Democratic presidential candidates preach hate

Agusta Chronicle ^ | December 28, 2003 | Herman Cain

[Veritas_est]

Democratic presidential candidates preach hate

The Augusta Chronicle By: Herman Cain

December 28, 2003

WHAT HAS HAPPENED to "united we stand?" Yes, as Americans, we can disagree and have the right to voice those disagreements, but destructive rhetoric about the war in Iraq for the purpose of self-promotion is demoralizing to our troops and the American people. Unfortunately, we can expect nothing more from the candidates running for the Democratic presidential nomination. Their words and their actions are unpatriotic.

Democratic presidential candidate U.S. Rep. Dick Gephardt of Missouri actually said, "The president is a miserable failure (on foreign policy)." In what way have President George W. Bush and the American people failed? Whom did we fail when we captured former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein? Did we fail when we stopped the oppression of a people who lived in constant terror? Did we fail when we stopped the genocide occurring to our fellow man at the hands of a merciless dictator?

Now that Saddam has been caught, Democratic presidential candidates have decided to write off the dictator's capture, even though they used Saddam's hiding to provoke fear in the American people. We need to build up the United States of America, not tear it down one phrase at a time, one lie at a time!

I was embarrassed for Democratic presidential candidate Gen. Wesley Clark when he recently tried to downplay Saddam's capture, by referring to Osama bin Laden, saying, "I would have kept the focus on Osama bin Laden. I would have gotten him ... I would like to think I would have had Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein by now."

WHEN VICTORY is achieved, when military goals are accomplished, these candidates have proven that they will say anything to destroy the success of our brave soldiers.

What do our children think when they hear Democratic presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts say, when referring to the war in Iraq, that he did not "expect George Bush to (expletive) it up as badly as he did?" Has he no moral compass?

When did a political agenda become more important than freedom? More important than peace? More important than facts or leadership, or holding the office of president in the highest regard? Do you really want one of the Democratic presidential candidates to finish the war effort, when their collective plan of action is to attack America's leadership and Americans fighting overseas?

As I think about their destructive behavior and language, I'm reminded of a quote from another president who served during a time of war, a civil war. President Abraham Lincoln said, "It is better to keep one's mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."

THERE ARE still things worth fighting for in this world: freedom, peace and democracy. And the Democratic presidential candidates would have us pull out of Iraq before the job is finished, admitting defeat to the terrorists and those who fuel their efforts to destroy America. What would they stand up for if, heaven forbid, one of them was to be elected president? If not for this country, its people and humankind, then what?

The Democrats have chosen to discuss every victory the United States has in the war to invigorate hate, fear and turmoil in the American people. If the Democrats have their way, the final result of this war will be a victory in Iraq but a terrible, terrible defeat here at home.

President Bush did not break the peace when he announced war on Iraq; he began to defend peace. As long as terrorists and the countries that harbor and abet them are allowed to continue on their murderous path, there will never be peace or true freedom. I earnestly ask the Democratic presidential candidates to put aside their demoralizing, hateful speech and replace it with something we can all use - constructive criticism.

(Editor's note: The writer is a conservative Republican from McDonough, Ga., who is running for the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by retiring Democratic Sen. Zell Miller.)

[Buck W.]

"(Editor's note: The writer is a conservative Republican from McDonough, Ga., who is running for the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by retiring Democratic Sen. Zell Miller.)"

Note that he's not just a Republican, but a Conservative Republican. Would they refer to a Democrat as a Liberal Democrat?

[Blood of Tyrants]

Would they refer to a Democrat as a Liberal Democrat?

No, because the spell checker would catch the redundancy.

[eyespysomething]

Thanks!

[eyespysomething]

Is he questioning the patriotism of the Democratic candidates?

< /sarcasm>

[eyespysomething]

One more thing, then I'll stop:

My husband still calls it Paul Coverdall's seat.

[leprechaun9]

One requirement to be a member of the Democrap Party is to practice the politics of FEAR, DIVISION, and HATRED!

[leprechaun9]

One requirement to be a member of the Democrap Party is to practice the politics of FEAR, DIVISION, and HATRED!

[Joy Angela]

Democratic presidential candidates preach hate

The Clinton's have really helped the Democrats be "all they can be!" in the past years, haven't they!

