Legislating A Terrorist Victory In Iraq
By Frank Salvato
March 30, 2007
If anyone was under the impression that congressional Democrats actually considered their actions, with regard to the "troop withdrawal bills," beyond achieving victory over the Bush administration, they would be playing the part of the uninformed, Kool-Aid drinking fool. (web site) While Democrats Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and the rest of their anti-war, pro-genocide, hate-Bush contingent revel in the fact that they have succeeded in passing a bill that opposes the president, al Qaeda operatives in Iraq are preparing to set their alarm clocks for "half-past redeployment" so the slaughter of those who braved Iraq's polling places can begin.
Upon a logical, thoughtful examination, all congressional Democrats really achieved was a guaranteed veto at the hand of the president, a veto that in all likelihood, in light of the slim margin by which the bills' passed, will be sustained. (web site) President Bush plainly promised to veto any bill that included a timetable or withdrawal measure and he made it perfectly clear to even the most feeble-minded in Congress that would be the case. (web site) So their actions -- the bloviating, the grandstanding and the headline grabbing, in reality, were a pre-determined waste of time and taxpayer dollars.
Even more disconcerting is the fact that congressional Democrats, cheered on by the mind-numbing inanity of the anti-war Left, used tactics such as bribing Blue Dog Democrats with taxpayer funded pork projects placed in an emergency supplemental bill simply to achieve a political victory over the president. Let me say that again -- they bribed many who wouldn't have normally voted for defeatist policies with taxpayer dollars for pet pork projects; remember that the next time anyone tries to say that moderate Democrats are different from Progressive-Left Democrats.
But perhaps the most infuriating issue associated with this most ignorant of political stunts is the fact that a Republican had the audacity to believe he could pretend he was acting in the best interest of the troops by siding with congressional Democrats when all he was really doing was positioning with moderates and opinion polls for a potential run at the White House.
If there is a hell for insincere, opportunistic, two-faced politicians Chuck Hagel will arrive there shortly after he leaves his earthly bonds. (web site)
Being a Vietnam veteran, he is either showing a complete disregard for history, exposing the depths to which he will bow to the political altar for power or displaying his ignorance when it comes to having an iota of vision for what the Iraqi people will face in the event of a pre-mature withdrawal of US troops from the Iraqi theater. Of course, there is the possibility that Hagel missed the Cambodian and Vietnamese genocide that took place after the premature withdrawal of American troops from Southeast Asia, a withdrawal forced at the hands of the same striking ignorance employed by today's 1960s anti-war throwbacks. Perhaps he was too busy perfecting his "deployment" of the perfect martini at his post-service bartending job or making sure that he could "hit the post" at his college radio gig, one can never really be positive about the origins of ignorance.
>> Continued -- Page 1 2 3
| 
