Sunday, April 29, 2007

Surrender-crats Weren't Always On The Enemy's Side

Just watch the video. You can argue with me all day, but I'm not the one in the video saying why Saddam had to go.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

I don't actually have time to watch the video right now...but you tend to do this sort of thing quite a bit: Complain/point out/observe how horrible the "surrender-crats" are. I realize that you disagree with much of what the Democrats do, but you DO know that without these "surrender-crats" our American civilization would fall apart at the seams?

The USA has a foundation of two parties—Democrats and Republicans. Without one or the other, the building falls down. That being said, wouldn't it make more sense to post links of things that your beloved conservatives have done? Things that have helped America, that have helped the world?—Rather than simply point out what the Democrats are doing wrong.

Obviously, you don't JUST point out your perceived failings of the liberals—but you do quite a fair amount.

Watch this video of Jon Stewart on Crossfire. http://youtube.com/watch?v=aFQFB5YpDZE

Darren said...

Thank you for your suggestion, but I'll post on those topics that strike my fancy. And if you look in the labels in the left column, you'll see plenty of posts demonstrating the wisdom of conservatism.

As for a foundation of two political parties, that's what we have now--but there's no reason it must be that way. In fact, President Washington warned against the creation of political parties. Have them we do, and a loyal opposition would be tolerable, but that's not what we have with the surrender-crats today.

Let's not forget, a Republican Congress allowed President Clinton to send troops to the Balkans (they're still there!) and confirmed Ruth Bader Ginsburg to the Supreme Court. Opposition, but not disloyal. Tell me Reid's Senate would confirm Chief Justice Roberts today. Heck, in the minority they wouldn't even allow some of the President's judicial nominees to receive an up-or-down vote until the Gang of 14 came up with a compromise.

Want another example of a loyal opposition? Did the Republicans use Pearl Harbor to make political points in 1942/44? Answer: no.

Today's Democrats are not a good political party. Their socialist ideas are bad enough; the way they comport themselves politically is, if not treasonous, then darned un-American.

Law and Order Teacher said...

Dear Anon,
Once again you miss the point. It's not about what the conservatives, beloved or otherwise, have done. It's about the fact that these "leaders" are so disingenuous it's disgusting. At least have the gonads to put your name on your public statements. Each of these leaders "rushed to war" and now they don't have the courage to stand by their statements. Could it be that there's some political reason for not standing by their words? Surely not!
Every one of these leaders had the same information that the president had and made the same finding that he did. How gutless and disgusting that they are not able or willing to stand by their words.
How about a history lesson? The politics leading up to the Civil War were vile and horrible. But at least each and every politician was willing to put his name on his statements and stand by them. Even the southern Democrats who supported slavery were willing to be quoted on the record.
At least Harry and his posse should have the courage of their convictions. Do they have real convictions or just political leanings.
Harry and Nancy,stop leaning into the wind!

rightwingprof said...

"How about a history lesson?"

Yes, how about one. How many millions of people were slaughtered because the McGovern Democrats broke the treaty and withdrew all aid from Vietnam? And what did it do to us as a nation? (Hint: there was more than a fiscal reason Reagan was elected in a landslide.)