Posted on 08/31/2006 1:30:32 AM PDT by Mo1
WASHINGTON --This week in his speech before the national convention of the American Legion, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld made an unconscionable faux pas. He defended our present policy in Iraq and our war on terror by citing historic events and quoting Winston Churchill and Georges Clemenceau. That is a rude way to discuss policy with one's Democratic opponents. The historical record is a particularly sore subject with the likes of Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid, who inveighed against Rumsfeld's speech as "reckless." History has not been going his way for a while. Reid's equivalent in the House of Representative, the Hon. Nancy Pelosi, spoke of the Secretary's impairment…and she was not referring to his golf swing. Senator Jack Reed, a Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, accused Rumsfeld of questioning the critics' patriotism.
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
One more self ping for later.
There's another difference. Today's appeasers positively hate America and Americans and capitalism and democracy. They want to see Americans in chains. It doesn't matter to them whether we are in communist chains or islamic fascists' chains as long as we are defeated and humiliated and enslaved. That takes them to a whole new level and makes them a bit more dangerous than the appeasers of old.
It's always refreshing when Rumsfeld sends the RATS leaping off the cliff by merely showing up to speak.
The Dems never miss an opporunity to over reach too
Pelosi's goofy and vapid statement was certainly an act of over-reaching and overplaying of the hand. She said something to the effect that Rumsfeld's speech was proof that Rumsfeld should be fired.
Pelousy... If the Democrats were really wanting to be taken seriously, why would they have a leader in the House who puts her make up on with a caulking gun? Even Bozo the clown has more credibility...
We should have Rumsfeld as the GOP candidate for president...
Aaaaaaaa. So true.. lol
I wonder why Pelosi and Reid assumes that the Secretary was talking about them unless they know it to be true.
I believe they make this assumption so they can come out and act all offended. It being all about them at all times and in all places, it is important that everyone know how upset they are whenever there is occasion to say so.
Or if they feel like it.
This is nothing new.
One person who used this tactic successfully, to the extreme detriment and incalculable harm, is none other than John "The Snake" Kerry.
Anyone who knows the truth about this traitorous rat-bastard, knows that his political ambitions were zealous in nature.
He ran (after moving several times to several districts in Ma.) for Congress and lost to the ultra liberal Catholic Priest, Fr. Robert Drinan.
It was only then, that he became involved in the Anti War (Vietnam) movement and joined the Vietnam Veterans Against War (VVAW).
Worse yet, I (and many others who have studied Kerry) believe he did so with the sole purpose of gaining name recognition, popularity and use this as a springboard to getting elected, which he did successfully.
After his having slimed millions of us Nam Vets and gaining all of the publicity as a "decorated" anti-war vet (his credentials having been established as required in Ma.)he dropped out of the movement and succeeded in getting elected to the Senate.
Of course, he cared not a whit at the harm and damage he had caused with his contrived and phony accusations towards Vietnam Vets; the Administration at the time; the Military; as well as the entire U.S. Government.
Moreover, his actions helped prompt Congress to refuse to fund South Vietnam after the North openly invaded the South with overwhelming "Regular Army" forces, including mechanized Battalions.
The resultant overthrow of South Vietnam by the North, caused so much death, destruction and misery (not to mention the indirect genocide which followed in Cambodia) was monumental, and thus I charge Kerry with having the blood of so many, on his hands.
Granted, he was not alone in the condemnation of our involvement in Vietnam. Nevertheless, IMHO, people inside (and outside) of Gov't listened to him and took to heart his exaggerations and deliberate falsehoods, due to the fact that (a) he was not a drafted, misfit who simply came back from the war disenchanted and disenfranchised; he was an educated, erudite, spokesperson who could articulate his position better than most, and (b) more importantly, he was recognized as an "authority" (albeit having served only 4 months in country which was NOT reported at all) due to his being an "officer" and having returned with a chest full of medals--again, some of which having been awarded under dubious and questionable circumstances.
Thus at that time, there is no "one" other person who garnered so much National recognition (thanks to a misguided and accomplices in the media and being given a Congressional Committee platform from which to spew his venom) and acceptance and therefore, was more instrumental than anyone else at that time in helping turn public opinion against the war as well as encouraging Congress to act as it did.
The damage caused to us Nam Vets was also incalculable and lasted for 35 years and is only now (because time heals all wounds) becoming less and less painful.
So why rehash something most of us are aware of and what does it have to do with the subject in this article?
It is because, today, many are using the same tactic (Murtha comes to mind among many others) and intentionally or not, the damage they may cause through their Anti-War tactics and policies, could beget the same consequential results as that of 35 years ago. Thus, we must all remain vigilant and NOT allow these charlatans to advance their specious personal agendas on the backs of our brave men and women who serve today as well as the overall consequences their actions could precipitate.
As for JFK, being a Christian, it is not a good thing to "hate" and to harbor ill feelings for such a long period of time. Nevertheless, as hard as I try, I find it difficult not to loathe this person with every fiber of my being, and thus, may God forgive me!!!
A 70+ year old man who can still dance circles around his Democratic and liberal rivals half his age, dancing a jig while playing bagpipes and tennis at the same time.
Best damn appointment Bush ever made.
It landed on the democrats and their shrieking like stuck pigs!!!
LOL....you mean you prefer Rumsfeld to William Cohen or that little milquetoast shrimp that preceded him!
How old was Churchill when he took the helm in England?
If he ever gets tired of being Secretary of Defense, I'd like to see him be Whitehouse Press Secretary for a while. Nobody handles the dimwits in the media better than Rummy.....and the best part is they usually don't realize they've been put in their place until they've had time to think about it.
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.