Memorial Day, 2004.
Memorial Day, 2004.
More rantings from the Left…. yawn.
E.L. Doctorow, one of the most celebrated writers in America, was nearly booed off the stage at Hofstra University Sunday when he gave a commencement address lambasting President George W. Bush and effectively calling him a liar.
Booing that came mainly from the crowd in the stands became so intense that Doctorow stopped speaking at one point, showing no emotion as he stood silently and listened to the jeers. Hofstra President Stuart Rabinowitz intervened, and called on the audience to allow him to finish. He did, although some booing persisted.
Here are a few of my favorite lines….
“One story he told was that the country of Iraq had nuclear and biological and chemical weapons of mass destruction and was intending shortly to use them on us,” he said. “That was an exciting story all right, it was designed to send shivers up our spines. But it was not true.”
Interesting. So what would he consider the Sarin and Mustard gas recently discovered in Iraq?
“Another story was that the Iraqi dictator, Saddam Hussein, was in league with the terrorists of al-Qaida,” he said. “And that turned out to be not true. But anyway we went off to war on the basis of these stories.”
Again, more leftist fantasy. I guess Richard Clarke’s statement in 1999 that Saddam’s nerve gas experts were working with bin Laden’s people at el Shifa was a load of crap? How about the many documented meetings between al-Qaida and Iraqi officials?
But some defended Doctorow’s speech. “I think he’s entitled to his opinion and he’s as American as anyone else,” said a Hempstead resident who identified himself only as Frank and whose daughter was graduating.
And once again, the Left seems perplexed that freedom of speech also protects those who challenge these idiots with the facts and call them on the carpet for their nonsense.
Some think he broke “the unwritten code that college commencement speeches should inspire and unite a student body”… I beg to differ. I think he united the students to see just what kind of idiocy exists in the “real world” and motivate them to not become another useful idiot.214c
An Open Letter to Senator Hollings
Iï¿½m responding to your editorial comments on May 19th. I find it very unprofessional for you to take your cause to the media in a unilateral dissertation, instead of debating in open public where your slander can be rebutted.
Letï¿½s examine your diatribe, piece by pieceï¿½.
With 760 dead in Iraq and more than 3,000 maimed for life, folks continue to argue over why we are in Iraq ï¿½ and how to get out.
Now everyone knows what was not the cause of this war. Even President Bush acknowledges that Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11. Listing the 45 countries where al Qaeda was operating on Sept. 11 (70 cells in the United States), the State Department did not list Iraq.
Why is it the Left is so quick to use State Department documentation when they think it suits their cause, but somehow overlooks or summarily dismisses documents from the State Department that state Iraq had chemical and biological weapons, or that their incomplete declarations of WMDs to the U.N. constituted a ï¿½material breachï¿½ or the claims by the Clinton admin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, Secretary of State Albright and more about the threat Saddam and Iraq posed to the U.S… I doubt itï¿½s a coincidence.
Then you go on to quote Richard Clarkeï¿½
Richard Clarke, in Against All Enemies, tells how the United States had not received any threat of terrorism for 10 years from Saddam at the time of our invasion.
Since youï¿½re fond of Richard Clarke, I wonder what you think of this quote, in 1999:
Clarke did provide new information in defense of Clinton’s decision to fire Tomahawk cruise missiles at the El Shifa pharmaceutical plant in Khartoum, Sudan, in retaliation for bin Laden’s role in the Aug. 7 embassy bombings.
While U.S. intelligence officials disclosed shortly after the missile attack that they had obtained a soil sample from the El Shifa site that contained a precursor of VX nerve gas, Clarke said that the U.S. government is “sure” that Iraqi nerve gas experts actually produced a powdered VX-like substance at the plant that, when mixed with bleach and water, would have become fully active VX nerve gas.
Clarke said U.S. intelligence does not know how much of the substance was produced at El Shifa or what happened to it. But he said that intelligence exists linking bin Laden to El Shifa’s current and past operators, the Iraqi nerve gas experts and the National Islamic Front in Sudan.
Given the evidence presented to the White House before the airstrike, Clarke said, the president “would have been derelict in his duties if he didn’t blow up the facility.”