Hillary: Queen-of-Hate

Hillary: Queen-of-Mean

Hillary: I want to be your Leader!

[CyberAnt]

"When did a political agenda become more important"

Anyone who does not know the answer to this question is not paying attention.

To the democrats, it's always been the party before the country. However .. during the Clinton regime .. it became more pronounced and more tangible.

[narby]

Before a battle has begun, it is fine to argue that the country should not fight it. But once the battle has been joined, to argue in the public arena against the country's action is Treason.

The crime of Treason is defined in the same document as "Freedom of Speech", the Constitution. They hold the same weight, and at some point, speaking in public is Treason.

It was proven by the comments of the North Vietnamese Generals in books published after that war that the "anti-war" movement in the US caused them to continue the battle long after they would have otherwise given up. That is defintily offering "aid and comfort" to the enemey, to the extent that we actually "lost" the war because of it.

The anti-war movement was most certianly Treason during Vietnam, and it still is today.

[Veritas_est]

ping

[Veritas_est]

Yours truly in conversation with our next U.S. Senator from Georgia, Herman Cain (center) and Matt Carrothers, Mr. Cain's Political Director (left).

[Veritas_est]

BUMP

[NewLand]

((((( HERMAN CAIN PING LIST )))))

FReepMail me if you want to be ON or OFF this list

Go Herman Go!

[NewLand]

You are quite distinguished there, Veritas!

[FreedomPoster]

Cain is a conservative. A bunch of us support him. Pings.

[mhking]

Herman Cain alert!

Black conservative ping

If you want on (or off) of my black conservative ping list, please let me know via FREEPmail. (And no, you don't have to be black to be on the list!)

Extra warning: this is a high-volume ping list.

[dwd1]

Was there a riot where many were killed? I keep hearing about Democrats preaching hate but I see an abundance on both sides. 500 dead, thousands wounded. I want us to do what it takes to win. And didn't Hillary, for all her problems, ask for more troops. The Generals say that it's all good but our people keep dying. I know we are over there and committed and that the commitment should be honored. I also acknowledge that Hussein is a bad guy and I am happier with him out. I will say, however, that we are paying a high price in good will and other intangibles that are going to cost us down the road. If we really are there for the oil, then OK, let us take it and be done. If we are there to free the Iraqis, then let's do the Marshall Plan along with a Martial Plan and get this thing taken care of. The main thing we have to do is leave things better than when they were found. I still say however, that Al-Douri is the guy who needs to be taken out ASAP... I am sure my old friends are looking for him.

Divisive rhetoric can be found everywhere, on this forum, in the Congress, on Fox, on CNN, etc. I don't think anyone has a monopoly on it.

And we did not lose the military battle in Vietnam because of people speaking up against the war. We lost the military battle because of rules of engagement and the micromanagement of the war by McNamara and others. We lost the political and public relations war because of the unpopularity of the draft, the propaganda war by the French, the Soviets, and the Vietnamese, and the returning veterans who were treated badly by an ungrateful public when returning who spoke out against the war. Now, I think John McCain is right to dislike Jane Fonda but that was because she didn't know what the he$$ she was doing.

[dwd1]

I hope that Mr. Cain learns a lesson from Howard Dean about the importance of running a positive campaign. This article sounds a little more like Star (whatever her last name is) who talks extremely to the right to get the attention and support of the GOP establishment. What are your ideas? What do you stand for? Will you represent all the people of Georgia? What is your ideas for job growth, education, a fairer criminal justice system(re: Marcus Dixon)? In other words, or you more of a Clarence Thomas or a Colin Powell in your conservative views?

And do you have any relatives, (Children, brothers, sisters) in the service that you feel are being done a disservice because of the fact that someone criticizes President Bush. It would seem to me that a soldier stationed in a hostile area is concerned about doing his duty and trying to make sure that he and that person watching his back make it back home alive.

Perhaps you should consider a fact finding tour. And I hope you will not be like Bob Dornan where we get pictures of you during a campaign and then you go into stealth mode. Anyone can point the finger and say, "That is where they are wrong" Let us hear some new ideas, not new insults, and certainly not old rhetoric.