First up is Cold Fury, who has more good writing on his blog than I've seen in a while. He's got Pre-emtive debate coverage that had me snorting coffee out my nose....
Moderator: For Mr. Kerry: sir, may we assume from your answer then that you will place great importance on the mandates and approval of the UN, and will you make all US military action contingent upon UN approval?
Kerry: Hell no, I never said that! How dare you question my patriotism! It’s a very complex question, one that my Vietnam experience has left me well-prepared to deal with. Do you have any idea who I am, you pusillanimous serf?
Moderator: Um. Okay. For Mr. Bush: same question.
Bush: Fuck the UN. I dicked around with the UN once already, and you see what that got me: a buttload of WMDs hidden away in Syria and every terrorist and his sister’s cat’s grandmother loaded up on a pickup-truck convoy from ever’ got-damned pissant colony in the Third World and beyond to meet our boys at the Iraqi border with guns and bombs. Kofi Annan better not ever come around here askin’ me for shit, I’ll tell you that for nothin’.
Tomorrow’s MSM coverage: Ex-President Bush made a fool of himself last night by stumbling through bellicose platitude after bellicose platitude, as the dashing, tanned, articulate John Kerry sat back and let him eviscerate himself. It was pitiful.
And do not, I repeat DO NOT miss Mike's case for Bush.
But after Carter and Clinton, these blue-collar New Yawk hardasses felt deep down that if pressure wasn’t applied somehow, then nothing would be done, just like nothing had been done about all those other attacks that preceded—and, in fact laid the groundwork for—this one. If Gore had been President, to this day we’d still be engaged in talks—aka Kerry’s beloved “summit”—with the UN over what, if anything, to do about the Taliban. We might have launched a cruise missile or three, we might have arrested a couple of low-level AQ flunkies, and by now Gore would have moved on to the next domestic “crisis” requiring a quick and massive infusion of taxpayer money. You know it, I know it, anyone but the most dedicated Democrat knows it. And that dedicated Democrat probably knows it too—but he also knows he can’t afford to admit it.
There was a very real, palpable anger about Bush as he said what he said at Ground Zero, and I had been waiting more than a decade to hear those words and see that anger. So had you, and so had a lot of other people; we shared Bush’s anger, and we had long been angry about America’s credibility having been dragged through the post-Vietnam mud by every on-the-make Democrat with an agenda and a microphone. And in that one moment of clarity, Bush changed a lot of people’s minds about him. Some of them have since changed back, but I think that’s more a reflection on them than it is on him.
QuandO writes about Kerry's one consistancy.
One often hears that Mr. Kerry is a flip-flopper, and there is much truth to that assertion, but there is one area in which Mr. Kerry has rarely wavered. At every opportunity, when faced with the prospect of using American force anywhere in the world, Mr. Kerry’s refrain has been constant: Retreat, withdraw, surrender.
That was his prescription in the 1960s and 1970s when America was involved in Vietnam. We couldn’t win. The North Vietnamese would never be beaten. It was a tragic mistake. Retreat. Withdraw. Surrender.
That was his prescription in the 1980s when Ronald Reagan was facing down the Soviet Union on the issue of tactical nuclear weapons in Europe, and John Kerry supported a "nuclear freeze". No matter that the Soviets were filling Eastern Europe with SS-20s. No matter that the KGB was directly and indirectly funding the nuclear freeze movement. Anything the Soviets objected to was too dangerous to try. Retreat. Withdraw. Surrender.
While Nicaragua was becoming a Soviet client state, with thousands of Red Army "military advisors" in the country, Kerry was jetting down to Managua for hugs and photo ops with Commandante Ortega. No, he counseled, we shouldn’t be trying to overthrow the Sandinistas. We should be trying to come to a peaceful accomodation with them. We should retreat, withdraw, surrender.
When the weapons systems that Reagan wanted to rebuild the military after a decade’s decline in the aftermath of Vietnam, Kerry was always on hand to vote against them. It was too bellicose, it cost too much money, it would make the Soviets too edgy. At nearly every turn, his counsel was the same. Retreat. Withdraw. Surrender.
In 1991, during the first Gulf War, that was his prescription as well. Let the Arab League take care of it. Let the UN Sanctions work. Let somebody else deal with Saddam. Retreat. Withdraw. Surrender.
And now that we’re embroiled there once again, he sings the same refrain, loud as ever. It’s a quagmire. Our troops are dying for a mistake, fighting the wrong war, in the wrong place, at the wrong time. Elect me, and I’ll bring all our boys home. Because, I’ll do what I always do when faced with the prospect of using force to secure our safety and our interests...
Retreat. Withdraw. Surrender.
Ouch. Just ouch. That needs to be printed and distributed as far and as wide as possible.
And for those who remember Michelle Malkins first episode of Democrats behaving badly, the Left has been kind enough to give even more examples! Add in the Bush/Cheney headquarters in Bellevue, WA that were burglerized (stealing only the computers with voter information, and leaving everything else!) and people may just get a hint that the "Party of Tolerance" really aint.
But then, we already know that.
No comments:
Post a Comment