It’s been a perfect week of illustrating why idiotic liberal ideology and the MSM are one in the same.
Let’s start with al-Qaeda. Over the course of the last few years, we watched the Bush administration - along with our best and brightest in Afghanistan and Iraq - literally destroy, kill, and round up most of the top operatives of various terrorist networks (not just al-Qaeda). As a result, liberals decided that terrorists deserved rights under the Geneva conventions. Liberals tried getting Congress to reject renewing the Patriot Act. Liberals tried closing down Guantanamo without a backup plan of where the detainees were going to go. Liberals hated that we stopped attacks using the NSA to listen to phone calls of suspected terrorists’ numbers found on al-Qaeda speed-dials.
For all of the alleged precious civil rights’ violations committed by the Bush administration, liberals (in a sad and pathetic attempt to demoralize us) are now using this week to remind us why those policies were enacted in the first place. Thanks to USA Today and Newsweek for reporting what most of us knew five years ago.
Exhibit one: Al-Qaeda Works to Plant U.S. Operatives
Exhibit two: Analysts: Al-Qaeda Back to Pre-9/11 Strength
And of course, we got the news of the 25-page Iraq report that casually mentioned that Iraq hasn’t yet met any benchmarks.
Back in the Democrats’ land of convenience, we have heard all arguments throughout the week, the rants and screams of the left all seem to stem to the same spot: Iraq.
All of the above evidence which has been showcased by the media this week has been nothing but rant-pellets for leftists who have wanted to pull out of Iraq for the last four years now.
But what the darlings seem to be forgetting is that their scare tactics are only re-affirming the importance of Bush’s anti-terror policies right here in the United States like the Patriot Act, like detaining terrorists at Guantanamo, and listening to their phone calls. Maybe Democrats will even advocate profiling at airports now! No? We’ll see.
Liberals have always compared the Iraq war to Vietnam. The only similarity is illustrated this week when liberals are screaming for a pullout for the above reasons just as Walter Cronkite and other liberal-media wigs were screaming about the Red Coats in the final days of Vietnam.
Say, I thought it was conservatives that were using terrorist-scare tactics to dictate war policy?
steveflesher
Philip
Mel Maguire
Mark Ciavola
Comments
If the Red Coats are coming – or anyone from the European Union for that matter – maybe we should look at the Visa Waiver program.
Maybe reviewing all those passports would be too tedious though. (Remember we allowed some foreign travel agencies to manage these jobs American officials were too important to do).
That’s such a preposterous fact, Shaw but unfortunately remains a sad fact.
This country has been so liberal with its National Security and we have so much to clean up and re-construct now.
I just love how liberals switch positions though. They cry that the way the military has handled our enemies are too harsh and then reaffirm why we have those policies to begin with when they start using the threat of terrorism as an excuse to argue for surrender.
Right Steve. I’m even tired (probably with everyone else) of reading my own harangues on the issue.
We’re at a stage the average American could be characterized as saying, “It looks like it, feels like it, smells like it, tastes like it…… Glad I didn’t step in it.”
Aaahhh…where to begin…Well, I’ll just pick one:
First off, that wasn’t the issue. The issue was getting a warrant before issuing a wiretap. Everyone knows that intel is vital to stopping terror attacks, and wiretaps are vital to gathering intel, so this “liberals hated” line makes it sound like you’ve been listening to too much Hannity.
Second, you can assume that these wiretaps were directed at terrorists, but with no warrants and little oversight you’re just taking their word for it at the end of the day. And if there’s something that most of us are uneasy with these days, it’s Bush or Cheney’s word on virtually anything.
Oh Chen,
This idea that Americans are worried about WARRANTS BEFORE our security is the biggest nonsense I have heard EVER in the land of bad arguments. He’s the commander-in-chief!
And who else are these warrantless acts going to make a difference to? Americans who dissent from GWB?
I can see the headline in the NY Times tomorrow:
“76% of the country rounded up and held at Gitmo for dissenting from Bush’s war policies”
(That would correlate with other headlines giving phony percentages of how many do not support his war policies.)
In light of this please explain to me:
WHY THE HELL IS ROSIE O’DONNELL RUNNING FREE!?
Well sure he’s the commmander in chief, but he’s not above the law, and that seems to be a recurring theme with this administration.
He commuted one sentence (Clinton PARDONED hundreds), he was allowed to fire attorneys that sit at his pleasure, he is allowed to protect the country in war-time without red tape.
He’s the president. The geneva conventions do not apply to people that want to kill us.
Once again, Steve. Excellence!
Why haven’t you caught Osama?
Why didn’t Clinton when he had the chance?
That video is on youtube, too.
BTW, if Clinton had listened to Stephanopolous in 1997 and assassinated Saddam, 3,000 American tropps would still be alive and OBL would have known not to mess with the United States.