| Today, on the 1st of November, the country can have a new thing to be disappointed about… The democratic leadership evoked the obscure and seldom used “rule 21” in order to take part in a closed session so that they could “get answers as to what our pre-war intelligence was.” This is a tragedy, and a prime example of how they are politicians that are only interested in obtaining more power. They are obviously betraying “the working man” and are trying to make political gains by letting men and women die…
The thing that is bothersome to me about the sudden calling of Rule 21 is that it is coming at a time that is rather vital to the president. One which is upon the nomination of his new Supreme Court justice. It is painfully obvious that the democrats in congress are trying to show that the president is incompetent, especial after his last appointment withdrew her nomination. This is a 2 pronged attack, not only are they undermining the court nomination, but they are also trying to take revenge on the republicans for the impeachment of Bill Clinton… the ironic thing it that when Clinton was impeached, he actually broke the law, George Bush in NO WAY broke any laws; especially since most Americans and virtually all of congress was in favor of invading Iraq. This can lead us to the logical conclusion that the democratic leadership are trying to criminalize a politician’s policy… There are people out there that say “no one died when Clinton lied.” This is a shallow way of looking at the issue; HE LIED! This is a country that is founded on principles, not one that is founded on the idea that it is ok to do wrong, so long as no one lies…
The issue is of pre-war intelligence is troublesome on several levels: the first being that the current war in Iraq is being compared to Vietnam. This is quite unrealistic, as we have yet to exceed 3000 American deaths in the WHOLE “war on terror”, in Vietnam the numbers were more than 20 times worse than what we have sustained in Iraq… not only that, but Vietnam was a war that was overwhelmingly supported by democrats… JFK got us knee deep, and LBJ made it the tar baby that we couldn’t get rid of. Something that people will refuse to take a look at is that it took the leadership of a republican to get us out of that war (that man was Richard Nixon… I will not even start to mention that he ran the war better than LBJ could have ever thought of doing.) The second is that the democrats are flip flopping on the issue, just as they did in Viet Nam. They had access to the same information that the president did, after all, they met in many closed sessions so that they could go over the intelligence and make up their own minds as to how they could vote over the war...
If we make the mistake of criminalizing a president’s policy decisions, where will thi slippery slope end??? I will take a moment to jog your memories… If we do criminalize policy, then we should jail Bill Clinton; as he had a chance to kill Osama Bin Laden. He however didn’t take the opportunity to do so; these not only resulted in the death of over 3000 Americans, but also lead us into a war in Afghanistan, and caused BILLIONS of dollars worth of damage to our economy, and trillions to the global one.
Let’s change our focus for one minute, and assume that the democrats are actually right about George Bush having lied to get us to invade Iraq… George W. Bush is a LIAR! Take the time to ask yourself this question: who did those very democrats vote for in the election of 2004? More than likely, it was John Kerry… isn’t he the same senator that stated that Saddam had WMDs, and voted in favor of the president using force to topple the regime in Iraq. Would the claim of WMDs in Iraq not be enough to make John Kerry a liar??? After all, he did say the same thing that the president did, which is what he is accused of lying about… Hell, He even voted to give the president the authority to invade a nation that “posed no immediate threat to the United States.”
So, what have we gathered here??? To make it short, we can say that Bill Clinton should be in jail (or even put to death for thousands of counts of manslaughter), we should let Saddam go free, John Kerry is a liar, and the democrats never know what it is that they want… this can all be concluded from the use of 1 single Senate rule; one that the democrats may not know if they actually wanted to use (now that they have hind site working on their side).
I agree with Jeff for the essence of this argument. Our whole governmental system runs on the principle of a double standard, primarily due to the two parties. When Clinton was in impeachment trials, the Republicans said to throw the book at him. Now, in Bush's war policies, the Democrats are yelling about how wrong and usleless it is. I, being the high, mighty, and influential person that I am make this announcement to the people of America:
Leave the President alone, and let him (or her) do their job.
No matter by what margin the President won the election by, he (or she) won it. Theoretically, they are smart enough to make decisions, based on far more information and reasons that we citizens can even begin to comprehend.
Let the democrats pull Rule 21. They can investigate if they want, and i actually give them my blessing. But even on a basic level, Saddam Hussein and his people are a threat to anyone around them. WMD or not, he needed to be taken out and his people need to be eliminated. USA is one of the most powerful nations in the world, so we have stepped in to care for the helpless. I am very sad that so many people have had to give their lives in this cause. But many of those great men and women gave their lives gladly, so that people in other parts of the world can have freedom like we do.
Well, that kind of turned into a big patriotic speech...but I think it is true.
The democrats have every right to pull rule 21, however that doesn't make it right... all they did was revoke their democratic principles in pulling such a rule, not to mention they flipflopped on an issue again... I don't really think that they should neccessarily leave the president alone, I just think that they should use more discression in bothering him... while it is there job to be dissentful, they go too low when they do personal attacks on the president (hell, the romans didn't even do personal attacks, they just killed the guys they didn't like... kinda like LBJ  )... People can usually do no greater good for their country than constantly questioning their government, it should just be done so using a good bit of discretion, and usually should be done BEFORE A MAJOR POLICY DECISSION IS MADE!!!
with that said, here is my prediction... as the bleeding heart liberals did in vietnam, you will see a radical pocket of them no longer descriminate between the president and their soldiers that are in the field of war... when the soldiers come home, they will be hated, spat upon, and disenfrachised in a country that doesn't remember how truely pro war is was just a few years ago... these are the people that are blatantly un-american, and should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law; for harassment or whatever law they break in doing spitting and throwing things at the soldiers... and if/when that takes place, then the left wing media will come to their aid, and try to make the prosecutor and the republicans that support him, look like facists... it will be REALLY interesting to see how this pans out if the person that it their poster child for a violent anti war movement is a *gasp* minority *gasp* (need I mention that Rodney King HIT the cops that were trying to cuff him for drug charges, and then once the LAPD tried to subue him, he kept trying to get up despite being beaten worse and worse and worse... all this while hopped up on PCP; what a martyr!!!)
...markmywords...markmywords...markmywords... it will happen... |
