"ALL CAPS IN DEFENSE OF LIBERTY IS NO VICE."

Wednesday, September 06, 2006

DEMOCRAT DOVES PROMISE TO ABANDON IRAQ AS THEY DID SOUTH VIETNAM AND THE CONTRAS

CLICK HERE FOR PROOF. I predict that cutting off funding for the defense of the nascent democracy in Iraq will be the first thing "Speaker Pelosi" does. The second will be to start impeachment hearings.

I ask you two questions:
IS THAT WHAT THIS NATION NEEDS RIGHT NOW!? WILL THESE ACTIONS HURT THE ENEMY, OR AID AND ABET THE ENEMY!?
I'LL ANSWER YOU THIS WAY: if you want to help Osama and Hizballah, then vote Democrat.

BTW, the analogy is quite apt: the last US combat troops left South Vietnam on 3/29/73 (Vietnamization was working, then - AS IS IRAQIAZATION WORKING NOW). Saigon did not fall to the Marxist totalitarians of North Vietnam - in violation of the Peace Treaty - until 4/30/75 - TWO YEARS LATER ... and right after the Democrat doves who controlled Congress cut off the SVG froom all funding. They did the same thing to the Contras in 1982.

The Democrat doves will cut fiancing to Iraq and throw them to the tyrannical, jihadoterrorist wolves.

You know, if these Left-wing doves (who NOW control the Democrat Party) had been in power in 1950's, then they would have abadoned the South Koreans! These doves would've even let Krushchev keep nuclear missiles in Cuba in 1962! And not even tried to air-lift suppiles to Berlin as Truman did in 1948.

These courageous acts were too confrontational for the doves. Thank God that THEN, Democrats still had some folks who believed in a robust national defense. Hawkish Democrats like Truman and JFK. THIS IS NOT TRUE ANYMORE - NOT NOW THAT LIEBERMAN IS GONE.

And that's why I feel it might even get worse: I feel the Democrat doves will also cut support for Afghanistan, and suspend our special alliance with Israel, too - all in the name of appeasement - in the name of "trying to appear more even-handed", as if Israel and and democratic Afganistan were the moral equivalents of Al Qaeda and Hizballah!

This is why I feel the stakes are so very high in the coming election. I hope America doesn't retreat by electing a Democrat Party majority in EITHER the House or the Senate. It would be like re-electing Chamberlain in 1940!

HERE'S A LINK TO A WONDERFUL SHORT VIDEO - WITH TOUCHING IMAGES AND STIRRING WORDS AND MUSIC - WHICH PUTS THE CURRENT CROP OF DOVE-O-CRATS INTO THE PROPER PERSPECTIVE.

UPDATE: Here's a link to even more proof that the Democrat Party is now controlled by Left-wing doves and anti-Semites.

9 comments:

peter said...

Click here for Proof of what?

"this bill recognizes that the very presence of U.S. troops is fueling the insurgency and increasing violence. But the bill also recognizes that the U.S. has an obligation to Iraq and allows for the use of defense funds to:
ensure the security of Iraq and the transition to democratic rule"

peter said...

I see you are also content to continue perpetrating the myth that "Vietnamization" was a successful policy, rather than the total and abject failure that it really was. NOT VERY ASTUTE OF YOU SIR.

peter said...

Weeks after Lieberman lost the Democratic primary - and defied his party with an independent bid - the three-term Connecticut senator was greeted warmly Wednesday as he attended his party's weekly luncheon and participated in Senate business.

"Democrats gave Lieberman an ovation as Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., introduced him at the lunch and welcomed him back,


You probably dont read Bull Moose, so here's a clue as to what other democratic senators really think

peter said...

Great speech by ZigZag Zell though, but how do you explain this:

Former President Jimmy Carter, also a former Georgia governor, has claimed Miller shifted from moderation in his first gubernatorial term to "black-and-white" conservative in his second. National allegations of flip-flopping arose during Miller's term in the Senate, mostly after his endorsement of Bush. In 2004, Miller was an extreme critic of John Kerry, who Miller said wanted weak national defense and "to fight yesterday's war." But at a dinner in Atlanta in 2001, Miller had introduced Kerry as "one of this nation's authentic heroes, one of this party's best-known and greatest leaders - and a good friend," who had "worked to strengthen our military."

peter said...

sorry to bore you, but i believe you are failing to grasp the none too subtle difference between a democrat who thinks Israel went a bit too far in retribution in Lebanon, and a genuine anti-semite. You will find plenty of Jews here in the UK that believe the Israeli Government has only succeeded in inflaming passions further throughout the arab world, and thereby encouraged more misguided youths to join the terrorist movements which we seek to destroy.

peter said...

Finally (for today at least) here is a basic Political fact that you ought to learn:

Neville Chamberlain couldnt be re-elected in 1940 because:
1) there wasnt an election in 1940
and
2) He was never elected by the British public in the first place, but replaced Stanley Baldwin (another appeaser) as leader of the Conservative Party in May 1937

reliapundit said...

peter wrote:

"the Israeli Government has only succeeded in inflaming passions further throughout the arab world"

oh yes we know this refrain quite well: when we retaliate against the enemies aggression WE cause them to hate us more; meaning i suppose that we should just appease them. how post-modern leftist. how chmaberlainesque. how hypocritical. why not blame hizballah for inciting israel? or binladen for inciting bush?

because you hate israel and bush. irrationally. which is bds an anti-semitism. holding israel to a standard that gentiole nations are exempt from is anti-semitism. simple and true.

ALSO: the analogy re chamberlain and 1940 was just that: an analogy - and not a refrence to how he first came to power or whether there was an election in 1940 in GB. by complaining about it you prove that you are a pedant and a jerk.

reliapundit said...

miller has already explained that in 2001 he did know anything about kewrry and was just being nice.
in 2004 a lot was at stake; he listened to kerry's history policies appeasement and traitorous comments about the us military and did the honorable thing: vocally supported bush.

peter said...

i think you misunderstand.(not for the first time obviously). "when we retaliate against the enemies aggression WE cause them to hate us more; MEANING I SUPPOSE THAT WE SHOULD JUST APPEASE THEM" NO! NO! NO! It means that i think the Israeli response was wholly disproportionate and in the long term may cause more harm than good to their own best interests. As for the Chamberlain analogy, this was based on your ignorance (or deliberate misrepresentation) of the facts.