In the news yesterday:
U.S. Sen. Lieberman insists he is ‘devoted’ Democrat
While this is a small victory for the hackers who brought down Lieberman’s website as well as the hard-left Democrats that are stomping on the dissent to their takeover of the Party - the bottom line is not good news for them.
Lieberman’s plea virtually guarantees that he will beat his opponent, the rabid and wealthy Leftist - Ned Lamont.
The Democrats are going into this election divided. It was a stupid move to try to purge a popular Senator in exchange for an unproven candidate with no support outside the radical left.
Supporters of the ‘anti-war’ movement say that the defeat of Lieberman in the recent Primary was a defeat for Bush. However, Lieberman let it be known from the outset that he would run as an Independent and that’s exactly what he did. These leftwing fanatics have made a major miscalculation because under this scenario the polls heavily favor Lieberman.
It’s amazing how a lot of hot air can turn out to be just that. They believe their own propaganda and the media eats it up. Sometimes I feel that ‘anti-war’ activists are like children screaming in schoolyard, “Nah, Na, Na, Na, Nahhh”.
All I can say is, “I’ll see you at the polls... and be sure to brush before you go to bed, darling”.
U.S. Sen. Lieberman insists he is ‘devoted’ Democrat
While this is a small victory for the hackers who brought down Lieberman’s website as well as the hard-left Democrats that are stomping on the dissent to their takeover of the Party - the bottom line is not good news for them.
Lieberman’s plea virtually guarantees that he will beat his opponent, the rabid and wealthy Leftist - Ned Lamont.
The Democrats are going into this election divided. It was a stupid move to try to purge a popular Senator in exchange for an unproven candidate with no support outside the radical left.
Supporters of the ‘anti-war’ movement say that the defeat of Lieberman in the recent Primary was a defeat for Bush. However, Lieberman let it be known from the outset that he would run as an Independent and that’s exactly what he did. These leftwing fanatics have made a major miscalculation because under this scenario the polls heavily favor Lieberman.
It’s amazing how a lot of hot air can turn out to be just that. They believe their own propaganda and the media eats it up. Sometimes I feel that ‘anti-war’ activists are like children screaming in schoolyard, “Nah, Na, Na, Na, Nahhh”.
All I can say is, “I’ll see you at the polls... and be sure to brush before you go to bed, darling”.
28 comments:
A Lieberman win would not really help the GOP but it would show the rest of the country that the radical left is a lot louder than their numbers. For decades the left wing has operated on the idea that the sqeaky wheel gets the grease and the loder they yell the more the rest will give just to get them to STFU. Its time to shut them up.
I'm hoping that this move to the far left will hurt the Democrats in November. It appeared to me that the Democratic Party was in a good position to regain control in either the House or the Senate or both but they may be making a mistake with this far left move. Hillary Clinton almost seems conservative in the new Democratic Party. I'm surprised they haven't nominated Cindy Sheehan for political office.
Not only that, but they are mistreating one of their own. When Lieberman made his sorry "I'm a devoted Democrat" spiel he really didnt break any new ground. He has criticized the Bush administration before (even though he actually supports our troops).
When the 'anti-war' crowd says that no one can criticize the war without having their patriotism questioned you have to wonder...
If they are so intolerant of other views, why should they expect special treatment for their anti-American views?
They sure havent earned it...
This is not meant to be funny, what happens in 08 if a Lamont type goes down in flames. Does this portend a new Clinton type of new packaged moderatism? Does the party grow more shrill with each defeat?
Funny?!!!!!!!! We are dealing with the Democratic Party here.
It is a tragic comedy of grand proportions.
They are at the forefront of the 'anti-war' movement's collective nervous breakdown.
A more accurate term would be 'Anti-Republican Movement'.
There are too many prominent Democrats that are committed to this cause. They will never stop until Iraq and Afghanistan have fallen the same way Vietnam fell. That is the only way they can prove that they are 'right'.
While they become more extreme, we have to hold the center. That is the key.
August 21, 2006 9:03 PM
Exactly, If the center can be maintained there is a chance to act decisively not react squishily! Unfortunately, I'm not sanguine about it!
Good morning, G*D bless and Maranatha!
tmw
FN,
Sorry but I'll be a little off topic here (although that photo of McKinney is a GEM!)
I appreciate very much your input concerning me over on Greg's blog. But you said something that really got my attention:
"...I dont believe in the "Islam is the enemy theory". I do believe that militant Islam is the enemy, however. I am also dissappointed in the lack of moderate Islam..."
What does one call a religion that has violent militants but virtually no moderates? I call it a militant religion overall, so yeah, Islam is the enemy overall.
Now, there is no doubt that there are Muslims out there who are repelled by Islamic jihad violence.
But their utter lack of visibility, voice, and influence tells us something very important: it is these "moderates" that are distorting Islam. They are in fact the ones who have been so influenced by Western freedoms and ideas that they are essentially Muslim in name only. They do not represent the true nature of the religion.
Violent Muslims haven't "distorted" or "hijacked" anything. It's the other way around; it's the moderates who are out of line with the "real" Islam.