Picking and choosing only the quotes you like isnï¿½t a very successful strategy in this day and age of information technology. Editorials seem your best debating ground, as bilateral or multilateral discussions generally bring in those pesky facts you guys hate to deal with.
Just when it appears youï¿½re just reciting the DNC talking points, youï¿½ve come up with a whopper.
With Iraq no threat, why invade a sovereign country? The answer: President Bushï¿½s policy to secure Israel.
Every president since 1947 has made a futile attempt to help Israel negotiate peace. But no leadership has surfaced among the Palestinians that can make a binding agreement. President Bush realized his chances at negotiation were no better. He came to office imbued with one thought ï¿½ re-election. Bush felt tax cuts would hold his crowd together and spreading democracy in the Mideast to secure Israel would take the Jewish vote from the Democrats.
So Bush is simply catering to the Jews for re-election. Interesting theory. Especially given that he lost the Jewish vote by a margin of 4 to 1 in 2000. Sure a man capable of pulling of the worldï¿½s greatest fabrications (as you Lefties keep ranting) isnï¿½t dumb enough to put all his re-election eggs in that one basket. Or is today one of those ï¿½Bush is dumbï¿½ days? I can never keep your mantra straight, always shifting, changing, flippingï¿½.
You donï¿½t come to town and announce your Israel policy is to invade Iraq. But George W. Bush, as stated by former Secretary Paul Oï¿½Neill and others, started laying the groundwork to invade Iraq days after inauguration. And, without any Iraq connection to 9/11, within weeks he had the Pentagon outlining a plan to invade Iraq. He was determined.
So why did you vote FOR the bill approving the use of force in Iraq? If youï¿½re so damned certain Bush has conspired to attack Iraq from the beginning, so he could gain some Jewish votes, why in the hell did you vote to authorize the war????
Again, say one thing, do another and then sit back while the real leaders act.
With President Bushï¿½s domino policy in the Mideast gone awry, he keeps shouting ï¿½War on Terror.ï¿½ Terrorism is a method, not a war. We donï¿½t call the Crimean War, with the Charge of the Light Brigade, the Cavalry War. Or World War II the Blitzkrieg War. There is terrorism in Ireland against the Brits. There is terrorism in India and in Pakistan. In the Mideast, terrorism is a separate problem to be defeated by diplomacy and negotiation, not militarily. Here, might does not make right ï¿½ right makes might.
ï¿½War on terrorï¿½ means get them before they get usï¿½again. It appears youï¿½ve gone into some senile fit with this last paragraph as it makes as much sense as the Bohemian Rhapsody. If you seriously think terrorism is something to be dealt with diplomatically, perhaps you can have a nice sit down chat with bin Laden, al-Zarqawi or Saddam himself. Of course, you wonï¿½t be able to use the nice facilities in downtown Manhattan, because the terrorism that isnï¿½t war destroyed them.
Finally, you end with, what you undoubtedly think, is a clever little clauseï¿½
Acting militarily, we have created more terrorism than we have eliminated.
But again, sadly, the facts seem to escape you. As a recent article read:
TERRORISM DOWN: LOWEST NUMBER OF ATTACKS WORLDWIDE SINCE 1969… source
Thanks for playing, Senator Hollings, consider yourself still totally irrelevant.1fe3
Denial ain’t just a river in Africa
Decrying Rumsfeld, Kerry Eyes McCain for Defense
ORLANDO, Fla. (Reuters) - Democratic presidential hopeful John Kerry said on Wednesday Republican Sen. John McCain topped his list for defense secretary as he criticized the Bush administration for failed policies in Iraq.
Is John Kerry even conscious? Are his brain and mouth connected at all to reality? So he’s so confident in John McCain, and apparently in such constant communication with McCain that he’s come out with saying McCain is his first choice for Secretary of Defense…..
HANNITY: I’m glad to hear that.
Now, before we get to the issue of the photos, and I know you saw a lot of them today, I’ve got to get this out of the way, senator. You know you’re a good friend.
The fellow senator from Massachusetts, John Kerry, in fact said today that you topped his list with defense secretary. You’re it. You’re the guy. So I’ve got to ask, would you…
MCCAIN: Whatever happened to vice president?
HANNITY: But you have said on this program, under no circumstances would you consider vice president.
