The confusing beliefs of a Liberal mind.

 Amusing  Comments Off on The confusing beliefs of a Liberal mind.
Sep 292005

They believe in the United Nations, and Kofi Annan, the maker of international legitimacy.

They believe that the UN inspections worked.They believe that SCUD missiles fired at U.S. troops minutes after the war began don’t change anything;They believe that 3 liters of sarin gas used against U.S. troops doesn’t change anything;They believe that finding evidence of mustard gas doesn’t change anything.

They believe that the war in Iraq conducted by a Republican president was unjustified because it lacked UN approval;They believe that the “military action” in Kosovo conducted by a Democratic president was justified without UN approval.

They believe that this war was motivated by greed and oil;They believe that when France, Germany, and Russia opposed the war, they were motivated by principle, and not by sweetheart oil deals or Oil-For-Food kickbacks;They believe that US oil prices are too high, and that the administration failed in its responsibility to do something about it.

They believe that the Iraq war was unilateral.They believe that the participation of Albania, Australia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Estonia, Georgia, Honduras, Hungary, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, South Korea, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Moldova, Mongolia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Thailand, United Kingdom, and Ukraine does not change the fact that the war was unilateral;They believe that multilateralism can only be achieved with the participation of France and Germany;They believe in multilateralism.

They believe that the U.S. may only legitimately use force for humanitarian ends in one place if it does so in all places where aid might be needed;They believe that the U.S. may not quell threats in places where the cost is relatively low unless it is willing to use force in places like North Korea, where the cost in lives would likely be very high;They believe that a humanitarian action is only truly humanitarian if there are no strategic interests to muddle the altruism.

They believe that President Bush lied.They believe that Prime Minister Blair lied.They believe that when Hillary Clinton and Dick Gephardt voted for the war based on the same intelligence relied upon by Bush and Blair, they made reasonable decisions based on the intelligence available at the time.

They believe that the administration did not make the case for war;They believe that the administration offered many different reasons but could not offer a coherent message explaining the need to go to war;They believe that the administration made perfectly clear that the only reason we were going to war was because of the threat from WMDs.

They believe that there were no WMDs.They believe that finding sarin gas is 14th page news;They believe that if the sarin gas is old, then it really isn?t a WMD we were looking for;They believe that it wasn?t really sarin gas;They believe that sarin gas isn?t necessarily a WMD.

They believe that there was no terrorist connection to, or threat from, Iraq.They believe that members of Abu Nidal in Iraq would not have committed terrorist acts if we had not invaded;They believe that al Qaeda operative Abu Musab al-Zarqawi would not have committed terrorist acts if we had not invaded;They believe that Saddam?s terrorist training camp at Salman Pak?complete with a Boeing 707 plane used for hijacking drills?did not exist or posed no real threat;They believe that it was merely a coincidence that the pharmaceutical factory bombed by President Clinton in Sudan was using al Qaeda funds and a uniquely Iraqi formula to produce VX gas;They believe that we are responsible for bringing terror on ourselves.

They believe that the prisoner abuse in Abu Ghraib is widespread and is probably the tip of the iceberg;They believe that Abu Ghraib proves that the America?s occupation is no different than Saddam?s tyranny;They believe that any attempt to suggest that there is a moral difference between a regime which systematically killed 300,000 people and tortured countless others and a regime which punished the acts of Abu Ghraib is illegitimate.

They believe that soldiers deliberately target women and children;They believe that the soldiers abuse and kill Iraqis because they are racists;We support our troops.

They believe that no one should question our statement that we “support our troops;”They believe that the best thing that could happen for this country would be for Bush to lose in November;They believe that the best way for Bush to lose in November is for the Iraq effort to go poorly, even if that means that more Iraqis and troops will die;They believe that most of the troops are minorities and the poor;They believe that when the word “heroes” is used to describe our troops, it should always be enclosed in scare quotes.

They believe in quagmire.They believe that when fringe Iraqi groups attack hard targets and are soundly defeated with relatively low Coalition casualties, that this is inescapable evidence of crisis;They believe that Iraq is Bush?s Vietnam.

