Wednesday, July 25, 2007

You Think These Folks Will Keep Us Safe???

Democrat Debate Debacle

I've just read the results of the Democrat "YouTube" debate on Mon. night... As I looked at the answers each Dem candidate gave--every Dem candidate gave--I was stunned by their mediocrity and political naivety.

Each candidate, in his or her own way, thinks that the world is comprised of a group of friendly puppies--puppies who just don't happen to know each other that well--but they're sure all want to play together. The roundly prescribed 'introduction' of one group to the other (“You can get on a cell phone and call somebody on the other side of the world right now!") was the sum total of what they thought necessary "in the cause of building peace.”

Kucinich explained that... he believes in “strength through peace”--(not "peace through strength"). During the debate, he said that he would “use the science of human relations and diplomacy,” along with “international agreements and treaties” to settle differences without fighting. (Then he'd better be the one signing both halves...) He also advocated that viewers “text peace” by using their cell phones to send the message to the whole world that they’re "tired of war." (Yep, that ought to do it!)

Bammie says [other countries] "may pose an extraordinary danger to this country, but we had the obligation to find areas where we can potentially move forward.” Edwards plans to spend his first year in office 'visiting' other countries in a whirlwind tour to 'get others to like us again'... Clinton, though more reluctant to meet with terrorist world leaders than Bama (who said he was willing to meet with them--without actually speaking to them...) said she wasn't sure she'd meet with rogue nations her first year in office... However, Joe Biden said it was ridiculous not to meet with them--as long it was alone, in their offices, and 'very late at night'... (He didn't want to be seen with them.)

The idea that we don't know Iran or Syria, or North Korea, or Iraq, or Pakistan, or Afghanistan, or Cuba, or Venezuela well enough is absurd; we've been dealing with these people since our founding (or theirs). They have been a continual fly in the ointment of modern times. It doesn't seem to matter how many times our extinction is called for, how often the specter of the 'weak horse' is dragged before us, how many maps from which the state of Israel is removed, or how many wishes for our destruction are penned, the clueless cabal of Dem candidates act like errant tv repairmen of old, who figure they'll 'have all the bugs out', if they can just twist one more knob of diplomacy with these folks!

The idea that those that threaten us, and build more weapons with which to do so in the future, are working towards the 'cause of building peace' is asinine. How many Achille Lauros, Israeli athlete graves, USS Coles, Mogadishu embassies, WTC's, Bali/London/Madrid bombings, Khobar Towers etc. do there have to be before they'll be taken at their word? These people DON'T WANT PEACE--the Democrats make a fatal mistake in thinking they do.

I don't care if you wine-and-dine the terrorists, Carnivale them, subsidize their refineries, carve up Israel into matchsticks, call muslims our best friends, import their workers, export our jobs, allow them to live and be educated here, cover our females in bad bed sheets, garbage-out our Bible, convert, revert, divert, or flirt--THEY SIMPLY DO NOT WANT US TO LIVE.

Nothing will make them want us to live. It doesn't matter which political party is in power, it doesn't matter what we give them, or what we turn ourselves into. Zawahiri has said it himself: "you people are always wanting to talk, to give us things... we don't want anything from you--we only want to kill you'... Thus, in the face of such nihilism and threat, peace is terribly, terribly overrated.

When a Democrat candidate says we 'have an obligation to move forward in the cause of building peace', what in the hell are they talking about? What obliges us so? Where--in any creed, document, Constitution, Bill Of Rights, Emancipation, prayer, invocation, salvo, motto, vow or slogan in the United States does it say we have made a bargain with the rest of the world to move everyone else toward peace--even, or especially, if they do not want it, do not conceive of it, do not work for it, or sacrifice to achieve it on their own? Where have we made this bargain, in particular, when it is predicated upon our own destruction? Can there be any more foolish antithesis to living?

Next time, put away YouTube's 20 or 30 'well-chosen questions' and ask the sniveling, war-protesting, Cindy-Sheehan-sucking, Democrat debate candidates to explain that.


Blogger The Merry Widow said...

