Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 02/06/2003 9:46:02 PM PST by kattracks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: kattracks
As always, Mona is a beacon of clear thinking.

With anti-Americans like the swimmer and katslurp running amuck, the fight to expose the truth is more important than ever.

2 posted on 02/06/2003 9:58:59 PM PST by evad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: kattracks
Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., said: "The American people don't want this war.'

Speak for yourself you fat, drunk, murdering liar. I want Saddam's head on a pike, and the destruction of Iraq's WMD arsenal. Is there any other way of accomplishing this other than war? And read the numbers: the American people are in favor of going to war by over a 2 to 1 margin.

3 posted on 02/06/2003 10:01:41 PM PST by Mr. Mojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: kattracks
Thank God America is not in the position of fighting "because we have to." Nations in those circumstances are fighting for their existence. We are in the comparatively luxurious position of being able to fight to prevent a threat to our welfare from ever arising.

Mona hit the bullseye. Kerry, Kennedy, and their leftist comrades betray a conspicuous weakness by admitting that they'd rather American be in a position of needing to fight a war than choosing to. Their overwhelming guilt (about probably just being alive) causes them to believe that a militarily weak America is preferable to a self-sufficient one. That's one of the reasons Clinton sold the Chinese our nuclear secrets -- he wanted to "level the playing field."

4 posted on 02/06/2003 10:07:28 PM PST by Mr. Mojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: kattracks
And it isn't that liberals are all pacifists. Recall that many liberals were beating the drums for war in Bosnia and Kosovo, and some even advocated war in Haiti in the 1990s. Those were wars liberals could back unreservedly. Why? The actions in Bosnia and Kosovo had NATO and U.N. coloration

Mona is right on about liberal hypocrisy concerning war (especially in the Balkans), but she's wrong in her assertion that liberals only endorse wars that have collective (NATO and U.N) backing. Most American libs will continue to be against our battle with Saddam even after the UN signs on to it.

The real reason for their inconsistency/hypocrisy is obvious, and far more primal: They despise President Bush and don't want to see him become an American hero when we liberate the Iraqi people and win major battles in the War on Terror. These "pacifists" aren't against war; they're against Republican Presidents successfully waging war. It's truly that simple, and that pathetic.

5 posted on 02/06/2003 10:16:33 PM PST by Mr. Mojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: kattracks
Modern liberalism was born during the Vietnam War, when antiwar activists taught that America was an international bully, ......it remains the picture that liberals carry around in their mental wallets.

Time has not marched on for these people in the slightest. A good example is their sincere belief that the media is a "right wing institution." This was a very common belief during the Vietnam era, and although it wasn't true, it's no secret that the media from that era was a lot less biased - more centrist - than today's ultraleftist bunch. Anyway, today's Vietnam-libs were conditioned to believe the media was a certain way, and that's the way it'll always remain. If they see evidence to the contrary, they completely ignore it.

6 posted on 02/06/2003 10:25:52 PM PST by Mr. Mojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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