Posted on 07/02/2005 5:24:03 PM PDT by CHARLITE
Last Tuesday evening, our president addressed the nation. He explained very clearly why we are in Iraq. He told us many things that were positive and explained some of the negative aspects of being at war in the present day. We understand life and death. We understand losses of many different types. War is truly hell. Wartime is sobering as well as uncertain. Losing the war on terror is totally unthinkable. That is why politicizing this war is disgusting and abhorrent. But wouldn't you know it, right after President Bush spoke, out marched the buffoons from the left, monopolizing the airwaves once again with their unsubstantiated "talking points." It was as if they hadn’t heard one word the President said.
There they were – once again - pontificating in the New York Times, among other places, those redundant, clumsy, diachronic, pulled together words we all have come to know as the “Democratic talking points.” We have heard them all so many times that they have literally transformed for many into, "Are we there yet?"
It dismays me – as well as over half a nation - that the left distorts and twists the facts just to undermine a president and his administration. It is incredible that they could loath so much. No matter what the president says their response is to drag out the same old dated, tired script that they all seem to talk off of! Those on the obstructionist left seem to never tire of asks the same questions, questions with no other purpose but to cast doubt on the war effort. Shades of the 1960’s.
They deride the notions of any connection between Saddam Hussein and the attacks of 9/11 while staying silent on the connection between and Saddam Hussein and al Qaida. Two very different things, both coming under the heading: War on Terror.
We know that Saddam and Bin Laden had a working relationship. Terrorists, including al Qaeda, were trained and residing in Iraq before 9/11. Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi and one of his leaders, Zawahiri were both invited to an Islamic conference in 1999 by Saddam Hussein’s government. Yet there is silence on this piece of information from those who decry that the “war in Iraq is illegal.”
Here are some facts from an article written by Matthew Levitt:
"From Iran Zarqawi traveled to Iraq in May 2002, where his wounded leg was amputated and the limb fitted with a prosthetic device. He spent two months recovering in Baghdad, at which time "nearly two dozen extremists converged on Baghdad and established a base of operations there.
“Secretary of State Colin Powell informed us that ‘these Al Qaeda affiliates based in Baghdad now coordinate the movement of people, money and supplies into and throughout Iraq for his network, and they've now been operating freely in the capital for more than eight months.’
“While Saddam Hussein’s regime maintained it was unaware of the whereabouts of Zarqawi or other terrorists, Powell informed the Security Council that the United States had passed information to Iraqi authorities on Zarqawi's location in the Iraqi capitol via a third party."
The continued attacks by Democrats on the legitimate reasons for the war in Iraq are nauseating.
Worse than having to listen to their misguided and uninformed rhetoric, their incessant cry for an exact date for pulling our troops out of Iraq is even more maddening. What is the matter with these people? Don’t they know that by setting a date they are literally telling the terrorists when to launch their modern-day “Tet Offensive?” Whose side are they on anyhow?
Decent and patriotic Americans are fed up with the Michael Moore style script that Democrats have been reading from! Enough already! It’s time to grow up, to become adults! Our safety, our very lives are at stake. This isn’t some trivial and factually inaccurate movie – read Fahrenheit 911 – a vehicle by which some jaded ideologue can propagandize in an effort to skew a presidential election. Propaganda like Fahrenheit 9/11 is fiction, but then again so are the talking points that many Democrats cite daily.
Every day the beat goes on as the Democrats rally behind the same discredited lies and false accusations! It will take its toll, eventually, on the psyche, will and morale of those fighting today’s War on Terror. That is why these treasonous attacks are most egregious and unforgivable.
Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL) can say whatever he wants. It is after all a free country thanks to those who fight to keep us that way. But then the words of the Durbins, the Kennedys and the Pelosis are picked up by the liberally biased news media. They take their insults and their disrespect and serve it up in their daily news broadcasts and on the front pages of their newspapers. That is when the real damage starts to happen. Somehow, a belated “apology” is supposed to undo all of the damage.
If the American people continue to believe the propaganda of the liberal, anti-war, anti-American left, if the seriousness of this war in Iraq, along with the role it has in the war on terror, continues to elude them, then I'm afraid all hope may be lost!
If we lose this War on Terror – and that is definitely a possibility if we follow those who helped us to lose the war in Vietnam – we may wake up one morning living in a land that more accurately resembles Israel, a land overshadowed by the constant fear of terror in the streets.
One wonders if liberals will ever put the country ahead of their own interests. I am starting to think that will never happen. But one thing is for certain, we can't wait any longer for them to wake up to what’s really at stake here. Entertaining their narcissism, their rose-colored ideology is costing lives, lives of patriots.
If they stay on their present course, and if We the People continue to allow ourselves to be hoodwinked it will endanger the entire country.
Are we there yet?
Marie Jon' is the founder of PeoplePolitical.org
Char :)
the democrats pride themselves on being "intellectuals" but the fact of the matter is, it's the republicans that have won the war of ideas.
the democrats have nothing. both in the university and in the media they have become more and more hysterical.
NEVER...
That is why control of the country, must be kept out of their reach or influence...
The "liberal/leftist/lunatics" need to be kept on the margin -- away from sharp instuments, authority or the purse strings...
They have proved too frequently -- they CAN'T be trusted where National Security is at stake..
Semper Fi
The "Chappaquiddic Plan"
bump
For the life of me, I can't see why any but a tiny minority of Americans would continue to support this current Democrat party! Maybe it is a reflection of how much our education system has declined in the past 40 years, but even the tenor and tone of these people, the stridency, the bellowing, yelping, screeching of pure self-contradictory nonsense should turn the voting public OFF!
Thanks for your excellent remarks, Ken.
Char :)
Liberals don't listen because they have their own agenda .. and we're too stupid to understand it.
they- are- all- lying- traitors- ping!
"Do Liberals Really Listen?"
No they hear what they want to hear, and fill in the gaps with what they want to believe (my wife does that during our infrequent spats!). Never let the facts get in the way of a good story (The Dan Rather School of So-called Journalism)!
Love the "Chappaquiddick Plan!" As a Massachusetts resident, I just love this. I would add this though: "Fail to report the plan until the next day (when you've sobered up).
They can't listen because they're so full of hate they can't hear. They have hate for President Bush, hate for the Constitution, and hate for the country in general. Wait a minute! They're liberals! They are incapable of hating anyone or anything! Riiiiight.
With any luck they'll be so full of hate in 2006 and 2008 they won't hear the train wrecks before they get hit.
Funny, isn't it? They explained away their 2000 losses by "regrouping, " saying, "we have to improve our methods for getting our message out!"
Then, after a further debacle in 2004, they explained that by saying, "well-l-llll, we got our message out this time, but the voters didn't understand it!"
Would that be due to the fact that they chose such a "nuanced" candidate?........just so much SMARTER (i.e. higher IQ) than George W. Bush?!
Bush won because he is not only a heck of a lot smarter than John François Kerry, but because Bush truly IS a "man of the people." Kerry is anything BUT!.....not to mention Tuh-RAY-zuh not exactly being everyone's little June Cleaver!
Char :)
That's one rhetorical question to which the answer is obvious. No, liberals don't listen - except to each other. Copperheads!
The MSM covered the dems more than the speech -- it was shameful.
Thanks for the ping!
Excellent! Thanks!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.