« If you make your own f'ing bed, you better be g-d ready to lie down on the f'er | Main | Bald Love »

So galling, you'd think they were French

So, the Republicans have managed to stymie (for now) a vote on the non-binding resolution opposing Bush's plans in Iraq.

Oh, the nerve of these Republicans, to use such underhanded tactics. Don't they have any sense of propriety, of proportion, of decency? This isn't some meaningless tripe like nominations to federal judgeships, this is about a NON-BINDING declaration that "we don't like it, but we're not going to do anything about it!"

I am so ashamed of every single time I've ever voted for a Republican.


TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference So galling, you'd think they were French:

» Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator linked with House Rebukes Bush On Iraq

» Flopping Aces linked with Just Let Them Win Dammit!

Comments (52)

My sentiments. Exactly.</p... (Below threshold)

My sentiments. Exactly.

Yes, I can imagine how you ... (Below threshold)
John:

Yes, I can imagine how you must feel.

There are more important things to take care of like renaming post offices, or changing the cafeteria menu to read Freedom Fries, instead of French Fries.

Yes, I can imagine how y... (Below threshold)

Yes, I can imagine how you must feel.

No, John. You can't.

Galling. French.C... (Below threshold)
mantis:

Galling. French.

Clever.

After the Dems lower the mo... (Below threshold)
GeminiChuck:

After the Dems lower the morale of our troops and embolden our enemies, I expect they will move to other important issues such as un-doing the Gingrich revolution including bringing back the House Post Office and House Bank (with Congressman Jefferson in charge of bringing in the freezers - err safe)

gc

Gemini, Pelosi's continual ... (Below threshold)
The Listkeeper:

Gemini, Pelosi's continual harping on on the Culture of Corruption wasn't any indictment of Republican ethics...

It was a campaign promise.

I will take a pass. You guy... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

I will take a pass. You guys are too good at writing for me.

Oh yes, the Republicans sta... (Below threshold)
Allen:

Oh yes, the Republicans stand for family values, such as Mark Foley? The Republicans support our troops, why isn't the VA fully funded, (last 6 years of rubber stamp Congress) should have fully funded it, but HELL NO, THAT just can't be done. Now the shrub wants to cut VA funding. WHY?

Oh yes, the power of the words works wonders to the neocons. Well, put your money where your mouth is, or is it the famous excuse, "Clinton's fault". Blaming Clinton is a hell of a lot easier than thinking, isn't it?

Uhhh Allen did someone give... (Below threshold)
jhow66:

Uhhh Allen did someone give you a weggie? lol

There's loads of stuff that... (Below threshold)
epador:

There's loads of stuff that hasn't been fully funded, only "continuations" - this tactic has been used by both sides. Its deceitful or just stupid to state otherwise.

Even this galling example of a resolution passed by the House on the same day our town had a funeral and memorial for a recently fallen son.

In this far-left coast universe, I don't hear many calling his end a waste. Here, that is.

Allen:Free-associa... (Below threshold)

Allen:

Free-associate much?

Have a napkin; you're frothing.

J.

Napkin, hell maybe a bib. S... (Below threshold)
Allen:

Napkin, hell maybe a bib. Since the Republican party stands for family value, support the troops, if you say anything about the Iraq war that isn't the party line your a "traitor" to this country.

They screwed the veterans from WWI, and since then they haven't let up.

Tell me Jay, since for the last 6 years, we had a rubber stamp congress, why in the hell didn't the Republicans fully fund the VA?

It's just fine and dandy to give un-bidding contracts to Cheney's old company, but the hell with the vets. And you support this BS?

I'm a disabled vet, and I damn sure know what I am talking about. So, as a good little Republican puke, start demanding the VA be fully funded. That would convince a whole lot of people that you really support the troops. Until you do, just keep drinking the Kool-aid.

Allen,What does "f... (Below threshold)
sam:

Allen,

What does "fully-funded" mean?

Yes, I was wondering the sa... (Below threshold)
SATerp:

Yes, I was wondering the same thing (re 'full funding').

