Carol Platt Liebau: Why Voting Democrat is Dangerous

Thursday, December 15, 2005

Why Voting Democrat is Dangerous

Morton Kondracke explains -- and spells it out for the apparently clueless: It's a bad thing to seem weak in the face of threats from abroad.

A key quote:

With a few exceptions, the Democratic Party has put itself in the position of being invested in U.S. defeat in Iraq. The main body of party leaders seems so hostile to Bush and his policy that it wants to be vindicated by collapse.
It's a terrible place for a political party to be - in effect, rooting for its own country's failure.

4 Comments:

Blogger Thomas said...

Good blog from what I have read so far.

4:09 PM  
Blogger Dan M said...

That's where the Democrats were during 'Nam, too.

That's why we "lost," why the South collapsed under a wave of artillery, tanks and troops from the North. It wasn't "indigenous" forces who toppled the South, it wasn't "guerillas," it was just a plain, old fashioned, conventional, totalitarian invasion.

And despite the solemn pledges of this country to supply, support, finance and ultimately, lend air-support to the South if it were attacked, WE RENEGED upon each of those assurances.

We broke our pledge to provide them with money, so they couldn't buy the material they needed to defend themselves; we broke our pledge to supply them with spare parts, so when equipment broke down or was damaged in battle, it couldn't be repaired; we broke our pledge to supply them with ammunition, hence brave South Vietnamese men went to face their invaders knowing that they needed to make each bullet, each shell, each mortar count; we broke our pledge to pound the enemy from the air, if they broke the treaty and launched a new invasion.

And my brief list is but a brief summary of the squalid doings of the Democrat Congress back then. It was all the Democrats, they controlled the money, and they passed laws, which when vetoed, THEY OVERRODE, that PROHIBITED the President from HONOURING our treaty obligations and going to the assistance of the South Vietnamese.

And so there were the "boat people." During the long wars against the Japanese, the French, and then during the long war when we were involved, THERE WERE NO flights of refugees. But after the Democrats finished with the South, THERE WERE MILLIONS OF THEM.

Poor people, leaving their ancestoral homelands, leaving their culture, the burial lands of their forefathers, and setting off, with only that which they could carry, braving piracy, rape, labour camps, extermination camps, summary executions, braving the sharks, the high-seas, braving it all, because it was better than the alternative.

Such is the brutality visited upon ordinary humans, when the reality of Democrat PUSILANNIMOUSNESS aquires the force of law.

That party is a damn disgrace.

And for those in that party, there can only be one question: "What did you know about the Democrats, and when did you know it............?"

1:08 PM  
Blogger Duke-Stir said...

Good Lord, Dan, we get it; you pace around your house shouting "pusillanimous" like a Tourette's patient.

Well, for future reference, print this and post it by your computer for the next time you have an online eruption:

pusillanimous (two L's, one N)
pusillanimity (the noun; not "pusillanimousness")

It'll help you sound (slightly) less ridiculous.

8:02 AM  
Blogger Pete said...

Typical - ridicule a spelling mistake and ignore the substance.

What I will disagree with Dan on is the fact that our military won the war - the MSM and the democrats (agreed) lost it! Hanoi John, Jane, and company!

"Friends don't let friends vote democrat!"

7:52 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Google