The Mudville Gazette
This is Mudville Gazette Back-up Site

Monday, April 21, 2003


OR: Worse then just denial: It's "You did it too!"

I ran an internet search for "lying sleazebag morons"
and of course the first page on the list (After "Buy Lying Sleazebag Morons from Amazon") was the Democratic National Comittee homepage. My first instinct was to back out quickly and wipe any residual slime from the monitor, then I remembered the inside of the screen couldn't be reached without a lot of work and that equals down time. So I figured since the damage was done why not look around in sleazeville a bit and report back to the right thinkers? I mean, I'm saving you serious damage to the inside of your monitors here people. But it's a sacrifice I'm willing to make for my fellow freedom lovers. But oh what I found...

In the on-line rant: GOP Hypocrisy: Republicans Fail their own Standards of Patriotism the party of the left tries desperately and sometimes hilariously to establish themselves as more patriotic then the Republicans. That this appears on the DNC homepage leads me to wonder exactly who is the target audience? Then comes the frightening thought; there are people out there who will believe this stuff hook line and sinker. Obviously the die-hard "I don't even think about it, I'm just a Democrat!" crowd will drool enough over this stuff to cause permanent keyboard damage. But can they really convert the masses? Are there people whose opinions can be swayed by this stuff?

I hope not. I will give the American public more credit then the DNC will. I will let you make up your own minds. Read the following two lines, and think how you might characterize the statements:

"Those comments may not undermine the President as he leads us into war, and they may not give comfort to our adversaries, but they come mighty close." --Dennis Hastert, 3/18/02

"This destructive rhetoric does nothing more than demoralize our troops and second-guess our commander in chief."
Tom Delay, 3/20/03

The Dems call these quotes "attacks," as in "With countless attacks like these on Democratic leaders, Republicans set a very high standard for patriotism..."

Attacks? If those were attacks, then what would you call Sep 11? We need a much stronger word! In fact, much ado has been made of non-existant "attacks" by Republicans and their "right wing media cronies" on the leaders of the Democrativc Party. It's not happening people. No suporting evidence of any substantial "attacks" has yet been offered.

Still no one of any intelligence whatsoever would be surprised to find the Dems crying over their victimhood. But could the DNC be doing what they think is a pre-emptive strike? Insisting they've been attacked? Who says they can't strategerize with the best of 'em? The first DNC cruise missiles are launching from the DNC home page in the form of quotes by Republican leaders from the Kosovo campaign. However, these missiles are duds. An opinion from House Leader Tom DeLay best describes the main points in Republican questioning of the Kosovo war effort:

"I cannot support a failed foreign policy... But before we get deeper embroiled into this Balkan quagmire, I think that an assessment has to be made of the Kosovo policy so far. President Clinton has never explained to the American people why he was involving the U.S. military in a civil war in a sovereign nation, other than to say it is for humanitarian reasons, a new military/foreign policy precedent." [Congressional Record, "Removal of United States Armed Forces from the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia," 4/28/99]

And there is the fundamental difference between the two events. Iraq was a response to Clear and Present Danger to the United States; Kosovo was arguably "humanitarian," but it was above all else a mission primarily undertaken to build a legacy for President Clinton. A feeb could see the difference. There is nothing aproaching "moral equivalance" here. Especially comparing the tone of Mr DeLays remarks to Sen Tom Daschle's now infamous "I am saddened, saddened that this president failed so miserably at diplomacy that we're now forced to war"

Or how about this 180 (that I've noted here previously):
"The last thing we need to do is to make partisan this war effort. These are not Democrats or Republicans that are fighting there on our behalf and trying to end this genocide. These are American, young men and women. And we ought to be on their side. And we ought not to be sending a message and pulling the rug out from underneath them by voting against what they're doing."
Dave Bonior, (D) Mi., 1999.

What great life changing event occured between then and now to lead Mr Bonior to visit Iraq?
If it turns out Iraq maintains a weapons of mass destruction program, would a U.S.-led preemptive assault be justified then? Mr. Bonior, again: "No. I wouldn't support military action in this endeavor at all."

There are numerous such well documented 180s from Kosovo to Iraq, on both sides of the aisle. I don't have a problem with questioning the need for Americans to die in Europe, especially for an administration with a track record for cutting and running at the first sign of blood (Somolia) thus rendering near-pointless that ultimate sacrifice. The "shocked and saddened" comment went well beyond that. Likewise "I won't support military action at all" None of those Republican comments from '99 approach aidding and abetting the enemy ala a few Dem leaders this past season. "Politicking" Iraq was at least inexcusable and unforgivable, and likely treasonous as well.

And OBTW, while I thought this was a dead-horse issue, it's front and center on the DNC web page today.

So on a final note, most military people are tired of hearing about how well loved they are by the Democrats. Few are so short-sighted to have forgotten the attempted disenfranchisement of Florida's military voters during the Democrat's attack on the Constitution after the 2000 elections. Military members took an oath to uphold and defend that document and the ideals contained within, take that oath quite seriously, and wish everyone who takes that oath would also.