The Movement Is Growing
Hey folks,
It seems the movement is growing. More and more people are starting to get more and more serious in dealing with Traitor Reid. No I haven’t heard from the White House yet, if ever, but I have noticed a lot more people calling Reid to step down or be removed. You heard it here first folks. I told you what would happen if they take over. I warned you that the Democrat party was completely taken over by the LWL {Left Wing Looney fringe} I started to tell you that they were walking a very thin line between practicing their freedom of speech and Treason. I told you when they crossed that line. I have been saying now for a while that Reid and Pelosi are committing treason and need to step down or be dealt with for what they are. Now?
On the Senate floor, Senator Lieberman gave a great speech pointing out the idiocies of Traitor Reid. Way to go Joe. A Republican Senator started calling for Reid to resign. The Washington Post has this opinion piece by David Broder.
Here's a Washington political riddle where you fill in the blanks: As Alberto Gonzales is to the Republicans, Blank Blank is to the Democrats -- a continuing embarrassment thanks to his amateurish performance.
If you answered Harry Reid, give yourself an A. And join the long list of senators of both parties who are ready for these two springtime exhibitions of ineptitude to end.
He pointed out.
On "Fox News Sunday," Schumer offered this clarification of Reid's off-the-cuff comment. "What Harry Reid is saying is that this war is lost -- in other words, a war where we mainly spend our time policing a civil war between Shiites and Sunnis. We are not going to solve that problem. . . . The war is not lost. And Harry Reid believes this -- we Democrats believe it. . . . So the bottom line is if the war continues on this path, if we continue to try to police and settle a civil war that's been going on for hundreds of years in Iraq, we can't win. But on the other hand, if we change the mission and have that mission focus on the more narrow goal of counterterrorism, we sure can win."
Everyone got that? This war is lost. But the war can be won. Not since Bill Clinton famously pondered the meaning of the word "is" has a Democratic leader confused things as much as Harry Reid did with his inept discussion of the alternatives in Iraq.
Now many more people are coming out and getting brave enough to say what needs to be said. I want to share this with you folks. This is from Family Security Foundation, by Pamela Meister.
Traitor, n. One who betrays one’s country, a cause, or a trust, especially one who commits treason.
Last week, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid confirmed what many Americans have suspected for some time now: that the Democrat Party is not only weak on defense, but weak on national pride.
Reid stated that, "I believe myself that the Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense and - you have to make your own decisions as to what the President knows - (know) this war is lost and the surge is not accomplishing anything as indicated by the extreme violence in Iraq yesterday."
Reid’s fellow Democrats were curiously silent regarding this proclamation from on high, except for florid Massachusetts Sen. Ted Kennedy, who came to Reid’s defense. "Who are we surrendering to? This is an unconventional war and it has to be dealt with in unconventional ways. ... What is failure is this bankrupt policy, this ineffective no-win policy of the administration."
As a result of the backlash by the White House and Republicans, Reid tried to backpedal, saying he meant that we would lose only if we continue to follow the "president’s path." But it’s not so easy to fool the people in this age of instant communication and new media. Reid cooked his own goose by saying exactly what he meant.
Meanwhile, despite their constant carping and criticizing of the progress in Iraq, it seems that Democrat leaders are more interested in dishing dirt than getting the real scoop on what’s happening. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (who recently traveled to Syria against the wishes of the White House) and other top House Democrats passed on attending a bipartisan video briefing on Iraq by General David Petraeus back in March, as did Senate Democrats. The only exception was Michigan Sen. Carl Levin, whose voice has been one of the only ones on the left saying that the funding rug should not be pulled out from under our troops.
With friends like this, who needs enemies?
One of the few constant voices of reason on the left has been that of Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut. Targeted by far-left bloggers and 527 groups during the 2006 election because of his unwavering support of our mission in Iraq and the war against Islamofascism, Lieberman lost the primary to newcomer Ned Lamont, only to win the general election by a large margin as an independent. (Hint to would-be candidates: elections are rarely won on one-issue platforms, especially against popular incumbents.) Lieberman, who still officially caucuses with Democrats on many issues, was quick to take Harry Reid to task over his treasonous "the war is lost" comments.
