Category Archives: 2008 Election

Vietnam Flashback, Democrats Today

Taking the first opportunity to show distrust and disdain of the military, democrats top-off their first 100 hours by kicking off the their second Vietnam campaign. That is to say, the democrat leaders today have turned the war on terror into a political battle with a penchant for sharing the Commander in Chief responsibilities.

Vietnam was lost hugely because of politicians running the war from Washington instead of generals running the war in theater. Today, right out of the box, democrats’ first position on the war was to ignore the advice of the general in charge, Lt. Gen. David H. Petraeus, and proceed with playing politics with our troops and the war with their ‘non-binding’ resolution.

Dems Rebuke Military In First 100 Hours

According to the ‘democrat clock’, the ‘first 100 hours’ is not over yet. Here’s the addendum to the 100 hour blitz of Jan.23, 2007, Lt. Gen. David Petraeus testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee today.democrat legislation. In the first 100 hours, Democrats rebuke the military.

Lt. Gen. David H. Petraeus, the President’s pick to implement the new Iraq strategy, was lauded by all the democrat leaders in the house and senate. Within a day or two of the big welcome and confidence expressed for Gen. Petraeus’ record and judgement, democrats in the house ignore his advice and have their Iraq plan ‘no confidence’ resolution anyway.

Asked by Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.) whether those resolutions would give encouragement to the enemy by exposing divisions among the American people, he replied: “That’s correct.”

So when people like Hillary Clinton chastise Bush for not listening to his generals (their spin), Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, John Murtha, Kucinich and the like are doing the same, to the real general, the one charged with the responsibility of prosecuting it, despite the fact that they know full well that the ‘unintended’ consequence of such a rebuff would give hope to the enemy. Giving hope to your enemy is not a way to win the war.

Resolution Hurts War Effort, Helps Enemy

With the democrats proposing to have a resolution, ‘non-binding’ they’ll be sure to say, for the purpose of expressing their ‘no confidence’ on the President’s ‘surge’ plan, one wonders what the effect of such a vote would have on our troops, the war effort, and on our enemy if it were to occur? Simply, it would hurt the morale by showing non-support of and for the troops, and, it would offer hope to our enemy that they can prevail if democrats would have their way.

As a legislator, does it make any sense whatsoever to do something that would in one fell swoop, harm our troops and our war effort and help our enemy?

How about a resolution to win the war and defeat al-Qaeda and other terrorists around the world? Unity in fighting this war is more important to this country than whoever is in the White House. A concept which the current democrat leadership does not endorse.

100 Hours on ‘Democrat Clock’

Back to the point of not hearing anything from the MSM on the first 100 hours of the Democrat congress, here it is. Well, no it isn’t. AP calls it ‘Six for ’06’, which is the Democrats’ six-bill, 100-hour legislative agenda. Now there is an article, but none of the six legislative actions were listed. Here is what it is, and why it’s not being explained.

  1. Remove incentives from and increase taxes on the oil industry. Add dis-incentives (conservation fee) to oil production and exploration in the Gulf of Mexico.
  2. Raise the federal minimum wage.
  3. Implement some 9/11 commission recommendations.
  4. Expand embryonic stem cell research.
  5. Empower Medicare to ‘negotiate’ prices with the pharm industry.
  6. Lower interest rates on student loans.

Today, Democrats stood united to say that we have kept our promise to the American people, said Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California.

She’s not referring to her promise of being partners, not partisans, with the minority. They were shut out of 100% of the 100 hours as far as input goes. There is this Democrat Clock that worked like this. . .

The Democrats’ clock, which counted only the time spent directly on the six bills, showed that 42 hours and 15 minutes had elapsed when the roll call ended on the last bill, energy legislation that would reimpose billions in fees, royalties and taxes on the oil industry.

What’s missing in the Democrats’ agenda?

First 100 Hours, Dems Treading Water

I haven’t been writing much lately.  Mainly because the Democrats still have nothing to say and I always knew what ‘cut and run’ was, and is.  Looks as though we’re in for a 2 year cruise of treading water in the manner that Clinton did for eight years.

Haven’t heard anything in the media about ‘the first 100 hours’ of the new Democrat majority congress.  100 hours being long gone now, working 20 hrs/wk it would take them 5 weeks to get to their first 100 hours.  So there’s still plenty of time.

What’s being ignored?

The obvious ones are winning the war-on-terror, economic policies like making the tax cut permanent, fixing Social Security, educational policies like allowing school choice via the school voucher program (No child left behind), real tort reform, earmark removal just to name a few.   The party has nothing to say about the issues they just ran on.  Oh that’s right, it was ‘Bush sucks.’

What ‘Cut And Run’ Is

Who’s fighting a war, and who isn’t?  The ’06 campaign was all about the difference between winning in Iraq and leaving before winning.  The Right was chastised for calling the Left’s position in Iraq as cut and run.  It was unfair because that is not what it was, they said.  Matter of fact, even through the election we still didn’t know what their position was.  But now we know.  Its cut and run.

“Our troops and the American people have already sacrificed a great deal for the future of Iraq,” the letter from Reid and Pelosi said.

 “After nearly four years of combat, tens of thousands of U.S. casualties, and over $300 billion dollars, it is time to bring the war to a close.”

A more clear example cannot be made, that the democrat party does not get in the slightest that the Iraq war is but a front in the war on terror, than their own words.

Be on the lookout for a MSM headline, ‘They do want to cut and run.’  Just don’t hold your breath.

The Aura Of Rep. Alcee Hastings

The Rev. Al Sharpton ‘wants to see some returns.’ What? This over Nancy Pelosi’s choice, Alcee Hastings, to become chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, one of the most vital and sensitive positions, in terms of national security, in government. And Rev. Sharpton says Alcee Hastings is the man. Nothing would make Nancy happier. For her, history began this morning. Nancy Pelosi voted to impeach him.

Mr. Hastings, your resume shows as a federal judge you were impeached by the house and convicted in the senate for taking bribes. Thanks anyway. We’re looking for someone with a history of integrity, not just recent history.

Aside from that, there’s more about Alcee Hastings than his being impeached as a federal judge for his bribery problems. His accomplice in that investigation, William Borders, was criminally convicted and went to prison. Borders also refused to testify against Hastings and Hastings was acquitted. And Borders got out of prison when Bill Clinton pardoned him on his last day in office.  Well isn’t that special?

Byron York points out that the pardon documents given to Clinton listed Borders’ crime this way:

“Conspiracy to corruptly solicit and accept money in return for influencing the official acts of a federal district court judge (Alcee L. Hastings), and to defraud the United States in connection with the performance of lawful government functions; corruptly influencing, obstructing, impeding and endeavoring to influence, obstruct and impede the due administration of justice, and aiding and abetting therein; traveling interstate with intent to commit bribery.”

Sharpton is calling Democrats to task, starting with his post on the Huffington Post. His point is that the Dems couldn’t have tilted the balance of power in Washington without 90 percent of the black vote. That’s a fact, but wasn’t his point. Rev. Al Sharpton’s point is there aren’t enough minorities in the Democrat ranks of influence. Its another ‘Bryant Gumbel‘ moment. Al just noticed a ‘paucity of blacks’ in the Democrat ranks, and his reaction is more like a ‘you owe us’ challenge to the Democrat leadership.

Hastings’ record what it is, I’m sure we could do better. And, btw, I don’t care what color his/her skin is, unlike Rev. Sharpton. I do care about the integrity of a person considered for that position, which ranks above skin color for me.

Byron York @ NRO: Hastings says he’s a victim of politics.