Allen, Thank you f... (Below threshold)
John:

Allen,

Thank you for your service.

To continue with your line of reasoning, here's a little excercise for the Wizbang readers.

Dubya will be in office for two more years. He's bragging about his ability to ballance the budget by 2012. The only problem with this, is most of the "fun stuff" happens in the next presidents term. In other words, Bush's "balanced" budget is up to the next guy...

So to come back to Allen's point, what does Bush do with the VA funding for his budget plan out to 2012. Well.... He funds the VA somewhat during his last two years, but drasticaly cuts funding the first year after he's gone, and from there on... Just when we need the funding for the returning Iraq vets... Without that little trick (and others) the math does not add up. But that's the next guy's problem to figure out.

Support the troops, my ass....

My wife's grandfather survived the Bintan death march in WWII. He died waiting for his benefits that the US promised.

I think Allen's correct in saying we have a history of cheering and waiving the flag, then forgetting the troops.

Jay... I appreciate the pun... (Below threshold)
Publicus:

Jay... I appreciate the pun. Groaners are fine; not everything has to be a LOL.

And, more seriously, I think it's good for all concerns that...even though the motion is blocked...the proceedings clarify for everyone where each of the legislators stand. This way, those who support the war can support legislators who blocked the motion. And those who oppose the war know who wants it to continue.

Only 34 Republicans voted ... (Below threshold)
JOHN RYAN:

Only 34 Republicans voted against it. The fact is that the American people no longer support this war. In view of that how long should we keep the troops over there?
Should they stay as long as they want or as long as the people of the United States feel is necesaary ?

Allen, you sound like a Fra... (Below threshold)
Mitchell:

Allen, you sound like a Francis. Your problem about this war is that we're not "fully funding" the VA.

Hmmm. Think much?

Non Sequitur much? Apparently so.

JOHN RYAN--I, too,... (Below threshold)
Publicus:

JOHN RYAN--

I, too, oppose the war in Iraq. I want our troops brought safely home ASAP, just as most Americans do. However, we both know that the war will continue just as long as those who support it have the power to keep it going. The Democrats can pass bills, but that can't overcome a veto...unless opposition to the war grows to 2/3 of both houses of congress.

This will only happen if those legislators either have a change of heart, or feel that unhappy voters will turn them out of office.

This war WILL end, and many, many war supporting legislators will lose their job...but not until the bitter end when reality takes hold----that we can't win a civil war and that their is no sustainable government in Iraq because the Iraqis cannot create one.

Of course, even though since the beginning the Republicans have had complete control over the war, and even now the Democrats have demonstrated little ability to affect our policy, the Republicans will blame the Democrats for the (inevitable) failure.

But the people will not be fooled.

This is small comfort as we would rather see our soldiers brought home safe and alive now, than merely get some political victory for Democrats at a later date. But that's just the way it is.

Publicus, Just a co... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Publicus,
Just a correction on the civil war: we all know that the former Baathists (and the Sunnit minority) want to regain their former tyrannical power over the rest of Iraq. AlQ wants to establish their brutal Islamic regime and a safe haven for their terrorism. Iranian has their thuggist proxies like Sadr. All these bad elements want to create a civil war to further their not-so-good goals for Iraq. So (1) it is shameful that most of the liberal left and the Dems would hide behind the "civil war" facade to turn Iraq over to such well known evil tyrannical forces (I wonder how liberals can look themselves in the mirror and proclain their democratic and equality ideals!), (2) most of Iraq, esp the Shiitte majority has shown a remarkable restraint in building their democracy and uniting their country (again, S. Korea and Taiwan had a dictatorship for a while before democracy took hold). Again it is a shame that the dems and liberals wouldn't want to help the majority of the Iraqui people against the terrorists, the former Baathists (Iraqui version of Nazi) and the Iranian mullahocracy.

Even now, as the surge has put AlQ and thugs like Sadr on the run. The dems seem oblivious to this fact. And at the very least, their determined action seems to encourage these evil forces to continue the fight against the American troops.