"With all due respect, I strongly disagree. Senator Reid’s statement is not based on military facts on the ground in Iraq and does not advance our cause there. Al Qaeda’s strategy for victory in Iraq is clear. They are trying to murder as many innocent civilians as possible in an effort to re-ignite sectarian fighting and drive us to retreat from Iraq. The question now before us is whether we respond to these terrorist attacks by running away as Al Qaeda hopes - abandoning the future of Iraq, the Middle East, and ultimately our own security to the very same people responsible for this week’s atrocities - or whether we stand united to fight them. This is exactly the wrong time to conclude that we have lost the war in Iraq, or that our new strategy has failed. Instead, we should provide General Petraeus and his troops with the time and the resources to succeed. We should not surrender in the face of barbarism."
We live in interesting times when Democrats embrace not those who would have us win armed conflicts against brutal enemies, but those who would rather we tuck our tails and run at the first opportunity in the name of political expediency. During last year’s campaign, Lieberman was dropped like a hot potato by his Democrat colleagues. One of those who turned on Lieberman was fellow Connecticut senator Chris Dodd, who is now a candidate for president. It wasn’t until he won re-election as an independent (thus making his vote important in a slim majority situation) that Democrats again began to speak of Lieberman as a friend and associate. The term "fair weather friends" certainly takes on new meaning in Washington D.C.
Like President Bush, Lieberman has never faltered in his belief that a strong offense against Islamofascists is essential for not only America’s survival, but for that of all of Western civilization. He has taken a lot of political heat for it, but refuses to water down his views in order to appease the appeasers on the left. Saying what you mean and standing by it shows true character. Joe Lieberman has it. Harry Reid, who felt he had to "clarify" his remarks last week, does not.
Over the past four years, we have had to listen to many Democrats make unconscionable remarks regarding the war. Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois likened our soldiers to Nazis. Sen. Ted Kennedy said that, under American control, Abu Ghraib represented "Saddam’s torture chambers re-opened under new management – U.S. management." Rep. John Murtha of Pennsylvania said Marines had "killed innocent civilians in cold blood" in Haditha. He made these atrocious, unfounded statements even before the military could begin conducting an investigation. DNC chairman Howard Dean said the idea that we will win in Iraq is "plain wrong." This continual degrading of our troops by liberal Democrats goes on and on and on. Yet none of these people have truly been taken to task for their remarks. As they pander to the anti-war, far-left wing of their party, Democrats continue on their crash course toward what they hope will be a White House victory in 2008 – long-term consequences be damned.
Former Senate Majority Trent Lott (R-MS) was forced to step down when he made a comment at a birthday party that many interpreted as being racist. Words indeed do have consequences. (Just ask Don Imus.) What of Harry Reid, whose words at a press conference last week were much more serious in that he gave hope and comfort to our enemies? What consequences will he have to face as a result? If the aftermath of Nancy Pelosi’s ill-advised trip to Syria in a foreign policy role is any indication, Reid doesn’t have much to worry about. Smug agreement by his fellow Democrats and a lack of gumption in the Republican Party means that Reid, in spite of declarations that would make even the likes of Benedict Arnold blush, will continue to be in a position to try to make President Bush look like a fool at the expense of our national security. Al Qaeda likely now is planning to simply hold on until America finally tires of war and partisan bickering and pulls the troops out. Then the real blood bath can begin, in Iraq and wherever else these terrorist thugs hold sway.
Harry Reid should be called upon to step down as Senate Majority Leader, before he can do more damage – if that’s even possible. But Reid’s rhetoric, like that of his counterpart in the House, shows that he has no honor. Winning in Washington has blinded them both to winning in Iraq.
Yes folks, the movement is growing. Gaining speed. Gaining power. We cannot stop until the Traitors step down or are removed. If we allow them the freedom they have now, to do ANYTHING without question nor accountability, they can and very well MAY, destroy this country. I warned you about this. Now others are starting to join with my voice. We MUST deal with these Traitors before it is too late.
Peter
Sources:
The Washington Post Opinion -The Democrats' Gonzales
Exclusive: Harry Reid Should Step Down…But He Won’t
LA Times -Petraeus: Situation in Iraq will get harder before it gets easier
Friday, April 27, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment