why are these reckless extremists in control? And when, for the safety of America, will we see a regime change in the once-honorable party of the donkey?
Mr. Ponte ... is a former Roving Editor for Reader's Digest.