“I don’t think it’s that we’re reluctant to take on Bush,” said Rep. Alcee L. Hastings (Fla.), a senior member of the House intelligence committee. “I think it’s we are reluctant to take on each other. . . . If I can fast-forward to September, October, November, December and see where we’ll be, we’ll be nowhere.”
Right Voices
in all matter of opinion, our adversaries are insane.
Subscribe to Right Voices
The article states that the dems are afraid of appearing weak on terrorism. Well, I got news for them. They ALREADY DO. Which imo will lose them the presidential election of 2008 and if they don’t get their collective asses out of investigating committees and into actually accomplishing something they will quickly lose their majority as well.
BonBon,
The Democrats do not appear weak, THEY ARE WEAK ON TERRORISM IF NOT BUDDY, BUDDY WITH THE TERRORISTS!
“The article states that the dems are afraid of appearing weak on terrorism.”
And as snowy pointed out, they have shown themselves to be de facto allies of our enemies!
So the Democrites don’t want to appear weak? That train has left the station!!!
=))
Correction PCD pointed out the fact that the Democrites have allied themselves with the terrorists.
You guys are right but I hope the majority of Americans see it. They keep trying to pass legislation that enables our enemies. I have even heard some liberals deny terrorism as a threat to begin with.
And just like Pandora’s box we won’t be able to turn back.
Perhaps the Liberals have been applying relativism to the determination of whether terrorism is a real threat.
They do it with ethics and morals all the time. Perhaps now they have extended that to the terrorism question.
If something is a problem, just change the standards, or redefine it. Poof! The problem goes away! It’s magic! :d/ <: -p
) 
|)
If the justice department would get off its ass and stop prosecuting border patrol officers and started prosecuting corrupt Democratic Congressmen (William Jefferson, D-LA) and investigating things like the newest Hillary campaign contribution scandal, the liberal Dems would be quaking in their Birkenstocks. Start investigating the anti American George Soros, and tying him up with all of the fraudulent campaign contributions he’s been making, and prosecuting HIM, this administration would have a lot less problems. Send Soros and all of his Clinton vanguard lackies to a correctional facility and take a few hundred million in fines for his activities and see how fast Hillary finds herself very short of friends.
Congress was given to the Democrats by the American people because Republicans FAILED.
The presidency will also be given to Democrats because of the Iraq Mistake.
You people have NO IDEA how bad you and your president f*cked up on this one.
You might not be trusted to return to power for years, if not decades…
SFL, you dumb Democrats are pulling a royal McGovern and destroying your own party. I hope you are so demoralized that you move to Zimbabwe.
Why would I be demoralized?!?
Nearly everything I predicted about the Iraq War has happened.
Because of the war, Bush is now one of the most least popular president in American history. Ranking lower than Nixon in approval ratings…
Because of the war, Republicans have lost controll of congress and will soon lose control of the Presidency.
Why the hell would I be demoralized?
I’ve never been more politicaly happy than I am now, seeing your beloved Republican Party fall to pieces with each passing day.
Democrats are so happy, that we’re getting ready to move into the White House. Not Zimbabwe. That’s where you sad clowns will go when the Republican party is banned for being treasonous in 2009.
NO ONE is lower than Carter. YOU have predicted squat. You should be shipped to Iran to find out first hand how they feel about you.
No, actually, Bush is worse.
George Bush is probably the worst, dumbest, most pathetic president of the United States.
The Iraq War, which you morons still support, will go down in history as the biggest millitary blunder we’ve ever undertaken.
…and of course, I predicted that.
And exactly what makes anyone think that the lowest rated Congress in HISTORY is going to stay in Democratic hands? Congress’s rating is half that of Bush’s. Since you’re so intent on taking polls at face value. You’re obviously too young to remember the 70s, so before you say in history, understand that history didn’t start with your birth. You don’t remember the way that McGovern’s radical antiwar, Anti US stance caused him to lose the election by 48 states. (yeah that’s 49 to 1) Jimmy Carter won 4 years later but was promptly booted out on his backside when he screwed up foreign policy, gutted the intelligence community, and pushed “liberal” policies that doubled unemployment, inflation and interest rates. His big slogan during his first campaign was to rate the economy according to his MISERY INDEX. By the time he was kicked to the curb, the MISERY INDEX, was DOUBLE where it was when he started. I was there, I remember what a screw up he was. You can’t tell me what a great president that moron Carter was, I KNOW better. You can’t rewrite history to make him anything but the worst president since before the Depression.
