Posted on 11/18/2007 5:14:39 AM PST by StatenIsland
Whew, that was a close one. We suffered a big attack and were in mortal danger for a while, but we are safe now. Thank God, the war on terror is over. There are no Islamic extremists. Homeland security is not an issue. The only problem in Iraq is how to get out.
Wait, this is news to you? Then you didn't watch the Democratic debate Thursday. Or maybe you did watch, but since those unpleasant topics were completely or mostly ignored, you assumed the war was over and went to bed believing peace is at hand and Santa Claus is busy making toys at the North Pole.
It's not your fault. It's the Democratic presidential candidates who are sleepwalking through history.
As befitting a scrum with too many people and too little time, the debate touched on everything and illuminated nothing. Sen. Hillary Clinton made headlines by defending herself and for finally taking a position against driver's licenses for illegal immigrants, but the gaping hole was the absence of any serious reference to the war on terror. It's long been that way on the campaign trail, and now Dem debates reflect the dangerous drift.
A New York Times language tracker tells the tale. Neither "homeland security" nor "war on terror" were mentioned. Osama Bin Laden was a no-show and Al Qaeda got one mention. "Terrorism" got three, two of them by audience members asking questions, as did "extremists," with two of those in a single answer by Illinois Sen. Barack Obama. On the other hand, "health" got 45 mentions and "education" 20.
It is remarkable how far the party and much of the country have strayed from the national unity of 9/11 (three mentions). While Bush's flawed handling of Iraq is a main reason, the unwillingness to separate his failure from the overriding truths of the continuing terror threat will come back to haunt not only Democrats, but the nation.
Consider that what was once called a generational war against an existential threat is now by unanimous consent of the candidates only a misguided Republican war in Iraq that must be ended immediately. What was once a bipartisan concern about the new phenomenon of lethal nonstate actors such as Al Qaeda has been reduced to denunciations of waterboarding and attacks on the Patriot Act. Thursday produced only one reference to Islam — when Sen. Joe Biden complained that Bush acts as though America is at war with the whole religion.
The one mention of the troop "surge" came from New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson. He declared it "is not working," no matter what the facts say, and Obama made a similar point without using the word. Meanwhile, anything wrong in Iraq or the world is America's fault.
Threats from Iran were discussed, as was the crisis in Pakistan. But beyond the insufficient answers about those troubled nation states, answers best summed up by Clinton's promise of "aggressive diplomacy," whatever that means, the debate never touched the major development that even old Europe is taking seriously. The rise of backpack bombers and homegrown terror cells is a menace our allies are addressing and we are ignoring.
Last week, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown announced sweeping security measures that include searches and bag screenings at railroad terminals and car bomb barriers at airports and malls. Theaters, restaurants, hospitals, stadiums, schools and places of worship — any place where crowds gather — will get advice on how to train employees to carry out searches and evacuation drills, the Guardian newspaper reported. Other beefed-up measures focus on who is entering the country and where they go.
French President Nicolas Sarkozy told Congress that "we must fight terror together."
Germany is giving its security authorities more power after a group of Islamists were charged with violent plots and a government report said 900 members of Hezbollah were in the country. The sudden sense of danger is a shock, with one woman telling USA Today that Germany's refusal to fight in Iraq lulled the country into thinking Islamic terrorists would focus elsewhere; "we assumed that if we behaved well in the world, nothing would happen to us," the woman said.
Ah, if that woman lived here, she could run for President of the United States. I know which party would have made her feel right at home.
The one mention of the troop "surge" came from New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson. He declared it "is not working," no matter what the facts sayIn a party full of nit-wits and morons it was amazing to watch Richardson rise to the top of the pack in the last debate. He was blazingly -- even blindingly -- stupid. He demonstrated High Stupidity, of epic proportions.
He even outshown Biden and Kucinich, which proves beyond all doubt that his utter and complete stupidity tops all contenders.
If I had the power, I would annoint Bill Richardson as King Stupid.
I did that already back when he was defending Clinton and his adminstration for all their lying antics.
The DBM/dems do not care if it's a LIE to get them to power. Richardson and his ilk are counting on trying to fool enough voters to win because THEIR cause is worth it!
At first, I was shocked but pleased to see the truth printed in the New York Daily News, but then I got to this line and realized if something looks too good to be true, it probably is.
Only a reality-challenged moron would call the fact that we haven't been attacked in six years a failure. Only a moron could look at the good news and the fact that things are getting better and terrorist attacks have greatly diminished in Iraq and call that a failure.
I guess The Daily News is giddily looking forward to a Hillary presidency where we can see how a war on terror is supposed to be done.
I should have known better.
"It's still dark outside, no matter that the sun has risen."
"It's summer, ignore the two feet of snow."
They are dumb as a box of rocks, no matter what they "feel."
Anyone like to add to the list?
I think whatever brain cells he may at one time have had, have all long since leaked down into that huge double chin of his.
If you add up the number of votes represented by state, local, and federal employees, retirees convinced that social security needs to be left alone, recipients of transfer payments through tax policy, social workers, those employed in education, the media, trial law, and in some cases those who work for private entities dependent upon government contracts, you will find that this number greatly exceeds that of those who more directly benefit from the private sector.
Add to this number the quantity of recent high school and college graduates steeped in anti-capitalist fervor, and the outcome becomes simple arithmetic. Admittedly, there are many who work for or depend on government who have enough sense to see what is happening, but they are numerically insignificant within the public sphere. If those who depend on government vote their own interests, then the Democrats will win, even if represented by someone impossible to like on a personal level.
The rising tide of GDP growth does not raise boats that happen to be atop a different body of water. We truly have two Americas, just not the ones John Edwards talks about.
... Hello ... Hello
"I enjoy visiting Florida for their mountains."
"We can trust Iran" (Oh wait..they already say that)
Only when the ‘rats start marching on DC with “Stop Jihad Now! signs will we know they are onboard.
“It would be nice if the coming election were about these issues that Dems seem to be on the wrong side of, but it won’t be.”
That’s what Goodwin fails to point out. The Dems, if they want to win, MUST take the wider GWOT off the table as an issue.
The success of COIN has already deeply threatened to remove the pullout issue from the debate, much to their chagrin.
I’ll say it again. For the democrats and liberals, there is nothing they won’t do or say to ‘get’ George Bush. Their visceral hatred of that man will lead them to ANY position which makes him look bad. Its not the war, its not global warming, its not Katrina, its not detainees and torture, its not surveillance and its not health care for 23 year old ‘children’. Its BUSH, BUSH, BUSH! Their irrational hatred of the President borders on national nihilism.
I’ll say it again. For the democrats and liberals, there is nothing they won’t do or say to ‘get’ George Bush. Their visceral hatred of that man will lead them to ANY position which makes him look bad. Its not the war, its not global warming, its not Katrina, its not detainees and torture, its not surveillance and its not health care for 23 year old ‘children’. Its BUSH, BUSH, BUSH! Their irrational hatred of the President borders on national nihilism.
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.