As reported here, "Democrats say they are determined not to cede the issue this year and are working aggressively to cast President Bush as having diminished the nation's safety." To be able to do that - which you can't - you have to give concrete examples as to how President Bush has diminished the nation's safety - which you can't. Saying that Islamofascists would simply leave us alone if we changed our Mid-East policies, and sat down to talk to them, to listen to their grievances, is naïve at best; appeasement has never worked (see Chamberlain and Hitler, circa 1938), and never will. Making changes in Mid-East policies so as to not "offend" a group of people bent on our destruction is tantamount to succumbing to blackmail.
"Seeking to counter White House efforts to turn the alleged terrorist plot in Britain to Republican advantage, Democrats are using the arrests of the suspects to try to show Americans how the war in Iraq has fueled Islamic radicalism and distracted Bush and the Republican Congress from shoring up homeland security. They say they intend to drive that message home as the nation observes the coming anniversaries of Hurricane Katrina and the Sept. 11 attacks in the weeks before the November elections." I have a newsflash for you - Islamofascists were already radicalized before we went to Iraq in 2003, or have you (conveniently) forgotten the bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut in 1983? Or, the truck bomb that was exploded in the parking garage of the World Trade Center in 1993? Speaking of the WTC, have you forgotten the two planes that were crashed into those two buildings, the one that was crashed into the Pentagon, and the one that crashed into that lonely field in Pennsylvania in 2001? Those, and other, events all took place before we went into Iraq, so how does the fact that we are in Iraq make Islamofascists any more radical than they already were? Explain that to me. Go on. I'm waiting ... I didn't think you could, because it's impossible.
"But they (the Democrats) are not waiting. A video Monday on the Web site of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee showed footage of al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden, referred to an increase in terrorist attacks, highlighted illegal immigration and pointed out the nuclear aspirations of Iran and North Korea.
""Feel safer?" it concludes. "Vote for change."" Yes, use the video that has Hispanics outraged that they are compared with al-Qaida and have demanded the video be removed, as one of your "We're not soft on National Defense" talking points. Yes, you are, and you're soft in the head, too, if you believe that the majority of the American electorate will buy into that fabrication.
"Republicans said they believe the Democratic efforts will fizzle, asserting that voters will ultimately choose to trust Republicans with the life-and-death issue of security.
"And Bush, in remarks Monday at the State Department, disputed the notion that his policies have contributed to a more dangerous world.
""Some say that America caused the current instability in the Middle East by pursuing a forward strategy of freedom, yet history shows otherwise," said Bush, ticking off terrorist attacks that occurred in the United States, Africa and elsewhere long before he took office."
He's right, and no amount of Democrat double-speak, or obfuscation of the truth, will change that. It's a fact - we are much safer with George W. Bush as President than we would be with any Democrat pretender.
Deal with it.
No comments:
Post a Comment