I remember the Democratic Congress cutting off the funding to our allies in South Vietnam and watching our Marines kicking people’s hands to get them to release the skids on the UH-1 helicopters as they lifted off of the US Embassy in Saigon. I watched it on TV. I watched the battle of Khe San unfold on TV. I remember what went on. I didn’t get my information about it from some cowardly liberal professor who has never had a real job outside of sitting in a classroom spewing revisionist history. I know that LBJ was president during the escalation in Vietnam, and the TET offensive. I also know that LBJ was the president who refused to take the fight to the North Vietnamese allowing them to regroup, rearm and recoup right across the border with impunity. Why would any intelligent president NOT attack enemy troops in an enemy country? I know what went on in Vietnam because I had 3 cousins and guys I served in the Army with who had been there. I also served with people who had been in central America when Carter decided to turn it over to the communists.
#10 Bwaaa haa haa haa haa! =))
“Republican party is banned for being treasonous in 2009.”
If it was possible to ban a political party for treason, this would have already been done to the DemoCrite/DemoTraitor party.
#10 San Fran, you are so much smarter than this. Your comments over the last few days have been, well to put it bluntly, childish. You are capable of doing better. Normally when someone resorts to this kind of immature behavior, it’s an indication that they realize that they are LOSING the argument. Normally your commentary has a reasoned point to it. Your logic may be flawed and your conclusion incorrect, but at least you don’t sound like a six year old.
Other than the aforementioned childish nature of your post, I do have a couple of other comments about it. To ban a political party would be against two of the principles that liberals so adamently claim to support. Those principles being tolerance and diversity. Of course we all know that the liberals only espouse supporting those values in sound bites as evidenced by their insistence on political correctness. The same applies to their supposed support of freedom of expression that only applies to desecrating Jewish and Christian religious symbols but not Islamic ones. Also while their supporters may assault conservatives with impunity (They dropped charges against the guy who attacked Ann Coulter with a pie in Tucson. If she ever comes back to AZ, I’ll act as her bodyguard for free. I guarantee the only person with pie on their face will be the moron who runs on stage with it.), anyone speaking out against a liberal at a Democrat political rally is promptly removed or soundly thrashed by union thugs.
Another point to make is that you don’t ban people for being treasonous, you either execute or BANISH them. And since when has defended the country against attackers, defending people’s rights to own guns, and trying to insure prosperity for the economy been treasonous? I guess maybe it is in a communist country but unless Hillary gets elected, this is not a communist country. BTW, how well did that communism thing work out in Russia, China, North Korea, Cuba, etc etc? Is that really the standard of living you want in this country?
Communism is an economic system and Fascism is a political system. Hillary and the Democrats are advocating a Communist economic model with a Fascist political model to support it. The first they intend to be exempt from, while the second they intend to run. If socialized medicine will be so wonderful, why doesn’t the former first lady use the VA hospital system instead of a private hospital?
“San Fran, you are so much smarter than this. Your comments over the last few days have been, well to put it bluntly, childish. You are capable of doing better.”
————
I’m being sarcastic here, guys.
Of course I don’t think it possible nor do I even want the Republican Party to be banned or whatever.
I was being facetious.
And, Mr. FAO…I would like to add that Congress has such a low appoval ratings for many reasons.
One of which is their inability to end the Iraq War.
If asked by a pollster, I would have to be negative in my opinion of this Democrat congress for that one, very large, reason.
I don’t think the over-all negativity is against Democratic ideological positions, but against the War in Iraq and it’s ongoing existance.
17, SFL, that tactic is a failed one. We don’t believe it for anyone else, not Kos, and certainly not you.
18-SF, that answer to a pollster would be understandable. You and your fellow democrats have strong feelings on the issue. When polled last fall, many Republicans voted in anger with their party. We are fed up with the issues being swept under the rug. We are tired of inaction, wasteful spending on pork, and a disregard for the office these people hold.
Right on Peejz.
we both have “issues” with our political parties inaction on hot topics…
21- That we agree with.