They believe that Vietnam is the lens through which all wars should be viewed.They believe that soldiers in Vietnam were baby killers;They believe that John Kerry is a hero for his service in Vietnam.

They believe that because John Kerry is a hero, he necessarily has the national security expertise necessary to be commander-in-chief.They believe that any attempt to question his national security expertise based on his voting record, including his decision to vote against a supplemental bill used to buy the soldiers body armor, is an unfair attack on the patriotism of a hero, who by virtue of this honorific has the expertise to be commander-in-chief.

They believe in the trinity: NPR, CNN, and the New York Times. They believe in Ted Kennedy, Tom Harkin, John Kerry, and all the DNC, and we look for President Clinton yet to come. Amen.

This is a modified Liberal Creed by Robert D. Alt.

Liberals Aiding and Abetting the Enemy

 Amusing  Comments Off on Liberals Aiding and Abetting the Enemy
Sep 282005

Which side are the liberals on?

Nearly every day we are spoon fed news that attacks in Iraq from outside terrorists and Saddam loyalists have taken the life of an American soldier or innocent Iraqi civilians. That’s right they kill civilians!

Back in the United States Senate, Ted Kennedy calls the President of the United States a liar. Liberals tell the world that our President is an evil and a deceitful man who led us into an immoral war under false pretenses. They insist that it’s President Bush that’s responsible for the deaths of young Americans in Iraq, not the terrorists. Meanwhile Osama Bin Laden cheers them on from his cave.

For some reason, liberals remain oblivious to the fact that much of what they stand for is endorsed by the terrorists. The liberals are for allowing imprisoned enemy combatants the right to challenge their detention in U.S. courts. I don’t think that Osama Bin Laden would object to that. Liberals are for repealing the Patriot Act. I don’t doubt Al-Qaeda terror cells in the United States support that.

The terrorists know that all they have to do is to continue the random killing of soldiers and Iraqi civilians to divide the American public. They may be succeeding due to the efforts of the politically motivated left’s support that gives courage to the enemy to continue the killing.

Today’s Treasonous Democratic Party.

 Amusing  Comments Off on Today’s Treasonous Democratic Party.
Sep 282005

“Congressmen who willfully take actions during wartime that damage morale and undermine the military are saboteurs and should be arrested, exiled or hanged” – that’s what President Abraham Lincoln said. Lincoln’s words illustrate the seriousness of political responsibility in wartime and draw a fine line between legitimate political dissent and aiding the enemy.

Today’s Democratic Party is playing with treason in their effort to destroy the nation’s wartime Republican president. Dick Durbin, Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry and others have said things that give aid and comfort to the terrorists. All of them should be removed from office according to Section 2381 of U.S. Code Title 18, “Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.”

Comparing Terrorists to Freedom fighters.

 Amusing  Comments Off on Comparing Terrorists to Freedom fighters.
Sep 282005

“One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.” That’s a catchy phrase, but also misleading. Freedom fighters do not need to terrorize a population into submission. Freedom fighters target the military forces and the organized instruments of repression keeping dictatorial regimes in power. Freedom fighters struggle to liberate their citizens from oppression and to establish a form of government that reflects the will of the people. This is not to say that those who are fighting for freedom are perfect or that we should ignore problems arising from passion and conflict. Nevertheless, one has to be blind, ignorant, or simply unwilling to see the truth if he or she is unable to distinguish between those I just described and terrorists. Terrorists intentionally kill or maim unarmed civilians, often women and children, often third parties who are not in any way part of a dictatorial regime. Terrorists are always the enemies of democracy.

Bush approval at 39 percent! What’s wrong with this picture?

 Other  Comments Off on Bush approval at 39 percent! What’s wrong with this picture?
Sep 232005

Something is wrong! I just can’t believe all the negative numbers that I am seeing and hearing on President Bush’s job performance. Outside of the media, I see a different picture.

Here is one example. Kanye West used a network hurricane fundraiser to charge “George Bush doesn’t care about black people“. Of course this was reported all over the “stuck on stupid” media. Less than a week later, during the NFL pre-game kickoff show featuring the Raiders and the Patriots, West performed for the Patriots crowd at Gillette Stadium in Foxborough via remote from Los Angeles. He was greeted by the crowd with thunderous boos that lasted much of his performance.

