Showing posts with label president. Show all posts
Showing posts with label president. Show all posts

Thursday, July 12, 2007

The Veto Rides Again!




Yesterday’s failure by Vermont Democratic Party lawmakers to override a veto by their Governor cast an ominous shadow over today’s Troop Withdrawal Vote in Washington D.C. The Vermont vote was an effort by majority Democrats to slap substantial taxes on their local utilities, but they faced stiff opposition from their fellow party members. Evidently 11 Democrats felt that the CO2 Scare was not worth risking the bill’s adverse effects on Vermont’s economy or angering their constituents with higher energy bills.

So the stage was set for today’s vote in D.C. where Democrats want to set a withdrawal date for our troops in Iraq. The legislation was passed 223-201 in the House. This margin is nowhere near enough to override President Bush’s veto. Almost as importantly, the voting record has shown that the media’s focus on growing Republican opposition to President Bush was overblown. The Herald Tribune and Bloomberg both reported that only four Republicans backed the measure, three of whom co-sponsored the legislation to give it a false bi-partisan appearance. This is a common tactic which is used quite often by the Left.

Over the past week the press has been eagerly devoting massive amounts of coverage to the defection of a handful of Republicans who support a change in strategy in Iraq. The Democrats have eagerly helped promote these unbalanced news stories by getting those dissenting Republicans to co-sponsor the latest withdrawal bill.

Appearances are everything in these days of Al Qaeda and Baathist terrorism. The rhetoric is so high that the media ignores the fact that there is a bigger revolt in the Democratic Party than there is in the Republican Party. 10 Democrats voted against party lines and rejected the bill.

It just goes to show that it’s only a matter of what we focus on that decides popular opinion. If America united instead of fighting amongst ourselves the war would have been over already. Its not as if these years of divisive politics have occurred in a vacuum. Even the remotest corners of our planet have access to the worldwide media. Al Qaeda often cites current events like U.S. elections when releasing threatening videos and tape recordings. They know what John Kerry, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi say. It’s no secret!!! Jihadists around the world take heart from the political opportunism of the Democratic Party.

In this day and age its almost as if I cant accuse these “dissenters” of being unpatriotic because nothing short of waging civil war is considered unpatriotic. At least that means that our democracy is the strongest it has ever been. It’s amazing that we are so tolerant during wartime and I am encouraged by the greatness of our country. However, I still reserve the right to criticize these power hungry buffoons.

Thursday, March 29, 2007

Head in the Sand Syndrome




The Democrats have to completely destroy Iraq before the 2008 elections.

It will help their election effort and in the wake of a withdrawal they can blame the fall of the Iraqi government on a Republican president.

Otherwise, if we keep our troops in Iraq and the Iraqi government continues to grow stronger, their window of opportunity will close. Think about it. If they win the 2008 election, a president from the Democratic Party will face intensive pressure from his or her constituents to immediately withdraw from Iraq. Such a president will be forced to comply and pay dearly for it.

With control over Congress and the presidency - the Baathist triumph which would result from the withdrawal that they propose will be rightfully blamed on the Democratic Party. From their point of view they cant take any chances and must force a withdrawal during the Bush Administration.

THAT IS THE REAL REASON BEHIND THE URGENCY TO SET A DEADLINE in 2008.

The Democrats dont have a real plan for Iraq because they only want to destroy the Iraqi government. Beyond that they have no concrete plan for the future. That is why they spend as little time as possible speaking about a post-U.S. Iraq. With the fall of Iraq they would have already gotten what they wanted and would have to wait and see where the pieces fall in order to formulate future strategy.

Ask your Democratic Party representative what his or her plan is for Iraq after a withdrawal.

Dont be fooled, the Democrats are absolutely desperate...