We must respect Islam, and by respect I mean really pay attention to what it is on its own terms. We must respect its Koran (believed to the the unalterable Words of God himself), the example of its "Ideal Man" Mohammed, its consistent interpretations by its huge variety of devout scholars over 15 centuries, and the beliefs and actions of the vast majority of its adherents - past and present.
Upon review of all these things, one can come to no other conclusion than Islam is, by Western standards, an oppressive, supremacist, violently expansionist religion. It makes sense because without its aggressive component of jihad at its core, Islam would have perished in the sands of Medina long ago.
Compared to Christianity, which caught like wildfire as an idea in the Roman Empire, Islam expanded by violent conquest only.
I like Western standards, so I do base my judgment on them. And there's an interesting point I read recently (can't remember the columnist, and I'm paraphrasing):
"It is interesting that the West now considers a "moderate" Muslim one who simply does not support mass murder."
The ideology of Islamic jihad is the true enemy. Jihad ideology is a core value of Islam, and Mohammed himself called it the absolute highest thing that a Muslim can do on behalf of Allah. There is no doubt any devout Muslim would strive for an opportunity to participate in some form of Islamic jihad. The only question they may have on the matter is when and to what extent.
That is why Muslim people, groups and nations are offended, riled, and emboldened so very easily: they are chomping at the bit for their chance to engage in the highest Muslim calling.
The problem is, those near invisible "moderate" Muslims who reject jihad ideology are in effect rejecting one of Islam's core principles.
Hence, they are barely real Muslims, they are very scarce indeed, and they are hounded and killed by the faithful as apostates if they speak up.
There are good Muslims who would never hurt anyone, but they will never come forward against other Muslims. This is because Islam is INHERENTLY militant, and the "moderates" know it all too well.
Again, sorry to barge in on this Lieberman post. Just wanted to clarify my thinking on Islam with you.
Cheers.
OD if you are going to barge in the least you could do is bring some party flavors.
I'd be more than happy to continue the discussion.
Al Qaeda is trying to make this a war of Islam vs. Christianity (and Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc... but their main thrust is against the US).
I am not interested in helping Al Qaeda achieve any of its aims.
I am also interested in seeing the organization cut-off from its support base.
Islam does have a serious problem, but I dont think it is unrepairable.
However, there is currently very little will on their part to reform the religion.
Moderates are under the threat of Islamists and the negative influence of Leftists.
Muslims must fix their religion before there can be peace.
Since the subject was breached I was like to say that I believe this IS a war against Islam. If you check out the major hot spots on the globe today, in almost every instance, it involves Islamic principles being forced on others. There is no need to start naming these conflicts as I already know you are well aware of them.
Islam is a religion that was born in war/violence and the Koran specifically instructs its followers to continue this struggle until everyone is a Muslim or submits to Islamic rule.
This is going to require a new post.
then get up and post one!
good grief, plucky - isn't it a little early in the day for the md 20/20?
nothing is over and not one person has said it's over. a mission is a mission - that mission was accomplished. get a grip.
So tell me Ducky what does Mission Accomplished mean?
Mission: an operational task, usually assigned by a higher headquarters.
Accomplished: completed; done; effected:
Prior to the liberation Iraq most of Iraq was under the control of Saddam Hussein and his genocidal army was still in charge of mass grave digging duties.
Hence the term Mission Accomplished. Perhaps you prefer Saddam Hussein to be freed from the courtroom and reinstalled?
...And tell me how Israel lost the war. Did Hezbollah take Haifa?
How many Isreali troops are in Southern Lebanon now? How many were there before the war?
Somehow in your mind you are fighting war stooges when you make propaganda for Saddam Hussein and Hezbollah.
Your war stooges are a lot worse than mine.
I love seeing the Democrats devour themselves. A house divided cannot stand.
fern? it's a sad day in the blogdom - beamish has been banned at autonomist. long live the king. war is hell.
good one, farmer.
I guess Rocco deleted the comment that got Beamish banned.
I tell you what, I would pay good money to read that comment.
Fern- Beamish just answered one of rm's comments with his usual lack of tact, about the FBI looking for him and continuing on more of what he found out. It was off topic and IMHO tiresome, but since I'm part of the Administration...I follow the Pres.-elect's policies!
tmw
perhaps he will republish the comment at his blog?
Perhaps we can cite the Freedom of Information act.
Will the ban hold?
Hmmm...who hijacked this post? We are way off topic here. Whats the protocol for situations like this?
I don't know Fern, maybe you could ask the blog host?
tmw
FN,
You've read my blog often enough to know where I stand on the subject of Islam--as to the threat it poses. "Radical Islam" is nothing new, and "reformed Islam" is no longer Islam.
Enough of that. On to the subject of this posting....I'm rooting for Lieberman to win the election. In fact, until he teamed up with Al Gore, I really respected Lieberman--a lot. I still respect him, but his relationship with Gore soured me on him a bit.
okay, so ban me for going o.t...
no dinks for me, kk!
So its official, the Mighty Kuhnkat is back. I could have done without the same ole geeky picture, but welcome back.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
I see that you are more humorous this time around.
In your honor drinks are on the house. Fill 'er up lads and lassies!!!!!!!
Yes my Royal Highness, your mightyness is known throughout the land...
Or he could be paraphrasing that famous song "Quinn, the Mighty Eskimo"
tmw
Post a Comment