What’s wrong with this picture? Why would West receive a response like this in liberal Massachusetts? Was everyone in the crowd a racist? Did George Bush pack the stadium with all the people that voted for him in Massachusetts? Inquiring minds want to know!

I bet that if you took a poll on President Bush’s job performance at Gillette Stadium that night, his rating would have been through the roof! Are we being misled by the “stuck on stupid” media?

Dancing on the graves of black people

 Other  Comments Off on Dancing on the graves of black people
Sep 102005

This appeared in The American Thinker.

Dancing on the graves of black people September 9th, 2005
For the left, the aftermath of Katrina has proven to be a godsend. In fact, I don’t think I’ve seen them this happy since Hugo Chavez hornswaggled Jimmy Carter into certifying his victory in a recall vote last year. There’s just something about communist thugs that brings a smile to the face of an American lefty and makes their hearts go pitter patter.

But even a victory by “The Laughing Goat” ( La Cabra que Ríe) couldn’t possibly gladden the hearts and warm the cockles of liberals like the prospect of celebrating…what? Well, there’s that drop in the President’s poll numbers. And then there’s…let’s see. Oh! Did I mention the drop in the President’s poll numbers?

Yes, these are heady days for our left wing friends. The fact that their celebrations are taking place as a direct result of the distress, suffering, anguish and death of tens of thousands of their fellow citizens seems to not be of much concern to our morally superior betters. In fact, it has emboldened them to advance every crack pot theory on race and class that has poisoned American politics for going on forty years. One could say the left is dancing on the graves of black people, celebrating the exploitation of a political opening brought about by the incompetence of relief efforts in the largely black neighborhoods of New Orleans. Except for one thing: most of those graves are empty at the moment because the future les habitants haven’t even been plucked from the floodwaters yet.

But why let a small detail like common decency spoil a good party? It’s Mardi Gras in September in the Big Easy and liberals are dancing the Cajun Reel with the thousands of grinning skeletons who very soon now will start filling up the temporary mortuaries set up to receive them. The fact that we will be denied the edifying television spectactle of watching the gruesome task of retrieving these corpses has now led to charges of a “cover-up” – as if focusing a camera on the bloated, blackened remains of our fellow citizens should be made into some kind of reality TV show. Kind of a Survivor meets The Great Race high concept production. Why, the syndication possibilities are staggering.

Consider the hue and cry that went up in the hours and days following September 11, 2001 about how we shouldn’t be showing images of the tortured souls as they jumped to their deaths from those doomed towers.Or the unbearable, constant replaying of the horrific scenes of destruction as the towers fell. The rationale at the time was that such appalling images would breed anger and hate. But the anger and hate that would be bred by showing the maggoty corpses left behind by a man-made disaster are perfectly alright – as long as that anger and hate is directed at George Bush. After all, from the left’s perspective, if you can’t use images of a rotting cadaver for the ultimate good of making George Bush look bad, why bother?

That’s all they have to live for, of course. That and the possibility that the American people will become so outraged at the President’s choice of Michael Brown to head up the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) that they will rise up in their righteous anger and smite the Republicans a mortal blow at the polls next year. The elevation of horse show impressario Brown to the lofty perch of FEMA Director may have been an unconscionable and unfathomable act of stupidity on the part of the President. But so was having Ron Brown’s Commerce Department give technology transfer waivers to American companies so that the Chinese army could improve the accuracy of thier ICBMs (Clinton). Or selling arms for hostages (Reagan). Or putting price controls on crude oil (Carter). Or putting wage and price controls into place when inflation was at the “astronomical” rate of 4.7% (Nixon). Or supporting Cuban ex-pats in a doomed-from-the-start effort to take back their country from Castro (Kennedy).

