Posted on 02/03/2007 9:06:15 AM PST by nwrep
In an Editorial titled "Have We an American Congress?", the NYT skewered the Democrats in Congress for taking the side of the enemy, using the enemy's arguments, and tying the hands of the President in his fight to protect the interests of the US:
*****************************************
HAVE WE AN AMERICAN CONGRESS?
Senator STONE knows very well that the President is not going "to plunge "this nation into the vortex of this "world war." The Democrats in Congress who are hostile to the President have raised that cry for their own purposes. It may be said with all confidence that Germany has no desire to add the United States to her already formidable array of enemies.
We are not likely to have any more serious trouble with Germany than that which has been brought upon us through the influence of her propagandists and her sympathizers in the American Congress.
By their Constitution, the American people created the Congress as a branch of the Government of the United States, not as an instrument to serve the purposes of Germany.
Yet, among the abhorrent forces now at work in Congress to obstruct the President in his policies, to prevent the expression of the country's will, and to bring dishonor upon the nation, that alien influence is too conspicuous for concealment.
It is a monstrous anomaly, a hideous solecism, that the American Congress should be the field of a contest in which a foreign government can display such power, or any power at all, over our national decisions.
It is only necessary for the American people to be informed of this invasion of the citadel of their sovereignty; they know how to rebuke the insolence of the assault and punish the collusive and the unfaithful among their representatives.
Great find. Maybe someone should submit this old editorial as a letter and see if the Times would do anything with it.
How true today, 101 Years later; they still side with the Enemy!!!
BTTT
Today's Democrats ARE the enemy and they prove it every day with their actions and their words.
The first two words should have given you a hint. "Senator Stone". We all know that there are no "stones" in Congress today. LOL
Thr NY Times ? werent they the paper of record or something?
Of course, in hindsight, that is what eventually happened.
bump for later reading.
To the Editor:
My eyes almost popped out when I read the headline of your editorial “Bullying Iran.”
Here is a state that is responsible for unbelievable violations of diplomatic immunity, numerous acts of terrorism, probable violation of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty; that calls for wiping a neighboring country off the map; that interferes in the internal politics of its neighbors; that ends official assemblies, political and religious, with chants of “Death to America!” and that, you have reported, may be facilitating the killing of American soldiers.
When President Bush declares that the agents of such a state who strike us should expect to be struck back at, you call this “bullying,” as if Iran were an innocent youngster in the schoolyard. Yours is a policy of appeasement.
Kevin S. Fogarty Cincinnati, Feb. 1, 2007
Mega-Bump for moral clarity.
I didn't see the date of publication on this.
Damn, I thought this was Scrappleface or John's Azconservative until I looked closely at the publication date.
The dam thing was nothing but Empires fighting other Empires. Even Great Britain didn't 'have a dog in the fight'. They only got involved over a worry about shipping and commerce within THEIR EMPIRE. There wasn't a dang 'democracy' involved until we stuck our nose in.
And IIRC Wilson did it because he got pi$$ed as Germany for 'allegedly' trying to get Mexico as an ally and promising them all their old territory back if they did and attacked the US Southwest. And in reality Mexico was as much of a Military threat then as Upper Volta (Burkina Faso) is now.
And then what was the final result. A FUBAR Middle East with made up countries and one really mad Germany. All because some frog who was still ticked over the whooping in the Franco-Prussian War of 1870-71 and financially raped them in the Treaty of Versailles, which begot -- Uncle Adolph. Heck, it 'prolly' would have been better in the long run if the allies LOST (no Nazis, no USSR, and NO crazy Muslims).
That being said, I think we should attack Mexico NOW - and like yesterday.
"Thought I was in the Twilight Zone until I saw the date on the editorial."
LOL, my thoughts exactly.
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.