Here’s the question…
MCCAIN: … circumstances.
HANNITY: Straight talk express, under any circumstances, would you ever consider being John Kerry’s secretary of Defense?
HANNITY: End of discussion?
MCCAIN: End of discussion
Can’t you just see John Kerry stomping his feet with his finger’s in his ears going “LA LA LA LA, I’m not listening to you, LA LA LA LA”
This guy is so out of touch with reality, he’s going Al Gore-style and just saying whatever he wants regardless of the truth or real circumstances. It’s as if these guys don’t even realize we have the ability to learn facts independent of the garbage they spew. They’re so arrogant about their own importance, they think they can say anything they want and nobody will know the difference.
If it weren’t so comical, it might be a bit sad…..
May 11, 2004 - A video posted Tuesday on an Islamic militant Web site showed the beheading of an American civilian in Iraq, and said the execution was carried out by an al-Qaida affiliated group to avenge the abuse of Iraqi prisoners by American soldiers.
February 22, 2002 - FBI and Pakistani officials said they received a videotape showing the decapitation of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl.
These are the animals we’re up against. While we’re dancing around in Congressional hearings and finger pointing about photos of naked criminals, while liberals are accusing the President of letting 9/11 happen on purpose, or lying about Saddam, these animals continue their typical, evil ways, laughing at us all the while.
Keep laughing, fools, they’re coming for you too.
I hear people asking why we’re so upset at the treatment of Iraqi criminals, when those who were photographed naked would’ve likely tortured the very U.S. personnel taking pictures without hesitation. I say it’s what separates us from them.
What appears to be our weakness in this battle against terrorists is our strength in life.289f
Damn those job numbers!
“The fact is that President Bushï¿½s misguided economic policies have failed to create jobs.”
-Nancy Pelosi, 08/01/03
“Since last August we’ve added 1.1 million new jobs”…. source
“Instead, 2.7 million jobs have been lost…”
-Nancy Pelosi, 05/07/03
But whatever you do, Nancy, don’t factor in the recession Bush was handed or the obvious effect September 11th had on the WORLD’S economy.
“Since taking office, President Bush has lost 2.8 million good-paying manufacturing jobs, and continues to lose more every month.”
-Nancy Pelosi, 04/27/04
So, in 2003, you said 2.7 million were lost, now with over 1 million new jobs since last August, you RAISE the lost job number to 2.8 million? Yeah, you’re in touch with reality. Have the Democrats gotten to such a point of desperation that you guys have decided that there’s no longer any use in trying to hide the lies, you’ve decide just to come out wagging your collective fingers and telling us that we should believe your completely inaccurate version of the truth? It’s a sad day for y’all, ain’t it?
Now you’re saying, “It is time for a new approach. It is time for real leadership. The Republicans have not led on the economy - Democrats will.” Wow, you can’t even get an original line, you have to steal from the successful Republican campaign slogan of the 2000 election? Well, I guess the good news is if you keep stealing lines from Republicans, at least you’ll finally be speaking the truth…even if you don’t recognize it.
The problem with that damn “economic cycle”
You’ll notice the Left focusing more and more on Iraq these days. Make no mistake, it has nothing to do with “outrage” over inhumane treatment of Iraqi MILITARY prisoners - afterall, if these folks were so upset over the treatment of human beings, you’d have heard the same feigned “outrage” a month ago when Iraqi animals attacked a convey of American CIVILIAN workers, who were in Iraq to HELP, you would’ve seen calls for protests over the hanging of their burned up corpses on public streets and bridges. No, this is just politics as usual and the reason Iraq must become the central theme to the DNC movement now is because the economy isn’t imploding like they’d hoped. For months they’ve “talked down the economy”….which is ironic because when the economy really was heading south, they blasted Bush for making comments on such…. but now, with most indicators showing growth, they seem to find it okay to trash-talk the economy.
Now they’re stuck with reality. Jobs are growing, productivity is growing, interest rates remain at 46 year lows, profits are improving, etc, etc, etc. source So expect the DNC to move full force away from their mantra of the past 12 months bashing away at the economy, and watch them repeat the term “vietnamization” ad nauseum from now until November….. or at least until June 30th when sovereignty is handed over to the Iraq people and they taste true freedom.