All Presidents make huge mistakes. Some lead to economic distress. Others actually cost lives. At this moment, despite the left’s charges that Bush is insensitive, I doubt whether the President is getting much restful sleep these past few nights. If there is anything at all that the American people have sensed about this man on a personal level, it is a sense of a simple, faith-based compassion for his fellow citizens. Does he recognize personal responsibility in his disasterous choice of Michael Brown as FEMA Director? Firing the incompetent fool would be a good indication one way or another.

But giving Master Brown the heave-ho won’t satisfy the baying hounds at the President’s doorstep. The ghosts of New Orleans may indeed haunt Mr. Bush’s presidency from here on out if he doesn’t act soon to counter the impression that the Federal government isn’t on top of this relief effort. It isn’t enough to promise money and support for the half million displaced people whose lives have been shattered by the storm. This is a given in America. It’s doing what’s expected.

What the President needs to do is the unexpected. Americans will back a President after he makes a mistake only when he admits the error in public and asks for forgiveness. Reagan and Clinton both made monumental errors in their second terms and yet finished their times in office with the strong support and even affection of the American people because they recognized their mistakes, apologized for them, and moved on to bigger and better things.

Following Iran-Contra, Reagan negotiated the first real reductions in a class of nuclear weapons when he signed a treaty with the Soviets eliminating medium range missiles from Europe. And following Clinton’s apology for lying to the American people about “that woman,” and his subsequent impeachment, he seemed to gather new energies which allowed him to finish his term with approval ratings over 60%.

Clearly, this is a mea culpa moment for Bush. But whether his political enemies, who now have the upper hand, allow him the luxury of such a course of action is problematic. The left’s continued glee at having the President on the run will last only as long as the President stubbornly refuses to make things right with the American people.

Things went horribly wrong in New Orleans. And while the inexplicable gaffes of the disaster tag team of Blanc-o-Nagin will ultimately come to be seen as at least equally responsible for the tragedy, the American people want an acknowledgement of what they’ve seen with their own eyes and heard with their own ears; the people that the President dispatched to deal with the relief efforts failed miserably. They want the President to take ultimate responsibility for this and they want it done soon. Any delay will be seen as playing politics and that’s something the American people have no patience for right now.

Do the right thing, Mr. Bush. And do it now.

Rick Moran is proprietor of the blog
Right Wing Nuthouse

Al-Qaida’s spectacular ‘Ramadan Offensive’

 Amusing  Comments Off on Al-Qaida’s spectacular ‘Ramadan Offensive’
Sep 092005

Bin Laden plans for terrorist strikes against U.S., Europe next month.

This was posted on the World Net Daily site.

Raising new concerns about the use of weapons of mass destruction by terrorists, al-Qaida is planning spectacular attacks next month against the U.S., Russia and Europe in what it is calling the “Great Ramadan Offensive.”

The offensive, designed to overshadow the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on New York and the Pentagon, was first referenced in a May 30 letter written by al-Qaida’s Iraq commander Abu Musab Zarqawi to Osama bin Laden. It is the subject of a report written by terrorism expert Yossef Bodansky, the former director of the Congressional Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare, to government officials.

Ramadan, the holiest period in the Muslim calendar, begins Oct. 4 this year and lasts a month.

Zarqawi characterizes the attacks as a “fateful confrontation” with the U.S. and Israel.

Airports in Italy and the Netherlands are referenced as specific potential targets, and Italy is already on high alert for possible terrorist attacks.

A Zarqawi operative named Abu Abdul Rahman al-Jazaeri is considered a key figure in the planned Italy attacks. He is believed to be in the country, but eluding authorities.

Details of the operation came from intercepted communications between top al-Qaida leaders about two weeks ago.

“I think that the plan for the next stage that was drawn up has reached you or is on its way to you,” said Zarqawi’s letter to bin Laden. “O God. Make the expedition of Osama proceed toward its goal … We await your orders as to the next stage of the plan.”

Bodansky says plans for attacks against Europe are being finalized in the Balkans, while preparations for attacks on Russia are being completed in Chechnya. Attack plans against the U.S. are being directed from the tri-border area in Latin America.

He also concludes that al-Qaida leaders have interpreted the devastation of the Gulf Coast by Hurricane Katrina as a sign that Allah is pleased with their plans.