This is not a record to be proud of. For me, it is despicable and shameful. The dems should be ashamed of themselves. Unfortunately for the moments, all they can think of is politics. So sad that the party of FDR has fallen to such a bottomless pit.

LoveAmerica Immigrant--... (Below threshold)
Publicus:

LoveAmerica Immigrant--

Most of America see a bloody mess where you see progress. This war has been going on longer than U.S. involvement in WWII. We show no credible signs of putting humpty-dumpty back together again.

This, despite the fact that Americans were told by some administration officials and supporters that it would be easy and quick and we would be greeted as liberators. That didn't happen. The administration failed to win the war and squandered its credibility. The millions and millions of Americans who want us out of Iraq are not traitors. They are Americans who are tired of being lied to, and who don't want any more of their sons and daughters to die for a lie, or for a hopeless cause.

And remember----this is the Republicans doing. All war policy was made and carried out by Republicans...and still is. The Democrats have failed to even pass a non-binding resolution. So, you can't blame any of this on them.

Pelosi is so despicable in ... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Pelosi is so despicable in my opinion. It is funny that she is that clueless (I would say stupid as an American leader in providing a free false propaganda for such well known evil forces) if not for the fact that her opinion is representative of the modern left. Again, so sad that the party of FDR has fallen to such a bottomless pit. I don't know they can look themselves in the mirror now if not 20 years from now.


Pelosi was on The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer last night, and Jim Lehrer said, "Ms. Pelosi, what would your position be if in fact the Petraeus plan worked?" What if it actually worked, the Baghdad security plan?

PELOSI: I pray that it does. But the fact is we know that it would increase the odds of it working if there were some sincere efforts to engage the other countries in the region in the diplomatic solutions that are necessary to stabilize the region, and do the political work, do the political work -- that is to say, amend the constitution, include the Sunnis and others into the civic life of Iraq. That's where you go. You don't go into ethnic cleansing of neighborhoods and say, "Now we're going to referee."

This war has been going on ... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

This war has been going on longer than U.S. involvement in WWII. We show no credible signs of putting humpty-dumpty back together again.
------------------------------------------------
Publicus,
I thought you know better than this. WE were involved longer in WW2 with more massive casualty. IN the first training exercise off the coast of England the US lost several thousand troops. DO you know how many soldiers we lost on D-day? You know how tough the battles on the Pacific ocean and East Asia was? For several years, there was no sign of progress if not losing ground.

The Reps have been putting together plan for the war on Iraq against the terrorists and their sponsors. YOu are right, the dems have no part in it. They have been busy providing propaganda for the terrorists and undermining the war policy as much as they can. That undermining effort continues today.

LoveAmerica Immigrant--... (Below threshold)
Publicus:

LoveAmerica Immigrant--

Well, you should be happy. Because the Bush administration will be able to do everything they want to win the war. They had complete control since the very beginning...and they haven't won yet. But, since the Democrats don't have the votes to overcome a veto, they don't make policy. Don't trouble yourself about Pelosi.

So, sit back and enjoy the war. Your party has won.

Publicus, Also are ... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Publicus,
Also are you saying that the dems from Clinton to Daschle, the UN and the Europeans have been lying about the threat of Saddam Hussein and WMD during the 1990s? Are you saying that Bush should have treated Clinton and other democratic leaders as liars when they signed the IRaqui Liberation Act even before 9/11?

If you say that Bush should have treated the dems as liars, then I would agree with you.

Publicus, Don't wor... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Publicus,
Don't worry I agree with you that the dems have no part in fighting against the terrorists and their sponsors. They are providing the propaganda for the terrorists (that 's what their resolution is all about and Pelosi 's stupid implication that US troops involving in ethnic cleansing!).
I am not surprised that the Dems want the power but don't want the responsibility. The least they can do is to stay out of the way, instead of undermining and providing propaganda for the enemies.

LoveAmerica Immigrant--... (Below threshold)
Publi:

LoveAmerica Immigrant--

So, since the vast majority of Americans who oppose the war in Iraq, and the Democrats have NO POWER over policy, why aren't you just happily sitting back and enjoying the inevitable victory being won by our patriotic Republicans and their President?

Why are you so agitated over the powerless Democrats and the powerless majority of American people...whom it sounds like you hate...when they can't do anything meaningful? You have every reason to be HAPPY not ANGRY!

How do you know that the ma... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

How do you know that the majority of American people are not happy because we are not fighting with more decisive force and less politically correct constraints by the left?

I am surprised that you are not agitated by such a despicable resolutin that does nothing but provide propaganda for the terrorists when they are on the run. I am truly surprised that you are not agitated that the liberals and dems want a repeat of VN for Iraq. For VN, the left can claim ignorance of the atrocities even though their silence was a shameful record. Given what we know from the VN legacy and 9/11 and the evil intention of the terrorists, the left is still pushing ahead for another VN. Sorry the left is more morally bankrupt than I thought!

Publicus, I am angry at the traitorous and despicable actions of the liberal left and the dems in this war against the terrorists. You many be comfortable opning here enjoying the safety provided by the American military fighting the terrorists in Iraq and Afghan instead oh here. But I learned from first hand experience. That 's why I am angry. I hope you will wake up.

The Congressional Democrats... (Below threshold)

The Congressional Democrats have launched a masterfully misguided campaign that features withdrawal and retreat as its primary goals.

One of the seminal drawbacks of adulthood is having to divine the least noxious options when all of them are equally unappealing.

That was axiomatic 50 years ago when lessons predicated on adversity were de riguerre. Today, everything from the temporary loss of our Internet connection to inadequate health care coverage is synonymous with an effront to our dignity.

In this cultural mileau, the absence of victory, as measured in our solipsistic universe, is simply unacceptable.

Also absent from our cultural landscape is any sense of collective sacrifice and collateral understanding of the gravity of our predicament.

Instead, we have Senator Reid excoriating President Bush for his temerity at wanting to establish stability in Iraq.

But, in politics as in physics, every action has an opposite and equal reaction, and the Democrats are casting a lasting political penumbra that will haunt them right up to the 2008 election.

For more, see our post of today, "The Penumbra of Political Justice," at:

www.clearcommentary.com

How do you know th... (Below threshold)
Publicus:
How do you know that the majority of American people are not happy because we are not fighting with more decisive force and less politically correct constraints by the left?

Because the left hasn't made policy; the Bush administration and his supporters have and continue to do so. So, people probably aren't unhappy about (nonexistent) restraints on our war policy.

The Congressional ... (Below threshold)
Publicus:
The Congressional Democrats have launched a masterfully misguided campaign that features withdrawal and retreat as its primary goals.

Well, since the Democrats can't even pass a nonbinding resolution, you haven't a thing to worry about. Just enjoy Bush's brilliant upcoming victory in Iraq. (He CAN complete it by the end of his term, can't he?)

Publicus,Because the... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Publicus,
Because the left hasn't made policy; the Bush administration and his supporters have and continue to do so. So, people probably aren't unhappy about (nonexistent) restraints on our war policy.
--------------------------------------------------
I know the dems have no policy and no intention of fighting against the terrorists. What the dems have done is to use their positions and available power to smear the US military whenever they can. I am surprised that you are not agitated by such an effort.

Did you forget about Durbin's Nazi implication against the US military? And here is what Pelosi just said about the surge success against the terrorists/Baathists.


PELOSI: I pray that it does. But the fact is we know that it would increase the odds of it working if there were some sincere efforts to engage the other countries in the region in the diplomatic solutions that are necessary to stabilize the region, and do the political work, do the political work -- that is to say, amend the constitution, include the Sunnis and others into the civic life of Iraq. That's where you go. You don't go into ethnic cleansing of neighborhoods and say, "Now we're going to referee."

Just give you another examp... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Just give you another example, the terrorists/Baathists can blow up women and children but they will be considered freedom fighters. When the US military and IRaqui forces respond decisively, then we are engaged in ethnic cleansing. I am surprised that you don't know the effect this kind of rhetoric on the morale of the troops. And we all know that PR is an extremely important front in any war effort. I am truly that you are not agitated when the dems provide such a PR campaign for the terrorists and their sponsors.

