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.