I didn't watch it or read much, I figured it would be an orgy of "touchie-feelie", romp through the meadows with the butterflies and little fluffy animals(like lions and tigers and bears, oh my)!
I don't need the stress I would feel that would cause me to scream at the screen!
I already knew that these people had no desire to keep us safe, why watch and court an ulcer?
And if any leftista reads this, the mohammadins hate us, period; our scientific advances shame them in their backwardness, our freedoms frustrate them with their slavery, and our wealthy nations cause howling envy!
And our G*D is so superior to the devil they worship, and they are caught in quicksand and poverty.
We have everything that a'al'alah promised AND NEVER DELIVERED.
And the leftistas, because of their abandonment of spiritual Truth, cannot understand WHY these countries are wallowing in poverty and degradation!
Good morning, G*D bless and Maranatha!


2:57 AM  
Anonymous prairieson said...

Very well-written and very true, Donal. You do have a way with words when you get going.

Some senior Democrats (most of whom wish to remain anonymous, naturally) are supposedly heaping scorn on Obama. But aren't the Democrats -- Howard Dean et al -- the very ones that adopted this posture of peace at any price to begin with?

The Democrats in Congress have spent the last few months, since being sworn in, trying to hand Al Qaeda and their kin a victory by playing politics with funding.

So now they're shocked that Obama would actually say in unequivocal words "hey, let's surrender and talk nice"?

They're shocked because it won't sell to most Americans. They are now facing having to defend their fiddling while terrorists schemed and if there happens to be a significant terrorist attack between now and November, 2008, they can shout "It's Bush's fault" all they want, the American people are not as stupid as some Democrats seem to think.


2:57 AM  
Blogger VerityINK said...

Thanks, TMW and Arnold! I'm afraid you-all have caught me in the middle of editing this before we go to bed!

I couldn't watch that mess on YouTube either--the idiocy makes me too nervous and I get to gnashing my teeth... I DO get the play-by-play the next day, though, and it didn't play any better!

I CANNOT believe these folks are adults--let alone the best the Dems have to offer. I heard the same crap out of pot smoking friends back in the 1970's--and it's just gotten worse.

Leaders? My patoot they're leaders! What the hell do they see in each other? 'Peace-at-any-price' is out of my league...

3:06 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

VERY well said DONAL!!

I've always wondered if the Dem pols were that damned stupid, or they were just playing to an idiot base. We know for sure that their base isn't very bright, and now I have to wonder about the half-wits that we saw on the stage.


4:32 AM  
Blogger VerityINK said...

MORGAN--They are that dumb; I was reading it to sissy here and, at one point she said how funny it was I'd used the words I did--and she asked me how could I think up such nuttiness...

She couldn't see the quote marks--I told her that I didn't think up that crap to be funny, make 'em look bad, or be snide. I told her they were actual quotes of the stupid things the Dems really DID say! LOL!

4:44 AM  
Blogger Patsy said...

Excellent, Donal, absolutely excellent! You are spot on with your assessment of the Democrats' naivete.

Hillary Clinton was the only participant who communicated a scintilla of understanding of what is required to handle our enemies, and that isn't going to cut it.

It's a frightening thought that she may well be our next President.

I have a serious question to pose to you Donal:

If Hillary Clinton is our next President, with the world so dangerous, America will still be entrenched in the war on terror, in Iraq, in Afghanistan, against al Qaeda.

Iran is well on its way to building nukes.

Syria is reconstituting and reinvading Lebanon, destabilizing the shaky, democratic government there.

Israel is in real danger and will probably be at war again very soon, possibly by the time she assumes office.

Here's the question:

Do you think it's possible that Hillary Clinton can rise to the occasion and do what's necessary to protect the nation?

Once she assumes office, does she have what it takes to put aside all of the superficial political shenanigans and take her job seriously, live up to her duties and responsibilites as Commander-in-Chief?

Is she someone who can do this?

6:52 AM

6:54 AM  
Anonymous z said...

Oh, Donal, that's so funny about Sis asking if you'd made those nutty lines up because she didn't know you were quoting. That's priceless/so telling.

Something I wanted to mention here is that the democrat focus groups showed such disapproval when a candidate even slightly criticized the other. Did you happen to catch that? The audience's 'pleasure lines' would go down for the simplest criticism and that was so telling, too. As you know, I'm always harping on how the Republicans criticize each other because we are a bigger tent than the Dems are... I've always bemoaned the fact that you'll never see a Dem insult another on TV, but the Republicans can't do much of anything else. Gives the Dems ammo to say Republicans can't agree or must be wrong because they differ on subjects, but really it's a sign of strength in my opinion. Here it was, on a graph..the proof. Frank Luntz even mentioned this exact phenomena.

Well, there's something good about Republicans having differing opinions because it shows a more open mindset and a desire to get it right....of course, FPM allows lefties and DU won't, right? Typical.

I think it's funny to watch the focus group taking this Dem candidate group so seriously, and all their comments were about nothing but personality, no political stances, did you notice that? ....and I found it scary to think that if that debate had run ten years ago, the American public would have seriously said "Are these people running for chairman of the Socialist Party?"

6:59 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


The little that I saw of the debates scared me half to death.

In my aunt LEA'S chicken coop you could hear more coherent thought and knowledge of the issues than these cluckers exhibited.

And my aunt LEA'S chickens gave us EGGS.

AND these blobal warmers flew on private jets to the "debates"



7:54 AM  
Blogger VerityINK said...

It's so nice to have all you guys write in!

PATSY, I think Hillary will do no more than Bill ever did--a lot of Bosnian-type razzle-dazzle and road show, but not much that solves anything concrete. Any move she makes to 'keep us safe' isn't liable to really keep us safe. I'd trust her far more with some underhanded oil-for-food type deal to keep the muslims off our backs--that's something she can understand very well.

With her, it's going to be what covers her ass first, what keeps her party beholding to her second, and we're a dim third. I feel in my heart of hearts that she is beholding to people about which we have only a slim understanding; their agenda is going to decide more than we know.

I do not know what the muslim agenda is, in that regard. I feel that the screaming Rage-Boy 'average' muslims have a different agenda than the ones who have the real power and influence (and the Rage-Boys and all the surface crap is meant to distract the world from what is really going on.) I don't know how it all fits together.

Remember how, in the Sopranos, decisions were always made without all the parties knowing why? (Tony would sign the Living Trust papers--but not because Carmela asked him to, but because Gloria had killed herself and he felt bad about it. Or Christopher was told some guy had to be killed because he gunned down his Dad--when that probably hadn't really happened at all, but Tony wanted the guy dead for other reasons... Or that Bobby's dad was 'allowed' to kill the guy that beat up that fellow--not because he was being paid a tribute as a still-functioning member, but because he was gonna die soon and everyone knew he'd spend the least time in prison for it if they got caught...)

Now, in all those situations, and oothers, the outcome was still the outcome--but the why was different for each person involved. Whenever I see Hillary, I think it's that way with her and her decsions. I'm no big conspiracy-theorist nutbar, but with Hill, I never get the feeling I REALLY know why things are going down the way they are, ya know?

8:15 AM  
Blogger VerityINK said...

LES--the topic to be addressed was the Democrat YouTube Debate. The Republicans have not debated on YouTube.

10:55 AM  
Blogger Patsy said...

I was wondering if you thought Hillary might be different from Bill, since she was raised in a Republican family.

If she were to be elected the first woman President, she might consider it her duty to forge a path for future women Presidents. Let's face it, being elected President of the United States has got to be the ultimate validation of one's life.

What more would she have to prove? All she'd have to do from then on is perform. She'd have an enormous responsibility.

Of course I'm applying normal emotions to her, which she may be incapable of or doesn't possess.

I am trying to find some way to keep from panicking if she does get elected. Truth be told, I am very concerned about the danger we will all be in if Hillary becomes our next President.

11:42 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

ARE the Republicans actually going to debate on YouTube? Based on what I saw the other night it can ONLY be a net negative. It's beneath Romney and Guiliani. No wonder Newt and Fred are staying out for now. That format is just contemptable!
Is McCain staying in until he gets his federal matching funds?


11:43 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You're giving her far too much credit Patsy. Her and the Zippermeister she married have a long and RUTHLESS history. Socialism and personal enrichment will be her first priorities, why would she change?

11:46 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'll see ya'll a little bit later!


11:47 AM  
Blogger VerityINK said...

Hill normally might consider blazing a path for other women--but she considers herself FAR FAR more qualified than average gals. She thinks she's better than that.

Well, if it's a choice between Bama or Hill, I'd have to hope Hill got it (though I loath seeing them back in the WH). Remember, Democrats do most of their damage through INACTION--not ACTION. Perhaps, if the world is quiet enough we will survive not too badly off after her reign.

She has a problem picking Bama as her Veep though--she knows she's have no second term... Something for her to think about...

12:18 PM  
Blogger Les Ismore said...

Well, fortunately Kucinich and others you quoted have about as much a chance of being the nominee as John McCain or Rudy Giulianni for the Republicans.

However, when discussing strategies you also need to differentiate between states, rogue states and non-state players. Three totally different strategies are required. The last one, non-state players is the scariest of the lot and there should be no negotiations with them. I dont know of any Republican or Democrat who is saying lets talk to Zawahari or any of that crowd. But Bush's insistance that we dont talk to our enemies is short sighted. Everyone knows those wise words, keep your friends close and your enemys closer. We need to do that with some of these state players. Talk is cheap, war is expensive.
Arnold said: "So now they're shocked that Obama would actually say in unequivocal words "hey, let's surrender and talk nice"?'
Wow, I missed that one. Which Democrats have said lets surrender. I think all of them are pretty sure they said something like the NIE has said the strategy in Iraq has failed on so many levels that it is best to cut our losses and let the Shia and Sunnis drive Al Qaeda out of Iraq. By the way, that is what our military leaders are now saying (sigh...just wish W would start listening to them)

12:42 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Les once again you have established your street cred as a Surrendercrat. Good going and how utterly predictable.

You know what I'm going to relish?

The stuttering and stammering that comes from the Surrendercrats when we finally pull out of Iraq after killing and subduing Al Qaida throughout Iraq.



2:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Peace is the absence of oppsition to socialism'' Karl Marx. All of these Democrats are Marxists through and through, Hillary the committed and obvious among them and Obama a close second. None of them have even the simplest of basic enconomic sense to run a lemonade stand let alone the abilty to understand, help guide and nuture the worlds largest and most complex economy, none have ever served in the military and as such have all the historical perspective and political intelligence the Good Lord gave a mothball. Their idiotic, naive and frankly staggeringly stupid remarks and pronoucements about ''peace'' and Denis the Meance'' Kucinich is so positivly an appeaser as to be treanous or just plain fecking nuts. None of these leftist morons should ever be sitting in the White House, EVER! or by the Almighty Above, we're dead. J'Mac.

6:35 PM  
Anonymous catfleas said...

"When a Democrat candidate says we 'have an obligation to move forward in the cause of building peace', what in the hell are they talking about?"

Donal, you explained the problem of peace so well! We can want all the peace that is possible on this planet. But not everyone wants peace, and that's the problem.

This piece was brilliant, Donal. Just keep writing, and we'll keep reading!

9:30 PM  
Blogger Les Ismore said...

Morgan, I guess the NIE is for Surrendercrats, eh?

Can you explain that?

3:22 AM  
Blogger Les Ismore said...

morgan, yes, the republicans will be doing the youtube thing.

3:31 AM  
Blogger Russet Shadows said...

The Democrats who are too afraid to debate on Fox News will not have the courage to stand up to terrorists. It's really that simple.

3:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

[b]an oem software, [url=]nero 9 update[/url]
[url=][/url] pc oem software microsoft office 2007 enterprise german netload dlc
buy c++ software [url=]inventory order software[/url] academic library software
[url=]buy it now software[/url] shopping store software
[url=]educational software awards[/url] student discount software photoshop
buy cheap microsoft software [url=]microsoft 3d software[/b]

6:38 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

[b]how to clear photos in acdsee, [url=]discount microsoft office home and student[/url]
[url=][/url] 4 Design Premium Mac windows xp pro
filemaker pro example [url=]buy cheap software[/url] added resellers software
[url=]between oem software[/url] windows xp activation
[url=]order software to[/url] buy chess software
office 2003 activation bypass [url=]software resellers usa[/b]

12:10 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

[b]cheap microsoft office suite, [url=]microsoft office 2003 for sale[/url]
[url=][/url] free kaspersky license key shop keeper software
spss software for sale [url=]store keeper software[/url] kids educational software
[url=]adobe photoshop cs4 extended incl patch-nope[/url] adobe photoshop cs4 extended mac
[url=]software prices australia[/url] software at student discount
to buy pirate software [url=]shop tech software[/b]

12:07 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

[b]microsoft network software, [url=]adobe photoshop cs3 torrents[/url]
[url=][/url] microsoft windows ce software adobe software retailers
pro discount software [url=]office software to buy[/url] buy used adobe software
[url=]icon plugin for acdsee[/url] free order processing software
[url=]autocad 2005[/url] adobe acrobat pro 9 serial
order creation software [url=]academic discounts on software[/b]

10:56 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home