I agree with you again that the dems have no war policy. They are providing the PR campaign for the terrorists. Can we agree now?

Philip -- This is ... (Below threshold)
Publicus:

Philip --

This is a very curious analysis.

In this cultural mileau, the absence of victory, as measured in our solipsistic universe, is simply unacceptable.

So, is your Bush administration going to win or not? And how do you feel about that?

Also absent from our cultural landscape is any sense of collective sacrifice and collateral understanding of the gravity of our predicament.

What collective sacrifices would you suggest? What collective sacrifices has the Bush administration requested?

Instead, we have Senator Reid excoriating President Bush for his temerity at wanting to establish stability in Iraq.

Is that really what Reid said? I think you know that's not true. Perhaps Reid, like many Americans, want to know what our sons and daughters have died for, and when we will get some results that justify their sacrfice. In fact, most Americans now think that the Iraq war was a mistake and want out. I don't think the use of words like "solipsistic" and "cultural mileu" actually adds any force or substance to your argument.

But, in politics as in physics, every action has an opposite and equal reaction, and the Democrats are casting a lasting political penumbra that will haunt them right up to the 2008 election.

Possibly. Your insubstantial (but important sounding!) reference to physics and penumbra notwithstanding, I would assume that if the Republican's policies in Iraq succeed (and they haven't done so yet), it will help them in the next election. And if they fail, I would expect it to hurt them.

I wonder where we would be ... (Below threshold)
Soupy:

I wonder where we would be in this war on terror - battle iraq - IF the dems had not continually been more against Bush than the terrorists. I STILL question 2/3 of the country against this battle... I am not seeing it here. But if that IS the case then yes I agree, Bring the troops home, and we'll fight them here. Might as well, since we can't seem to unite to fight them there!

I agree with you a... (Below threshold)
Publicus:
I agree with you again that the dems have no war policy.

I don't think you agree with me, because you haven't even been able to follow what I've been saying.

I didn't say the Democrats have no war policy; I said they have NO POWER OVER WAR POLICY! So, I recommend you try not to get agitated and worry about them! Why be a sore winner? It's very unbecoming...

I agree with Publicus again... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

I agree with Publicus again that the dems have no war policy against the terrorists and all they have done so far is to undermince the Rep war policy with their propaganda effort on behalf of the terrorists/their sponsors.


I didn't say the Democrats ... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

I didn't say the Democrats have no war policy; I said they have NO POWER OVER WAR POLICY!
------------------------------------------------
I show you the democrats (as American leaders) have power to undermine war policy with the propaganda effort they have done with this resolution and the Nazi/ethnic cleansing smear against the US military. Again, Pelosi is an American leader and the terrorists can simply said that an American leader admitted that the US is engaged in ethnic cleansing. Surprised that you don't see this.

Soupy--I ... (Below threshold)
Publicus:

Soupy--

I wonder where we would be in this war on terror - battle iraq - IF the dems had not continually been more against Bush than the terrorists.

I know this is hard for you to understand, but the Democrats are not FOR the terrorists! Neither are the millions who want us out of Iraq! And, since the Bush administration made ALL policy regarding the war, they BEAR FULL RESPONSIBILITY.

If you have confidence in the Bush administration, this shouldn't be a problem for you. You should be confident of their policy. And they should get FULL CREDIT for the results...however they turn out.

Publicus,The Democ... (Below threshold)
kevino:

Publicus,

The Democrats have the power to stop this quite quickly, and it is veto-proof. All they have to do is not approve money for the war. That's it. They should pass the DOD appropriations bill without any money for Iraq (immediately) and tell the world that Iraq war will be funded by a quarterly basis. That sends a clear message: get ready to "redeploy". Bush can veto it or not veto it. It doesn't matter: he doesn't get the money.

The non-binding resolution is a complete waste of time.

The Democrats won't do it. They don't have the guts, and they don't want to give up the opportunity to keep the war going through the 2008 elecions.

LoveAmerica Immigrant--... (Below threshold)
Publicus:

LoveAmerica Immigrant--

Well, if we lose wars because some ineffectual politicians speak out against them, then we never had a chance, because people have different opinions. You'll just have to learn to live in a world where not everyone agrees with you. And, when you do, you'll be a happier person.

kevino--T... (Below threshold)
Publicus:

kevino--

The Democrats have the power to stop this quite quickly, and it is veto-proof. All they have to do is not approve money for the war.

Well, yes...you are right. But I am beginning to doubt they have the willpower to do that. And, of course, the administration may find some extra-Constitutional ways to get around a funding cutoff in the event that the Democrats do try to cutoff funds.

That said, I hope they do. It's a clumsy and unfortunate way to end the war...but it's probably the best option left.

We show no credible sig... (Below threshold)
marc:

We show no credible signs of putting humpty-dumpty back together again.Posted by: Publicus at February 17

What would be credable? Ths from the Christmas week edition of Newsweek. (funny how these stories come out AFTER the election)

Civil war or not, Iraq has an economy, and--mother of all surprises--it's doing remarkably well. Real estate is booming. Construction, retail and wholesale trade sectors are healthy, too, according to a report by Global Insight in London. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce reports 34,000 registered companies in Iraq, up from 8,000 three years ago. Sales of secondhand cars, televisions and mobile phones have all risen sharply. Estimates vary, but one from Global Insight puts GDP growth at 17 percent last year and projects 13 percent for 2006. The World Bank has it lower: at 4 percent this year. But, given all the attention paid to deteriorating security, the startling fact is that Iraq is growing at all.

How? Iraq is a crippled nation growing on the financial equivalent of steroids, with money pouring in from abroad. National oil revenues and foreign grants look set to total $41 billion this year, according to the IMF. With security improving in one key spot--the southern oilfields--that figure could go up.

Indeed Publicus, there is a "quagmire" there, it's located in the countries microwave towers. There are now 7.1 million mobile-phone subscribers in Iraq, up from just 1.4 million two years ago. The IRAQI phone company stands to reap revenues of $520 million.

Let me get this straight ..... (Below threshold)
ohiovoter:

Let me get this straight ...

Well, yes...you are right. But I am beginning to doubt they have the willpower to do that. And, of course, the administration may find some extra-Constitutional ways to get around a funding cutoff in the event that the Democrats do try to cutoff funds.

You ADMIT that the Democrats have a method of stopping this war and ADMIT that the Democrats lack the willpower to take the step, but it's the Republicans fault that the Democrats who we are told CONTROL Congress after the last election can't get a coherent policy on Iraq passed by Congress?

LOL!

Congress, who by the way, is the branch of government who actually approves the funding for the VA and the war. Bush can only recommend.

And what is the Democrat Party's plan for Iraq and the future of the Mideast? I personally have been waiting several years for them to state what their plan is. It always seems to be "in process".

"I am so ashamed of ever... (Below threshold)
Herman:

"I am so ashamed of every single time I've ever voted for a Republican." -- Jay Tea

Congratulations, Mr. Tea. You are making notable progress. And to the rest of you conservatives, let Mr. Tea's example provide you with inspiration: if he can do it, you can too.

Piglosi and her Party of... (Below threshold)
Rob LA Ca.:

Piglosi and her Party of Criminals are spewing lies out their asses like fire hydrants.

"They don't have the guts, and they don't want to give up the opportunity to keep the war going through the 2008 elecions."

The democrats aiding and abetting our enemy was done precisely to give the terrorists hope and to continue fighting so that they can report on every single death of our soldiers and the rising cost. That is how they won in November.

DEMOCRATS COMMITTED TREASON TO WIN AN ELECTION.

Democrats offered nothing on the War on Terror, zero zip nada. All they gave us was , actually it was their Media that gave us non stop "MACACA!" , two weeks of election fraud AKA mark Foley non scandel and the usual breaking of voter registration laws.

Has anyone noticed the "Impeach Bush" amnesia?
Don't think they forgot about it. The fact is we have been watching the democrats Impeachment of President Bush for almost a month now. If they could only get those 60 in the Senate so they can continue with their next traitorous act of killing more soldiers with their despicable slow bleed cowardice.

When the Rats threatened Iraq with their "TIME IS RUNNING OUT" meme , there were in fact speaking about the troops not being properly equiped and capable of completing the mission. Being pressed for time and out desperation and fiendish lust for the only thing that concerns them, "COMPLETE AND ABSOLUTE POWER", this is their responsibility free plan. Call it the "Shameless and Short Track Comprehensive Strategy". This satisfies all their mentally deranged lunatics seeking revenge while shielding themselves of certain accountability.

Cut and Run = SLOW BLEED

IMPEACHMENT = non-binding resolution opposing Bush's plans in Iraq.

It's just a question of time , who wins first.

Well, if we lose wars becau... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Well, if we lose wars because some ineffectual politicians speak out against them, then we never had a chance, because people have different opinions. You'll just have to learn to live in a world where not everyone agrees with you. And, when you do, you'll be a happier person.
------------------------------------------------
Publicus,
Surprised that the word "honor" and "patriotism" are not among the vocabulary of the modern day liberals/democrats. Zel Miller said it best. The Reps definitly didn't agree with FDR but they didn't undermine his war policy against fascism because they believe winning the war for America is more important than winning an election. That 's why Zel Miller couldn't recognize the dem party today. I am also surprised that you don't see the differnce between disagreement and actively undermining the war policy against the terrorists. Not that the liberals are undermining for great cause. The liberal democrats are undermining the war on behalf of the terrorists, the modern Nazis, and the Mullahocracy. Again, the FDR party has fallen to a bottomless pit.


Publicus: Thank yo... (Below threshold)
kevino:

Publicus:

Thank you for your honesty. The Democrats have the power: there is no way around it. If they "don't have the willpower to do it", then the war will go on throughout the 2008 elections, and they will win hands down. Good news for you. Good news for your favorite political party. Bad news for the young men and women who will die for nothing more than Democratic party politics.

Rob LA Ca,:RE: Dem... (Below threshold)
kevino:

Rob LA Ca,:

RE: Democrats committed treason to win an election
Two elections, actually: 2006 and 2008.


RE: Democrats offered nothing on the War on Terror
And nothing for the Iraqi people. And nothing to help moderates in the Middle East. And nothing to deal with Iran and Syria. And nothing on the economy. And nothing on saving social security. They are the party of nothing. Their principle of governance is simply, "We hate Republicans. We're against everything they propose." They have already gained a great deal of power, and plan to take more. What happens next? Who knows. I don't think they have any idea what they want to do, other than fight the GOP. It's a scary situation when a group takes power,l and you don't even know what they're going to do.


RE: Impeach Bush
I think that the Democrats will spend the next two years investigating the Bush Administration. Every day, the Democrats will remind the American people how much they hate Bush and the GOP. It will be a good distraction to prevent people from asking the Democrats why they aren't actually doing anything.

I don't think they will actually impeach him. They don't have the votes, and Bush is more useful to them in office -- as a target.

How do you know that the... (Below threshold)
hansel2:

How do you know that the majority of American people are not happy because we are not fighting with more decisive force and less politically correct constraints by the left?

Uh...well, because the MAJORITY of the United States put the Democrats in a power position in the Congress and the Senate.

And there were NO constraints from the left prior or to this day.

LAI, get out of your own ass and stop acting like a delusional psycho. You may think you're speaking from fact and common knowledge but to those with intelligence, education or clarity, you just sound like a joke.

Only psychos believe what has no basis in fact. But since you're a psycho you won't believe this post either.

watching that skank pelosi ... (Below threshold)
moseby:

watching that skank pelosi and her ilk remind me of those Keystone Cops movies...especially when her eyebrow makeup is all askew...goddamn hilarious!!

how are the french so stupi... (Below threshold)
pete:

how are the french so stupid to lose their own revolution




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy