Re: Washington update

Staying on topic:

America's Defeatist Politicians

By: Rachel Marsden

NEW YORK -- President George W. Bush asked Congress to approve funding for
the U.S. troops in Iraq to be able to do their job. But before he could get
through the cafeteria checkout, the Democrats insisted their heaping side
order of surrender hitch a ride on his tray.

Democrats insisting that troop funding be accompanied by a U.S. surrender
date for the Iraqi front in the war on Islamofascism is the political
equivalent of, "Do you want fries with that? No? Well, screw you, you're
getting some anyway."

Thankfully, Bush is still the president and can use his veto powers to send
back the full meal deal. The problem is it's the troops who will end up
starved.

General David Petraeus, for whom the Democrats actually voted to oversee the
war in Iraq, said this week that Iraq will need "an enormous commitment over
time," echoing what George Bush said in his 2002 State of the Union address:
"Our war on terror is well begun, but it is only begun. This campaign may
not be finished on our watch -- yet it must be and it will be waged on our
watch."

Since it may be too much to expect people nowadays to recall what the
President said five years ago when they strain to remember the name of last
season's American Idol winner, here's a more recent version.

At last year's address, Bush reiterated: "Our own generation is in a long
war against a determined enemy -- a war that will be fought by presidents of
both parties, who will need steady bipartisan support from the Congress."

Why doesn't he just come out and say, "Hey, weren't you morons listening?"

Even back in 1899, in his book The River War, former British prime minister
Winston Churchill wrote of Islam: "No stronger retrograde force exists in
the world." In a 1996 lecture, the other great British PM, Margaret
Thatcher, warned that "radical Islamist movements now constitute a major
revolutionary threat," and cited the "intellectual climate" as the reason
why the West probably won't deal with threats.


That "intellectual climate" is perfectly exemplified by leading Democratic
presidential hopeful Barack Obama, who has never voted for military action
to counter the murder of Americans and westerners. Yet he referred to
outsourcing of American jobs as "the violence of men and women who have
worked all their lives and suddenly have the rug pulled out from under
them," and called radio host Don Imus' "nappy headed ho" comment "verbal
violence."

I'd be hard pressed to trust the perspective of someone who appears prone to
confusing a paper cut with a bloodbath. Perhaps if we could get the
terrorists to engage in some aggressive carpet removal or hip-hop karaoke,
Obama's interest in fighting might be aroused.

Obama says: "We know we can win this war based on shared purpose." Bill
Clinton already tried dazzling extremists with his charm and charisma. It
didn't work. Neither has 50-odd years of "negotiating" with Mideast
radicals.

A "shared purpose" can only mean that we would all have to unite in wanting
to kill the people who want us dead. And Obama has yet to prove that there
exists a circumstance in which he'd be prepared to do that.

No one who initially voted against the war should get to vote in favour of
doing nothing again. How about taking your dulcet tones to the local
Toastmasters club, where you can refine your defeatist rhetoric while doing
less harm to the world.


PUBLISHED: TORONTO SUN (April 29/07)

COPYRIGHT 2007 RACHEL MARSDEN


.

Relevant Pages

  • Insight into the workings of a simple mind: GWBush on Iraq
    ... war in Iraq is his insistence that we're winning. ... the country descending deeper into civil war ... It's becoming increasingly clear that Bush sees the war in Iraq ... "I mean I would very much like to ask President Bush how he defines winning, ...
    (alt.politics)
  • Re: Clintons experience: Exactly what is it?
    ... We are talking about the president of the United States. ... Hillary is as qualified to be president as Bush II, Reagan, or Bill ... Bush, yelling how another Clinton ruined America, lost Iraq, ... Who cares if there is a civil war in Iraq? ...
    (alt.politics.bush)
  • This war is brought to you by ...
    ... This war is brought to you by ... ... against Iraq. ... The American corporate media are not inclined to spell it out, ... enshrined in a goal of the Bush ...
    (misc.consumers)
  • OT - Frank Rich, American Treasure
    ... revisionist history of the White House?s rush to war, ... of the House denouncing French opposition to the Iraq war. ... Carol Lam, a Bush appointee? ... President Bush holds his last prewar news conference. ...
    (alt.sports.basketball.nba.la-lakers)
  • Re: "...Unsubstantiated, contradicted, or non-existent..."
    ... dodging war criminals, war profiteers, and mass murdering ... Senate Finds Pre-War Bush Claims Exaggerated, ... found that Bush and Vice President Dick ... American people were led to believe that the threat from Iraq was much ...
    (rec.motorcycles)