Kowabunga

George McGovern, still bitter 35 years after defeated in his run for the presidency in 1972, has come out with an opinion piece in the Washington Post where he joins the clamorous hard-left Moonbats calling for the unwarranted impeachment of George W. Bush. In it, McGovern claims that the war has killed over 600,000 Iraqis and "laid waste their country."

First things first, the number of Iraqis is somewhere UNDER 60,000, which is 1/10 what McGovern claims. Most of those killed are either terrorists, sectarian death squad members, or their victims. There has been a few innocent bystanders killed by U.S. led forces, and a very few murdered by same (one instance of a family that I am aware of), but the vast majority of innocents have been killed by evil-doers bent on returning Iraq to a totalitarian regime. As for the laying waste of the country of Iraq, the U.S. led coalition has made great strides in restoring the infrastructure there while contending with terrorists trying to stop the coalition from rebuilding a country.

Bush and Cheney are clearly guilty of numerous impeachable offenses. They have repeatedly violated the Constitution. They have transgressed national and international law. They have lied to the American people time after time. Their conduct and their barbaric policies have reduced our beloved country to a historic low in the eyes of people around the world..

Name three instances of any of the above that can be verified and confirmed? And that last bit about our standing in the eyes of the world is laughable.

All of this has been done without the declaration of war from Congress that the Constitution clearly requires, in defiance of the U.N. Charter and in violation of international law. This reckless disregard for life and property, as well as constitutional law, has been accompanied by the abuse of prisoners, including systematic torture, in direct violation of the Geneva Conventions of 1949.

Again, laughable. I suspect that McGovern never studied U.S. History, or, if he did, he slept through the class and got an "F." Historically, the United States has declared war on only five occasions: War of 1812, Mexican-American War, Spanish-American War, WW1, and WW2. The United States has fought many wars since its founding without a Declaration of War, starting with the Quasi-War with France in 1798 all the way up through today with wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, with dozens in between.

Further, the constitution does not require a Declaration of War, it merely states that the sole power to make such declarations resides with Congress. There is also an exception to that power defined in Article 1, Section 10 of the Constitution.

If this is the case, why did he not speak out in support of impeaching Bill Clinton for the wars he waged in Somalia and Kosovo? There was no declaration of war there, yet it was certainly a war being carried by the U.S. in both of those instances. Not to mention Vietnam, which he voted to authorize, and there was no Declaration of War there as we;;.

The war to liberate Iraq was NOT in defiance of the U.N., but in accordance with resolutions issued by that Dunsel body. No laws were violated, either at the national or international level.

As for the allegations of torture, the people subjected to water boarding and other tactics, are not protected by the Geneva Convention. They are not uniformed combatants, but terrorists, and are subject to the same rules as mercenaries and spies where the Geneva Convention is concerned. That means that they can be executed without trial, not that I would advocate doing so.

I can't say I like the idea of water boarding terrorists, but I am unaware of any law preventing it. Our military routinely subjects its own personnel to that treatment, so how can it be illegal?

How could a once-admired, great nation fall into such a quagmire of killing, immorality and lawlessness?

It happened in part because the Bush-Cheney team repeatedly deceived Congress, the press and the public into believing that Saddam Hussein had nuclear arms and other horrifying banned weapons that were an "imminent threat" to the United States. The administration also led the public to believe that Iraq was involved in the 9/11 attacks -- another blatant falsehood.

Again, lots of problems with McGovern's claims. It was never stated that Hussein had nuclear weapons, only that he was pursuing them; we have recovered over 500 chemical weapons (as of the2006 declassification of military documents on the subject), not counting the two that terrorists attempted to use in roadside bombs (one armed with mustard gas, the second armed with sarin nerve gas). Add to that the munitions banned under the cease-fire agreement that have been recovered, including the multi-warhead missiles manufactured by France and dated "2002," and you've got confirmed cases of "horrifying banned weapons" in possession of a rogue regime controlled by a totalitarian dictator who murdered at least a half-million of his own people. As for claims that Iraq was involved with 9/11, go back and check the records; you will find that the administration never made such claims; it stated that Hussein and his regime were sponsors of terror and provided some logistical support to al-Qeada; it never claimed Iraq was involved with the terrorist attacks of 9/11.

Consider the difference between the policies of the first President Bush and those of his son. When the Iraqi army marched into Kuwait in August 1990, President George H.W. Bush gathered the support of the entire world, including the United Nations, the European Union and most of the Arab League, to quickly expel Iraqi forces from Kuwait. The Saudis and Japanese paid most of the cost. Instead of getting bogged down in a costly occupation, the administration established a policy of containing the Baathist regime with international arms inspectors, no-fly zones and economic sanctions. Iraq was left as a stable country with little or no capacity to threaten others.

No Declaration of War there, either. Also, note that had the earlier President Bush finished the job and removed Hussein we would not have had to go in there in 2003 to get the job done.

There is more moonbattiness in the entire piece. I have no idea what McGovern has been smoking, but one thing is for sure. He is a Class-A Moonbat. Congratualtions Mr. McGovern, you are the latest recipient of the Moonbat Award.

Tags:

McGovern Iraq War Bush Impeachment al-Qaeda Weapons of Mass Destruction Moonbat

Posted by Sqotty at 6:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

The amazing thing about the left is their propensity to stoop to name-calling those who disagree with them. Such is the case with the latest from hard-left Liberal Moonbat Dave Lindorff and his piece on the impact of Global Warming on the possible changes to the political landscape in the U.S., published in the Baltimore Chronicle recently.

Lindorff is a poster-child for showing how stupid, hateful, and power-mongering those on the hard-left really are. In his piece, he proclaims that despite the current warming trends and the hypothetical doom-and-gloom scenario pushed by Al Gore and the I.P.C.C. (which is subservient to that pillar of corruption, the United Nations), "there is a silver lining."

He goes on to illustrate that the areas most likely to succumb to the rising sea level are predominantly conservative regions, like Texas and other parts of the south East, and San Diego. We'll set aside the fact that the sea level rise of a few inches over the next few decades is unlikely to cause San Diego to be under water. Only Al Gore and Lindorff believe that the Earth will see a deluge of biblical proportions over the next few years. Even the IPCC isn't predicting as much of a rise in sea level as the Boracle is.

Lindorff then goes on with the Midwest:

Then there's the matter of the Midwest, which climate experts say is likely to face a permanent condition of unprecedented drought, making the place largely unlivable, and certainly unfarmable. The agribusinesses and conservative farmers that have been growing corn and wheat may be able to stretch out this doomsday scenario by deep well drilling, but west of the Mississippi, the vast Ogallala Aquifer that has allowed for such irrigation is already being tapped out. It will not be replaced.

This part is news to me. I don't know about the aquifers in most of the Midwest, but here in Minnesota, there are numerous aquifers that haven't even been tapped as yet. I find it hard to believe that the bulk of the Midwest is relying on only the Ogallala Aquifer. Also, no where in his diatribe does he cite who these "climate experts" are that are making such doomsday claims that much of the Midwest will be unfarmable. He also ignores the fact that it is the hard-working farming community that produces the food that Lindorff and his cronies on the Left put on their table. No farm land, no food.

Further, water management and irrigation practices constantly improve. Plus, should the Ogallala Aquifer run dry (unlike to happen in my daughter's lifetime, let alone mine), there are other, deeper aquifers that can be tapped.

Will there be another '30s style dustbowl as the Earth's climate warms? Maybe, but probably not as we've been able to more efficiently tap our underground water resources since that time, allowing efficient irrigation of crops, thus relieving farmers of the necessity of relying solely on rainfall to water their crops, and making desolate places like the San Joaquin Valley, an area that gets maybe 10 inches or so of rain a year, highly profitable farmland.

Lindorff goes on to point out that Southwest retirement communities are being hit with rising energy costs, which may well put them on the path of becoming ghost towns.

What is hilarious about this is Lindorff's stand:

There is a poetic justice to this of course. It is conservatives who are giving us the candidates who steadfastly refuse to have the nation take steps that could slow the pace of climate change, so it is appropriate that they should bear the brunt of its impact.

How about those on the Hard-Left, like Barbara Boxer, Nancy Pelosi, Barack Obama, John Kerry, John Edwards, Hillary Clinton, and a host of other Hard-Left (and even some "moderate") Democrats who insist that the theory that global warming is man-caused, rather than a natural phenomenon, and are hell-bent to bankrupt working Americans by forcing them to pay higher energy costs while they sit on their laurels jetting to Bali for their CO2 rallies.

Al Gore, one of the biggest champions of "Cap and Trade," the shell game where power companies will be forced to purchase "carbon credits" from "green" power plants, such as wind turbines, owns Generations Investment Management, a firm dedicated to brokering such trades (and provides the Boracle with his carbon credits).

If the Hard-Left has its way, America will be pushed into second world status instead of world leadership, while reducing jobs, raising energy costs, and bringing us higher taxes, all of which will combine to significantly lower the American standard of living. Meanwhile, the wealthy liberals who are pushing this on us will continue to live a life of leisure, prestige, and privilege while telling those of us who have to work for a living (assuming we still have jobs) that we must conserve and use less of everything.

The capper in Lindorff's piece is when he states that conservatives should be denied any future say in government because, in his mind, we've screwed the world up.

The important thing is that we, on the higher ground both actually and figuratively, need to remember that, when they begin their historic migration from their doomed regions, we not give them the keys to the city. They certainly should be offered assistance in their time of need, but we need to keep a firm grip on our political systems, making sure that these guilty throngs who allowed the world to go to hell are gerrymandered into political impotence in their new homes.

There will be much work to be done to help the earth and its residents-human and non-human-survive this man-made catastrophe, and we can't have these future refugee troglodytes, should their personal disasters still fail to make them recognize reality, mucking things up again.

Based on this, Lindorff must be okay with silencing and disenfranchising the hard-left for all of the things they've done to screw up the world: Abandoning South Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia to communism in the '70s; abandoning the Shah of Iran thus allowing a totalitarian theocracy to be established in the Middle East that has been supplying terrorists with money, arms and training; hog-tying the nuclear industry by making it illegal to reprocess fuel rods, which has forced nuclear power plants to stock pile spent fuel rods rather than send them to other facilities that can reprocess the rods (like is done in France) and extract more energy and consequently reduce the amount of radioactive waste that needs to stored; not enforcing our immigration laws and allowing a huge influx of illegal aliens and then pushing for amnesty and citizenship for millions of people who do not respect our laws; providing nuclear technology to North Korea and then turning a blind eye as this totalitarian regime develops and tests its first nuclear weapon. I could go on and on listing all of the ignorant and dangerous decisions that have been foisted on America and the World by Hard-Left Liberal Democrats, but what would be the point? Most conservatives are aware of these issues, and Liberal/Progressives don't care.

As for Dave Lindorff, congratulations, you are the latest winner of the Moonbat Award.

Tags:

Moonbat Lindorff Global Warming

Posted by Sqotty at 7:59 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)
View blog reactions

Time Magazine has a new interview with Stephen King, Maestro of Horror, posted on their website. In it, King states that the Bush administration should water board Jenna Bush and ask her if she thinks that is torture or not. I am not surprised by this line of thinking. The Moonbats and Chickendoves on the left routinely call for applying different standards to the Bush daughters, like having them drafted into the Army and shipped of to Iraq in a front line combat role. I figured King to be a Leftie, but am surprised that he would spew the same kind of rhetoric that his Leftie fans regularly spout.

From Times.com:

Yeah. You know, I just filmed a segment for Nightline, about [the movie version of his novella] The Mist, and one of the things I said to them was, you know, "You guys are just covering - what do they call it - the scream of the peacock, and you're missing the whole fox hunt." Like waterboarding [or] where all the money went that we poured into Iraq. It just seems to disappear. And yet you get this coverage of who's gonna get custody of Britney's kids? Whether or not Lindsay drank at her twenty-first birthday party, and all this other [bleep].

You know, this morning, the two big stories on CNN are Kanye West's mother, who died, apparently, after having some plastic surgery. The other big thing that's going on is whether or not this cop [Drew Peterson] killed his... wife. And meanwhile, you've got Pakistan in the midst of a real crisis, where these people have nuclear weapons that we helped them develop. You've got a guy in charge, who's basically declared himself the military strongman and is being supported by the Bush administration, whose raison d'etre for going into Iraq was to spread democracy in the world.

So you've got these things going on, which seem to me to be very substantive, that could affect all of us, and instead, you see a lot of this back-fence gossip. So I said something to the Nightline guy about waterboarding, and if the Bush administration didn't think it was torture, they ought to do some personal investigation. Someone in the Bush family should actually be waterboarded so they could report on it to George. I said, I didn't think he would do it, but I suggested Jenna be waterboarded and then she could talk about whether or not she thought it was torture. And then the guy from Nightline said, "Well, obviously you've not been watching World News Tonight with Charlie Gibson." But I do - I watch 'em all!

As King served as a pitch man for the hard-left MoveOn.org during the 2006 election cycle, I guess it really shouldn't have come as a surprise.

At that time he claimed he knew scary. (allbusiness.com) "[G]iving this president and this out-of-control Congress two more years to screw up our future is downright terrifying." Just wait until we have either Hillary or Obama in The White House. Now there's some scary thoughts; the stuff of nightmares for potentially 8 years.

King does have a point though. The MSM spends way too much time focusing on celebrity frivolities, like Spears custody battle and Paris Hilton's jail time.

As for the Bush daughters, if King thinks they should be waterboarded as a case study, then he should also be prepared to undergo that same treatment. It won't change his mind any, but at least then he'll be able to say that he knows waterboarding just as he says he "knows scary."

King does deserve one additional acknowledgment for his call to waterboard Jenna Bush. Congratulations Stephen King, you are the latest recipient of the Moonbat Award. Does this mean you are the King of Moonbats?

Tags:

Liberal Stephen King MoveOn.org Moonbat

Posted by Sqotty at 5:46 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

Senator Joe Biden has been busy brainwashing 4th graders in New Hampshire. From BreitBart:

How did the war in Iraq start? Biden compared the war in Iraq with the invasion of Afghanistan.

"Osama bin Laden set up camps there, and he was getting a lot of help from folks running that country called Afghanistan. And that's where he planned an attack on America to bring the World Trade Towers down and kill all those innocent Americans. We had a right to, and we should've gone, to Afghanistan to try to get bin Laden and those people who've done very bad things to America," he said.

"But the president, I think, he got a little confused," he continued. "I think he thought the folks in another country, way, way far away, far from here, it's also far from Afghanistan, called Iraq. He said, 'The guy in Iraq he helped bin Laden do bad things to us,' and he didn't. He wasn't a good guy, but he didn't help. So we used that kind of as an excuse to attack Iraq."

I doubt many of those fourth graders will be reading this post, but I think we need to set the record straight. Biden use "simple" talk to call President Bush a liar. That's the way what he said will be interpreted. Now, of course, the leftist mantra for years now has been "Bush lied, people died" even though the president never stated that Saddam Hussein was directly involved in the attacks of 9/11. What bush did claim is that Hussein was a sponsor of terror, providing funding to terrorists throughout the region, especially amongst the Palestinians where the families of suicide bombers received substantial amounts of money. Hussein also provided a safe haven for terrorists to meet and plan, although there is no evidence that any of the planning for the 9/11 attacks took place in Iraq.

Another reason that Bush gave for invading Iraq and removing Saddam Hussein from power is that Hussein had a large stock pile of chemical and biological weapons, and was attempting to acquire materials for a nuclear bomb. We all know that Hussein had chemical and biological weapons; just ask the Kurds about that. Although we don't know what became of the bulk of the biological agents (there were reports that some viles containing botulinum toxin were recovered), over 500 chemical (not including the two used against U.S. forces by terrorist groups) have been recovered as well as tons of precursor materials that could be used for building more chemical weapons. Then there is also all of the missiles recovered capable of delivering chemical, biological, or nuclear warheads that were recovered, many of which were acquired in violation of the Gulf War cease fire agreement.

And let us not forget the occasional pot shots, also in violation of the cease fire, which the Iraqi military took at U.S. aircraft.

What we have here is a clear case of a Senator who would like to be president, who is lying to children. It is one thing to be a chickendove and disagree with the president on the necessity of war (didn't Biden vote in support of liberating Iraq back in 2002?), but it is a whole different matter to lie to children about what the president said, and to call the president a liar.

Congratulations Senator Biden, for your moonbatting to children about the reasons we went in to Iraq, you are now a recipient of the Moonbat Award.

Maybe I should design a certificate and send it to these whackos.

Tags:

Biden Bush Iraq Moonbat Chickendove

Posted by Sqotty at 6:39 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

I ran across a good opinion piece in the SF Chronicle online edition about my former congressman, Pete Stark. I lived in his district before moving to Minnesota, so it is a good thing to know what he's been up to. In this opinion piece Debra Saunders describes Stark as the Ann Coulter of the Democrat Party. That actually describes about half of the Democrat Party.

Last week, after President Bush vetoed a bill to expand the State Children's Health Insurance Program to cover not only poor but also middle-class children, Stark accused Republicans of wanting "to blow up innocent people if we can get enough kids to grow old enough for you to send them to Iraq to get their heads blown off for the president's amusement." Speaker Nancy Pelosi rebuked Stark for his "inappropriate" comments.

This is a very sick statement on two counts: first that Republicans are only interested in killing innocent people and second that the president finds getting American soldiers killed as an entertaining past time. Fortunately I never voted for him, not because he's a Democrat but because he is a lousy congressman. Spewing a contemptible statement like that confirms my long standing opinion of him. Question for Stark: did you say the same thing about Kennedy and LBJ for Vietnam? How about Clinton with Somalia and Kosovo?

Stark, after finding himself in hot water, issued the following statement: "I have nothing but respect for our brave men and women in uniform and wish them the very best. But I respect neither the commander in chief who keeps them in harm's way nor the chicken hawks in Congress who vote to deny children health care."

Actually, he doesn't show a lot of respect for our troops by making outrageous statements. Further, he continues to show his moonbattiness by bundling socialized medicine (health care for children) into his reasons for not having respect for the president.

Surprisingly, Stark served in the Air Force in the '50s (was he drafted?), post Korean War. He was also anti-Vietnam War and had checks printed with the "peace sign" on it and even had one on the roof of the bank he started. He's may not be a chicken dove, but he is still a moonbat.

As Saunders points out in her piece, we are back to the return of the Chicken Hawks for another fun-filled campaign season. Saunders points out several interesting facts about the current field of candidates running for president and a bit of recent history:

Sure, in 2004 Democrats hurled the "chicken hawk" epithet at George W. Bush, who took America to war in Iraq even though he only served as a pilot in the Air National Guard. Then-Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAuliffe, who had no apparent qualms about President Bill Clinton's evasion of the draft, charged that Bush was "AWOL" during Vietnam.

You see, Democrats had nominated John F. Kerry, a decorated Vietnam combat veteran, who had voted for the Iraq war resolution. So, just years after President Clinton put U.S. forces into the former Yugoslavia and sent bombers over Iraq, Democrats argued that only a combat vet was suited to serve in the White House and put U.S. troops in harm's way. In that mind set, Kerry addressed the Democratic National Convention in martial terms: "I'm John Kerry, and I'm reporting for duty."

The Democrats are very one-sided in their views on the military, especially when it comes to the Vietnam era. Clinton was a draft dodger, milking the system for all that it was worth by getting deferments. The Dems shoot back that Cheney also did so, ignoring the fact that Cheney was already close to being exempt from the draft when Vietnam was going on (I'm not sure about this, but I seem to recall that the draft was for those between the ages of 18 and 27, Cheney, being 5 years older than Clinton, had a lower likelihood of being drafted during the war). Basically, the Dems blast Cheney about his draft deferments but not Clinton.

What is worse is the Dems treatment of President Bush's service in the Air National Guard, during which service he flew one of the most dangerous (to the pilot) fighter aircraft in the inventory, and volunteered for a program called "Palace Alert", which, had he been accepted into the program, would have had Bush flying combat missions in Vietnam. This is hardly the mark of someone who was AWOL, despite the rantings of Dan Rather.

The Dems then wrapped themselves in the Flag and pushed hard for a combat veteran, preferably of the Vietnam era. They ended up with John Kerry and lost the election with Bush getting over 51% of the vote (and funny how they still claim he doesn't have a mandate, even though Clinton never broke the 50 percentile and they claim Clinton did have a mandate).

This year the field is truly interesting, as Saunders points out:

In 2008, Democratic hopefuls are twice as likely to have been in law school than in boot camp. Among eight Democrats, Mike Gravel served in the Army from 1951-1954, while Christopher Dodd of Connecticut, who voted for the Iraq war resolution, served in the Army Reserves. By McAuliffe's lights, Dodd was AWOL.

Based on the 2004 election cycle, the only candidate that should be acceptable to the Dems is Mike Gravel, as all of the others never served or, as McAuliffe would say, AWOL. Meanwhile, the GOP has John McCain (not my favorite, but is gaining traction with me) whose story in the Vietnam War we all know, and Duncan Hunter, a decorated Vietnam Veteran. Oh, yeah, there's also Ron Paul.

Quite a contrast.

Of the Dems, both Hillary and John "Never Served" Edwards voted FOR the Liberation of Iraq. Barrack "Never Served Chicken Dove" Obama claims that if he were a senator then he would have voted against. Maybe that's true, but claims of what one would have done in office don't count.

Three years ago, Democrats shamelessly donned a military mantle. In a display of craven opportunism, they embraced an argument that seemed phony then, and now has vanished. They argued their candidate was better because he was a combat vet. Today none of the Dems' top three candidates has a military record.

Saunders his right on the money on this one.

Meanwhile, back to my former congressman Pete Stark, I have this to say to you: congratulations Congressman Stark, you are the latest winner of the Moonbat Award.

Tags:

Pete Stark Moonbat Chicken Hawks Chicken Doves Iraq

Posted by Sqotty at 7:19 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

The Star Tribune, never failing to miss an opportunity to rip on America, has published an editprial by Minnesota "writer" Syl Jones where he proclaims America is winner of the "Arrogance Award." Syl ones has an award coming to him.

From the Strib:

The winner of the Most Arrogant Nation In The World award is clearly the United States of America. We are arrogant in our dealings with sovereign nations like Iraq. We are arrogant toward our own citizens. We are arrogant in assuming that we have a special place in history. We are arrogant in believing that all nations want and need our kind of democracy. So, let's all reach around and pat ourselves on the back. We've won. "Arrogance Is U.S.," and the whole world knows it.

Jones's claim of Arrogant Americans is synonymous with the proverbial "Ugly American", and is as off base as the latter was in its heyday. He is half-right about our believing that all of the world wants Western democracy. We can, however, all name a few people who don't want Western democracy: Kim Jong Il, Ahmadinejad, Castro, Hugo Chavez, Osama bin Laden and the al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, Fatah, Muqtada al Sadr and his Mahdi "Army" death squads, and, of course, the folks at MoveOn.org. There are others.

We insisted on putting our massive footprint in the heart of the Middle East, where we don't belong. Arrogance. We lied to the world about WMDs, about a link between Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein and about our real purpose in Iraq, for political reasons. Arrogance. We proclaimed that we'd be welcomed as liberators. Arrogance. We told the world that we were fighting them "over there" so we don't have to fight them "over here." More arrogance.

Fact: over 500 chemical weapons, WMDs have been recovered since 2003. Fact: there were links between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda as Iraq was used as a safe haven for meetings. Fact: Hussein provided financial incentives to Palestinians to produce suicide bombers. Fact: Many Iraqis (Muqtada al Sadr and his death squads excepted) did welcome the U.S. led coalition as liberators. Fact: we are fighting them over there, although they are still attempting to bring it over here, so far they have failed due to the vigilance of our Armed Forces and Intelligence Agencies.

We sent troops to Iraq and Afghanistan without the needed armaments and equipment.

Thanks to Congressmen like John F. Kerry who voted against the funding of our troops.

We told soldiers who spilled their blood on foreign soil that, "You go to war with the Army you have, not the Army you want."

Thanks to the Clinton Administration which gutted the military during the '90s, and Congress refusing to pass the funding to rebuild it to Reagan-era levels.

We disbanded the Iraqi army and put 100,000 armed men out of work, further destabilizing the nation.

Whether or not that was a mistake is something open to debate. He may be right. What he fails to mention is that prior to military action, Hussein emptied the prisons of violent criminals, which contributed to the problems of stabilizing the country.

Syl Jones continues to prove he is either ignorant, incapable of grasping the facts, or is a denier of the facts. He ends his rant with the age old "Bush was AWOL" bit during Vietnam, despite the fact that Bush volunteered (and was turned down) for service in Vietnam. Despite the fact that Bush was NEVER AWOL, Jones chooses to push that bit of propaganda just like the best of the Nazi propagandists he references in his bit about what "homeland" means. Cheney and the deferments, like that's a bad thing when Clinton did the same thing, but Bill did it with the intent to avoid service in an unpopular war by running off to college. He continues a Riefenstahlian bit with Vietnam being nothing more than the death of over 50,000 Americans in an attempt to bolster an anti-Communist government and fails to acknoldge the fact that when the Democrats pulled support in the aftermath of Watergate, South Vietnam fell to the communists resulting with the incarceration of hundreds of thousands of South Vietnamese, many of whom were later executed. Cambodia also fell to the Khmer Rouge because of our failure to support the anti-communist government of South Vietnam, and some 3 MILLION people were killed.

Syl Jones, you may believe that the U.S. is an arrogant nation. It is for the above that you are now a recipient of the Moonbat Award. Congratulations. Think you can pull your head out of your arrogant…

Tags:

Syl Jones Star Tribune Iraq al-Qaeda Bush War Hussein Moonbat

Posted by Sqotty at 7:09 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

I received an email from Senator Barbara Moonbat Boxer the other day. To my (lack of) surprise, she is once again showing her complete and total ignorance of what a U.S. pull out from Iraq will mean to the millions of Iraqis, as well as a complete lack of knowledge of the impact of the U.S. withdrawal and consequent abandonment of South Vietnam.

In Boxer's email, she writes:

Did you hear President Bush last week talking about Iraq? Instead of listening to the vast majority of the American people on Iraq, President Bush is talking about how wrong it was to leave Vietnam.

I hate to break the news to you, but Bush is right about Vietnam. When we pulled out, the North Vietnamese moved in (just as Iran will do to Iraq the moment we pull out). Hundreds of thousands of South Vietnamese were put in gulags, and tens of thousands of people were murdered.

Things were worse in Cambodia where the Khmer Rouge liquidated over a third of the population, over two million people were murdered, while the rest of the population were used as slave labor.

That is what happened when we abandoned South Vietnam, at the insistence of the Democrats who ran Congress.

Democrats like Boxer are not ashamed of what happened in Vietnam, and, obviously, are willing to sacrifice millions of Iraqis to a similar fate, this time at the hands of a brutal totalitarian theocracy. Should we abandon Iraq, as we did Southeast Asia, the millions of Iraqis that have supported their liberation from tyranny and aided the formation of a democratically elected government will be forfeit.

Well, just a reminder to this President: U.S. troops stayed in Vietnam, in the middle of a civil war, for more than ten long and painful years. More than 50,000 of our young people died, countless wounded mentally and physically. Suicides and homelessness still follow too many of our Vietnam veterans. How many more would have died if George W. Bush had been President in the 1970's? How many more of our troops and innocent Iraqis will die if we don't finally end this war?

Yes, over 50,000 Americans died, and many thousands more were injured in Vietnam. As for the "suicides and homelessness" of Vietnam veterans, it is thanks to the hard-left that took control of the Democratic Party in the late '60s and early '70s that we have to thank for that. Instead of a hero's welcome, they were spat upon by the chickendoves, and called baby killers; even John Flipper Kerry referred to them as being nothing more than killing machines and war criminals.

Although how many Americans and Iraqis will die if we continue to work with Iraq in ending the terrorism and sectarian violence is valid, it is also valid, and critical, to ask "how many Iraqis will be murdered should we let the terrorists win?" We should also ask how many Americans will die at the hands of terrorists if we surrender to them now, as they will be greatly emboldened to carry out more and bloodier attacks against the U.S.

Boxer clearly doesn't understand what is at stake in Iraq, nor does she care.

Congratulations Senator Boxer, you are a Moonbat. I think we'll start calling you Senator Moonbat instead.

Tags:

Iran Iraq Boxer Moonbat

Posted by Sqotty at 6:56 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)
View blog reactions

Every time I let myself begin to think that the Moonbats on the Left can't surprise me anymore, something happens that proves me wrong. The latest was in the news today, and is brought to us by Nobel Laureate Betty Williams, who delivered the keynote address at the International Women's Peace Conference on Wednesday night. she ranted to a crowd of about 1,000 that President Bush has been acting treacherous and unconstitutional. Treacherous? Unconstitutional? How so, Madam Moonbat?

It is pretty obvious, given the name of the event organizers, that she is referring to the war on terror going on in Iraq and Afghanistan. More accurately, she is referring to the ongoing operations to secure Iraq and build a sovereign democracy.

Now ranting on about the President and how leads this country is one thing, and there should always be opportunity to debate the actions of any elected or appointed official, is one thing. It opens up an opportunity to set the record straight, at least when the Moonbats list examples of alleged wrong-doing rather than simply spouting empty rhetoric.

However, in the case of Williams's keynote address, she went too far. From Dallas Morning News:

"Right now, I could kill George Bush," she said at the Adam's Mark Hotel and Conference Center in Dallas. "No, I don't mean that. How could you nonviolently kill somebody? I would love to be able to do that."

In the audio clip provided you can here a fair amount of laughter in the audience. Even Williams let's loose a chuckle.

As for me, I am appalled that anyone, especially someone who has been living in this country for any length of time, let alone American citizens, would find making a statement such as Williams made as being funny or even acceptable.

I remember a time when someone making such a joke would be immediately investigated, possibly hauled off to jail, to determine if it was just a stupid blunder or something that could be a potential threat against the President. Is Williams undergoing such an investigation, or is it simply being dismissed? Regardless of whether it is a joke or not, should she be allowed to maintain some high position as she currently enjoys (at one time she was appointed to the Texas Commission for Children and Youth). Should the Nobel Prize Commission take action to revoke her prize (if possible)? Would it do so if it could?

"It's hard for America right now. It's twisted. It's all wrong. There are so many lies being told. It's horrible, right now, to be an American and go out into the world."

If it is hard for America and for Americans, if there are so many lies, it is being told by the Moonbats on the left who routinely lie about the fact that Hussein had chemical weapons and the willingness to use them. Over 500 chemical weapons have been recovered since 2003. It is the Moonbats who call for a surrender to terrorists that will allow Iraq to be over run and turned into a killing field that would be far worse than what happened in Cambodia when the U.S. abandoned our allies in South East Asia. It is people like Williams who think that those of us who continue to support this administration when it comes to ongoing military operations in Iraq claim WE are not REAL Americans, but that the liars and fools who push for an immediate withdrawal and abandonment of Iraq are real Americans.

She goes on in the audio clip to state that Ireland adopted the Constitution of the United States. This is flat out wrong. I have read the Ireland Constitution, and it is not even close to the Constitution of the United States. Has this woman read either of these documents? I seriously doubt it, otherwise she wouldn't have made such a false claim.

"If you really are a patriot of the United States of America, you will be sure that the man next door to you has a loaf of bread on his table, because that's what this country was formed on."

In America, we have the inalienable right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. This means it is up to the guy next door to make sure he has a loaf of bread on his table, not me. I don't recall ever having a neighbor check to see if I had food on my table.

America is about taking responsibility for your actions. Every choice you make can lead you to the path of prosperity, or to poverty. The choice is up to each individual. And believe me, I've made a few choices that proved to be bad in my life, but I overcome the obstacles that were in my path as a result of those bad choices.

This is not to say we shouldn't do something to help others. Americans, including myself, do quite a lot, probably more than any other people on Earth, to help those in need. We do it primarily through charitable giving, helping others by choice. At that point, if my neighbor doesn't have food on the table, he should be able to go to any number of groups to get help. But I am drifting from the main topic of this piece..

This woman, Williams, not only doesn't know the U.S Constitution, or the Constitution of Ireland, she doesn't know history.

However, it is for her earlier statement concerning what she would like to do to a sitting President of the United States that earns her a Moonbat Award. There are very few limits on free speech, and she crossed that line with her statement, whether joking or not. I have also read on Wikipedia that this is not the first time she has made such an outrageous statement. There you will find that she used those same words in a talk to a group of school children.

Congratulations Betty Williams. I hope you get thrown in jail, your citizenship revoked, and deported. Okay, I'll settle for her getting tossed in the clink.

Tags:
Moonbat Betty Williams

Posted by Sqotty at 5:28 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

Either Paul Newman is a fool and ignoramus who doesn't know what he is talking about, or he is a serious leftwing Moonbat. Politico has an email be distributed by the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee in which Newman uses scare-mongering tactics to get gullible Americans to give money in order to elect more anti-American Socialists to the Senate.

In it, Newman writes:

"It was one of my life's proudest achievements.

"More than the films, more than the awards - finding out that I was on Nixon's Enemies List meant that I was doing something right.

"Nixon didn't like my campaigning for Democratic presidential candidate Eugene McCarthy. But then again, he didn't much care for debate, dissent, or the Constitution either.

"I was proud to stand with Democrats against an imperial president back then. And I am proud now to stand with a new generation of Democrats against a president who poses what I believe to be the biggest internal threat to American democracy in my lifetime.

"That's why, when I was asked to send this message on behalf of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC), I quickly agreed. A Democratic Senate is the best defense against this administration. I am as frustrated as all of you that Congress hasn't made more progress on issues we care about here in 2007. But I also know that Democrats only have a 51-49 majority in the Senate - and that Republicans, with threats of filibusters and vetoes, have tried to block just about everything.

"We've got to preserve and strengthen our Senate majority in 2008, and the best way to do that is by supporting the DSCC. No other Democratic Party organization - not even the DNC - is focused exclusively on electing Democrats to the Senate.

"The DSCC is only $114,941 away from their crucial second quarter fundraising goal. They need you to get there.

"Click here to make a contribution of $50, $75 or more to make sure Democrats keep control of the United States Senate. Make a contribution now and a group of Democratic senators will match every single dollar you give, effectively doubling your contribution.

"You can take your pick of issues where Republicans are seriously damaging this country: Iraq, global warming, civil liberties. But I resent them most for how they've destroyed the American spirit by using xenophobia and fear to hold onto power.

"It's scare-mongering pure and simple, and it is the only thing Republicans have left to offer.

"We need to preserve and expand the slim 51-49 Democratic majority in the Senate, and we need to do the hard work to make it happen now.

"Click here to make a contribution of $50, $75 or more to make sure Democrats keep control of the United States Senate. Make a contribution now and a group of Democratic senators will match every single dollar you give, effectively doubling your contribution.

"One seat is all that separates Republicans from retaking the United States Senate. That's why the 2008 elections are so pivotal.

"The DSCC needs to raise $114,941 by June 30. I'm more than happy to help. I hope you'll join me.

"After all, the Senate hangs in the balance, with only one seat making all the difference.

"Let's do our best to keep it in Democratic hands."

There is also a video in which Newman sys that this White House is making America less strong. What has Newman been smoking?

In his hit piece he claims that Republicans are "seriously damaging this country," and then cites the war in Iraq, global warming, and civil liberties (I guess he is referring to the McCain/Feingold Campaign Finance Reform). He also purports that Republicans have "destroyed the American spirit by using xenophobia and fear to hold onto power." The "American spirit" by the liberl/progressive/socialists and the drugged-out hippies of the '60s that have taken over the Democratic party, not by Republicans.

What's some of the proofs on this? Easy: The Clinton Adminstration, along with his DNC cohorts in Congress gutted our intelligence agencies, as well as our military, during the '90s. They also treated Osama bin Ladin and al-Qaeda as being a law enforcement issue, and never took the threat seriously, including passing by an opportunity to have bin Ladin extradited to the U.S. End result: 9/11.

It was Democrat Jimmy Carter who handed Iran, at that time a staunch ally of the U.S. to the Ayatollahs and Mullahs, resulting in a tyrannical theocracy that is fueling terrorism and moving towards nuclear weapons.

Carter also hamstrung the nuclear energy industry by banning the reprocessing of nuclear fuel rods, causing these spent, radio-active, fuel rods to be stockpiled as hazardous waste.

It was John Kerry who pushed the Winter Soldier campaign during the Vietnam War era and Democrats who abandoned our ally, South Vietnam, and surrendered South East Asia to communists, resulting in the brutal murder of millions of men, women and children.

It is Democrats who are pushing hardest to legalize millions of illegal aliens, rather than enforce out laws.

It is Democrats who are pushing to silence free speech on the radio waves by reinstating the "Fairness" Doctrine.

On Iraq, it is the Democrats that have sounded "retreat" and are pushing towards abandoning our fledgling ally, Iraq, which will result in chaos and a killing field that will dwarf what happened in Cambodia in 1975.

Democrats are also wrong on Global Warming, but that is because they worship at the altar of Al Gore rather than read the science on the subject and learn that current climate warming trend is a natural phenomenon, and not caused by mankind.

The real scare-mongers are the Democrats and their shills. They have done more damage to the American spirit, and done more to assault the Constitution in my lifetime than the GOP has done since it formed in the 1850s.

If Paul Newman serious believes that Republicans have destroyed the American Spirit, then he must not have any clue as to what the American spirit actually is.

Congratulations, Paul, you are the latest recipient of the Moonbat Award.

Tags:

Paul Newman DSCC Democrat Moonbat

Posted by Sqotty at 3:18 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

Bill Maher has really stepped over the line this time. On his program, "Real Time With Bill Maher," he had a panel discussion regarding the recent removal of a number of comments from the Huffington Post concerning the recent attempt to assassinate V.P. Dick Cheney. From FoxNews:

Frank earned applause when he quoted bloggers saying the bomb was wasted when it missed Cheney. Maher asked the panelists whether it was wrong for blog host Arianna Huffington to remove the comments.

Quoting the blog, Maher said, "I have zero doubt that if Dick Cheney was not in power, people wouldn't be dying needlessly tomorrow."

Asked by Frank if Maher believed that sentiment, the host replied, "I'm just saying if he did die, other people, more people would live. That's a fact."

Had this been said about a Democratic V.P., the outrage over such a statement would reverberate throughout the media.

Let's focus on a few facts. Prior to Operation: Liberate Iraq, something on the order of a half-million people were murdered by a tyrannical regime. These are people who, in my opinion, died needlessly. In other words, we should have told the U.N. to bugger off in 1991 and did the job right the first time. Thousands of people died needlessly on 9/11. Since the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, thousands of terrorists and others have been killed, and others imprisoned. This is good. The downside is that several thousand American and Coalition soldiers have died in the process. Then there are the several thousand innocents who have died, mostly at the hands of terrorists and sectarian death squads.

Iran has actively contributed to the destabilization of Iraq by supplying arms to the various terrorist groups operating in that country. Muqtada al-Sadr, instead of being captured or eliminated in 2004, was negotiated with, allowing his "Mahdi Army" to rearm and rebuild, and now posing a greater threat to a democratic Iraq than it posed in 2004 when al-Sadr took the stage.

Does Maher believe that the world would be better off if America had done nothing, stood by and let attack after attack be leveled against the United States by al-Qaeda? If America had done nothing, how many thousands of others would have died in further 9/11s? How many more people in Iraq would have died at the hands of the Butcher of Baghdad (and his sons) had he been left in power? What would it take to convince Maher and others of his ilk that the world is better off by confronting terrorists and totalitarian regimes? A mushroom cloud over New York and Los Angeles? Probably.

The Huffington Post's action to remove comments as described in the article concerning the assassination attempt on Cheney was the right thing to do. I am glad they had enough common sense to do it (I am giving them the benefit of the doubt that they were actually proactive about it). Such comments stop short of being criminal in nature. Hopefully there were not any that crossed over the line.

As for Bill Maher, there is no doubt in my mind as to the kind of person Maher is. Congratulations Bill Maher, you are the latest recipient of the Moonbat Award. I hope HBO shows some common sense and cancels your show.

Posted by Sqotty at 9:05 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)
View blog reactions

It's an interesting day. On the Washington Post, William Arkin wrote a column (published Jan.30) in which he describes our military men and women as mercenaries. Here's the quote:

But it is the United States and instead this NBC report is just an ugly reminder of the price we pay for a mercenary - oops sorry, volunteer - force that thinks it is doing the dirty work.

There is much more in the piece, like:

So, we pay the soldiers a decent wage, take care of their families, provide them with housing and medical care and vast social support systems and ship obscene amenities into the war zone for them, we support them in every possible way, and their attitude is that we should in addition roll over and play dead, defer to the military and the generals and let them fight their war, and give up our rights and responsibilities to speak up because they are above society?

I can imagine some post-9/11 moment, when the American people say enough already with the wars against terrorism and those in the national security establishment feel these same frustrations. In my little parable, those in leadership positions shake their heads that the people don't get it, that they don't understand that the threat from terrorism, while difficult to defeat, demands commitment and sacrifice and is very real because it is so shadowy, that the very survival of the United States is at stake. Those Hoover's and Nixon's will use these kids in uniform as their soldiers. If I weren't the United States, I'd say the story end with a military coup where those in the know, and those with fire in their bellies, save the nation from the people.

This male obviously does not believe that our military is a force for good, considers the tools of the trade to be obscene amenities, as he is unclear about what he considers to be such, that is what I must assume he means. These are men and women serving their country, fighting al-Qaeda terrorists and fighting an insurgency fueled by hostile neighbors (Iran and Syria).

By referring to him as a male and not a man, I am using a viewpoint set forth in a classic western film of Charlton Heston, Three Violent People in which one of the characters states that all men are born male, but not all males grow to be men. So it must be with Arkin. He may be male, but he is not a man.

This is made clear by his rant against to military, where he supposed that such as our Armed Forces would seize control via military coups if this were anyplace other than the United States.

In his non-apology issued today, he shows his utter contempt for our armed forces yet again:

I said I was bothered by the notion that "the troops" were somehow becoming hallowed beings above society, that they had an attitude that only they had the means - or the right - to judge the worthiness of the Iraq endeavor.

I was dead wrong in using the word mercenary to describe the American soldier today.

These men and women are not fighting for money with little regard for the nation. The situation might be much worse than that: Evidently, far too many in uniform believe that they are the one true nation. They hide behind the constitution and the flag and then spew an anti-Democrat, anti-liberal, anti-journalism, anti-dissent, and anti-citizen message that reflects a certain contempt for the American people.

No one, and I mean no one, has ever elevated our military to the level of "becoming hallowed beings above society." Except for the chicken doves on the left, like Arkin, who are too intimidated by real men and women who have displayed the honor and integrity to uphold our constitution and our way of life by putting their own lives on the line.

He stated that he was "dead wrong in using the word mercenary," yet there is a big BUT right after that, where he proves his utter contempt for our soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines. He claims the situation is worse, that many of those who serve our country believe that they "are the one true nation." And that those who serve hide behind the constitution (what better document to use when expressing ones utter contempt for Arkin?) and the flag.

If the management of the Washington Post has an ounce of integrity, they will terminate Arkin immediately.

But they won't. They will defend and protect him, just as the rest of the chicken doves and the liberal-left always does when someone writes such contemptuous schlock as Arkin has.

One thing is for sure, Arkin is not just a chicken dove, but also a Moonbat, and thus deserving of a Moonbat Award.

Tags:

William Arkin Moonbat

Posted by Sqotty at 7:52 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

This is definitely a Moonbat moment. From CBS News:

"When we walk away from global warming, Kyoto, when we are irresponsibly slow in moving toward AIDS in Africa, when we don't advance and live up to our own rhetoric and standards, we set a terrible message of duplicity and hypocrisy," Kerry said.

"So we have a crisis of confidence in the Middle East - in the world, really. I've never seen our country as isolated, as much as a sort of international pariah for a number of reasons as it is today."

Thus spake Flipper Kerry while at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, while sharing the stage with Mohammad Khatami, former president of terror state Iran.

The United States has done more for AIDS in Africa than any other country, on any continent. We have sent BILLIONS of our TAX DOLLARS there, as well as huge amounts of charitable giving through various non-government agencies, including through religious organizations.

Walking away from Kyoto was the right thing to do, as it is meant to break the financial backs of the American people, never mind the fact that "Global Warming" is all part of the natural rhythm of the Earth's climate. It wasn't all that long ago that scientists were predicting the Earth was entering another ice age. The Kyoto plan was set forth based on flawed computer models. Any software engineer knows that computer models can be tailored to return the results you want. And the designers of those models have all stated that their models were flawed, not taking into account many variables that impact the climate.

As for the "crisis of confidence in the Middle East," we have Leftist Democrats, like Kerry, who are not supporting the mission there, not supporting the troops, and not providing the backbone to show the terrorists in Iraq that the U.S. has the moral fortitude to get the job done.

If the U.S. is an "international pariah," it is thanks to Kerry and others of his ilk.

Congratulations, Flipper, you are a Moonbat. But then, we knew that already.

Tags:

John Kerry Flipper Moonbat World Economic Forum

Posted by Sqotty at 2:14 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

Suzanne Somers lost her home in Malibu to fire this week. I have no doubt that losing your home, whether it was due to an earthquake, flood, or fire (as in this case) is certainly no fun. It’s a disaster. And, normally, I wouldn’t write about such. However, Suzanne Somers is a special case. This is off of the LA Times:

Somers bit her lip before making a statement for microphones thrust in front of her. In proper Hollywood fashion, that statement was scripted.

It wasn't as though she'd lost a son or daughter in Iraq, she said.

"My nature is to look at the glass half full," Somers said, reading from a piece of paper. "I haven't lost a loved one. We will rebuild, and I truly believe we will learn something great from this experience."

Okay, I agree. Losing one’s home to a fire is not like losing a loved one in Iraq. I have no doubt about that. What bugs me is that she is using this fire as a podium to get out her political views. It is probably the only chance she has had to do so, as most people don’t even remember her these days.

The other point that bugs me, if she had to say something like that, is why she chose Iraq as her reference point rather than losing a loved one in 9/11?

Perhaps she is bucking for a Moonbat Award.

And who am I to disappoint. Congratualtions Suzanne Somers, you are a Moonbat.

Tags:

Suzanne+Somers Moonbat

Posted by Sqotty at 6:44 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)
View blog reactions

Looks like we're starting the New Year off with an early Moonbat Award. Cindy Sheehan strikes again, this time, along with other anti-Liberation zealots, breaking up a press conference that was being held by House Democrats. Off of FoxNews:

We didn't put you in power to work with the people that have been murdering hundreds of thousands of people since they have been in power," Sheehan said. "We put you in power to be opposition to them finally and we're the ones who put them in power."

Actually, how is she so certain that it was the anti-Liberate Iraq zealots who are responsible for the shift in Congress? But that is a minor point. The big point is the first line where she proclaims the the United States has "been murdering hundreds of thousands of people since they have been in power." Meaning, she believes that President Bush has murdered hundreds of thousands of people.

Sure, in the conducting of military operations in Iraq, a lot of people have died. Most of those that died as a result of U.S. or Coalition Forces action, were terrorists. Like Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, killed June 7, 2006 by military operations. Apparently, in the world-view of Sheehan, this was murder!

This is not to say that some innocents have not been killed by accident. There has been. For the most part, most (nearly all?) of the people that have been killed, at least as far as non-terrorists are concerned, have been killed by terrorists. And sectarian death squads like those run by Muqtada al-Sadr.

Congratulations, Cindy Sheehan. You are the first Moonbat of 2007.

Tags:

Cindy Sheehan
Iraq
Moonbat

Posted by Sqotty at 4:07 PM | Permalink | Comments (3)
View blog reactions

This is worthy of a Moonbat Award. From FoxNews:

Joy Behar, who during a discussion Monday about Time magazine's 'Person of the Year' selection, likened former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to ... Adolf Hitler.

"You have to put, like, a Hitler type [on the cover]," Behar said in response to a question about whether Time's selection of "You" was appropriate.

"Like, you put Donald Rumsfeld there, or something," she said.

The show's audience — even show diva Rosie O'Donnell — was stunned by the comment, and as many began to jeer, Behar feigned surprise and yelled, "What's wrong with that?"

It sounds like the audience got it, and even O’Donnell, but this particular Moonbat is oblivious to the obvious. There isn’t any American in politics that could, or should, be compared to Hitler. Hitler MURDERED millions of Jews, as well as members of many other ethnic groups, like gypsies, as well as homosexuals, political dissidents, and the severely handicapped. Hitler set about the holocaust, with plans to exterminate every Jew.

Rumsfeld, on the other hand, set about the LIBERATION of Afghanistan from the repressive Taliban and Iraq, from the sadistic Saddam Hussein (who murdered at least a half a million Iraqis, ran torture chambers and his sons maintained rape rooms).

If Behar is unable to recognize the difference between a mass murderer and a liberator, then one has to ask just exactly what kind of wacko she is. Or at least what she’s been smoking.

This is in addition to the conspiracy theory that she le out concerning Senator Tim Johnson’s recent stroke.

“Is there such a thing as a man-made stroke?" she asked. "In other words, did someone do this to him?”

This is a sick statement to make. Yet, make it she did, on national TV. She went on to confirm she believes that the GOP is not only capable, and willing, to do such horrendous things.

Congratulations Joy Behar, you are a Moonbat!

Tags:

Joy Behar

Posted by Sqotty at 10:58 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)
View blog reactions

Perhaps Kerry's recent spat of "Mad Senator Disease" is wearing off, but the silence on left leaning candidates such as Minnesota's Amy Klobuchar is astounding. No denouncements of Kerry's slanderous remarks about our military. Silence on the matter rings eternal.

Amy Klobuchar has a lot of reasons to stand by John Kerry. 115,000 reasons to be precise. That is the amount of money that Kerry has helped Klobuchar to raise for her campaign.

Jim Webb, running in Virginia has even more reasons to not denounce Kerry's describing our troops serving in Iraq as uneducated and lazy.

Here's a list from the John Kerry website. I am not able to find it there now, so check out the screen shot. Anybody in your state on the list? If so, have they denounced Kerry's slander?

Meanwhile, now featured on Kerry's website, is an op-ed by Thomas Friedman who states:

George Bush, Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld think you're stupid. Yes, they do.

They think they can take a mangled quip about President Bush and Iraq by John Kerry - a man who is not even running for office but who, unlike Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney, never ran away from combat service - and get you to vote against all Democrats in this election.

If this was a poke at President Bush, then why wasn't he mentioned anywhere in the quote?

"You know, education, if you make the most of it, if you study hard and you do your homework, and you make an effort to be smart, uh, you, you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq."

Frankly, I believe that Friedman, who acting as a shill for the DNC, and the rest of the loony left, are the ones that believe Americans are stupid if we believe that this "botched joke" was about Bush when he wasn't even mentioned in the statement.

As for the slam about Bush and his military service, perhaps Friedman should look up the National Guard program, "Palace Alert," which a young Lieutenant Bush attempted to enroll in. Had Bush been accepted into the program, there is no doubt he would have been flying F-102s in Vietnam. By the time Bush completed his training on that bird and could qualify for the program, U.S. involvement was winding down and the program was being terminated.

Friedman, who is old enough to have served in Vietnam himself, seems to be missing that honor on his resume. Did he receive deferments, or is it a simple matter that his number simply didn't come up?

Thanks to Alan Simpson of Comlinks Political Intel for providing this list of people who have or did not serve. The list is fairly non-partisan, can't say the same about the commentary.

Thomas "Never Served" Friedman goes on in his diatribe with the following:

What could possibly be more injurious and insulting to our men and women in uniform than sending them off to war without the proper equipment, so that some soldiers in the field were left to buy their own body armor and to retrofit their own jeeps with scrap metal so that roadside bombs in Iraq would only maim them for life and not kill them? And what could be more injurious and insulting than Don Rumsfeld's response to criticism that he sent our troops off in haste and unprepared: Hey, you go to war with the army you've got - get over it.

Let us not forget that Senator Kerry and other members of the left in Congress voted AGAINST providing our men and women in the field with the equipment that Friedman claims was necessary. He must think we're stupid if we believe that the Army we have is the fault of the Bush Adminstration, and not due to Congress' failure to fund the military adequately. The $87 billion that Kerry "voted for before voting against" was to provide, among other things, body armor for our troops in the field. I haven't forgotten that, even if Friedman has.

Quite frankly, I would like to know why Thomas "Never Served" Friedman believes we're dumb enough to believe his assessment that America has become a banana republic and "our democracy is in tatters because it is so gerrymandered, so polluted by money, and so divided by professional political hacks that we can no longer hold the ruling party to account."

Banana republic?! America?! Is he nuts?! Or has Friedman become just another moonbat who thinks slaming America and our troops is okay, and that Americans are stupid if they vote for Republicans:

I, for one, don't think we're that stupid. Next Tuesday we'll see.

In other words, he believes that if the GOP hangs on to its majority in the 2006 election, or, gains seats, then Americans are stupid.

Congratulations to Thomas "Never Served" Friedman, you are a Moonbat.

Okay, somehow, I started this piece in one direction and ended somewhere else. But it was fun for me.

Tags:

John Kerry
Iraq
Politics
Moonbat
Thomas Friedman
George W. Bush

Posted by Sqotty at 10:26 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)
View blog reactions

John Kerry, Moonbat Extraordinaire, again shows his utter contempt for those who have chosen to serve in the Armed Forces of our country. This is off of KFI AM radio:

"You know, education, if you make the most of it, if you study hard and you do your homework, and you make an effort to be smart, uh, you, you can do well. If you don’t, you get stuck in Iraq."

Why am I not surprised by such an idiotic statement coming from John "Flipper" Kerry. I have to thank KLI for providing the sound clip. It's on their website.

What Kerry is saying is that only losers end up in the military. Only losers too lazy to do well in school serve their country and go to war. Is this also true of those of us who served during peace time? (My service was during the Reagan years.) Or just those who serve in Iraq, like one of my cousins who just returned from there recently?

It's truly incredible to hear a former presidential candidate make such disparaging remarks about military service. Instead of saying only lazy whelps who fail in school end up in the armed forces, he should be promoting the possiblity of serving and the leadership skills that military service develops.

Such is not the way of the hard-left.

Over on youtube.com, there is a video clip of the comment:

Kerry, like Howard Dean, is one of the Left's greatest heroes, and is most dmaging to the Democratic Party. Gotta wonder what kind of damage control they use after Kerry's latest blunder.

Senator Kerry gets the latest Moonbat Award. Congratualtions Flipper! You've earned it.

Tags:

John Kerry
Iraq
Politics
Moonbat

Posted by Sqotty at 3:05 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

I haven't had a Moonbat Award in a while, call it being too busy with family things. Today marks the return of the Moonbat Award with a recipient that is truly deserving of the honor…Rocky Anderson, Mayor of Salt Lake City, Utah. From Deseretnews.com:

In delivering the speech at the anti-war rally, Anderson said: "So James Evans and these folks who financed this massive radio campaign these last few days, let them understand that blind faith in bad leaders is not patriotism. A patriot does not tell people who are intensely concerned about their country to just sit down and be quiet; to refrain from speaking out in the name of politeness or for the sake of being a good host; to show slavish, blind obedience and deference to a dishonest, war-mongering, human-rights-violating president."

It is interesting to note the reference to James Evans, who is a black Republican and the reference to "slavish" devotion to the president. This is a racist statement if ever there was one.

Add to this the rest of the statement, "dishonest, war-mongering, human-rights-violating president." Granted, he is entitled to his opinion, but needs to defend it. Anderson is referring to President Bush, not former President Clinton. Had this been in reference to a black Democrat and his "slavish" devotion to the war-mongering, dishonest, philandering President Clinton, the outrage would be tremendous, with reverberations throughout the Main Stream Media and demands from every Democrat for an immediate retraction and apology.

That single quote s probably the most important one from the speech warranting the awarding of the Moonbat to Mayor Rocky Anderson. There is more:

The truth has been established. Iraq had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks on the United States. There is no evidence of any operational ties between Iraq and al Qaeda. And there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

What a tragedy, leading to greater tragedy. We are fed lie after lie, our
media reinforces those lies, and we are a nation led to a tragic, illegal, unprovoked
war.

And this guy calls Bush a liar?!

Congratulations Mayor Rocky Anderson…you are a Moonbat.
Tags:

salt lake city
Rocky Anderson
Moonbat

Posted by Sqotty at 8:58 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

Cindy Sheehan, California’s most famous Moonbat, is on a “fast” to bring the troops home. Fasting, the Moonbat way, includes consuming fruit smoothies, coffee and ice cream. As a guess, I am assuming other things fit in there as well.

In an article posted on the communist online rag, Political Affairs, Sheehan complains about the difficulties of traveling without her regular ration of smoothies and the lack of Jamba Juices where she is at. I'm not keen on providing a link to the site, so you'll have to cut and paste the URL in your browser. It's: politicalaffairs.net/article/articleview/3794/1/198/

The whole time she refers to the Global War on Terrorism as “the war crime in Iraq” and BushCo.

The vitriolic hatred this Moonbat holds for Bush is apparent in her posting:

Then our focus can change to holding BushCo responsible for the war crimes, crimes against humanity and crimes against peace and focus on never allowing this to happen again.

It’s no wonder that this is posted on an openly communist website. She really believes the vile she spews forth on the internet, accusing our troops in the field of war crimes, human rights violations and worse.

At least they’ve dropped the line about “no WMDs found in Iraq.” At least, for the moment, until the general public forgets about the report released that detailed the finding of some 500 chemical weapons in Iraq.

It is also ironic that they focus so much on the war in Iraq, and ignore continued military operations in Afghanistan and Kosovo.

Not to mention our continued “occupation” of such countries as: South Korea, Japan, Germany, Italy, Turkey, and any where else that the United States stations troops by agreement with the host governments. We are in Iraq by invitation of their government. If the government of Iraq decides to ask the U.S. to leave, it will.

Our troops are not there as an occupying force, legal or otherwise. To leave now would throw the region into utter chaos, and, most likely, result in the return of a totalitarian government.

Saddam Hussein committed daily atrocities against his own people; the “killing fields” of Iraq contain the bodies of roughly half a million people brutally murdered by Hussein’s regime. I can only assume that Cindy Sheehan would prefer to have left Hussein in power under whose power the death toll is estimated at some 25,000 people a year. Innocent people.

Of course it would come as no surprise that the commie rag that posted her commentary would prefer it that way.

Most importantly, it is her comment that the election of George W. Bush in 2000 and 2004 was a coup, that defines this moment in Moonbatism.

Congratualations, Cindy Sheehan. You are truly a Moonbat!

And she wants to be a Sanator?

Cindy Sheehan
Moonbat
Moonbats

Posted by Sqotty at 3:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

I heard about this interview on my commute this week, and taking it into consideration, decided that Natalie Maines of the Dixie Chicks is the one most deserving of a Moonbat Award. This in from the Daily Telegraph:

"The entire country may disagree with me, but I don't understand the necessity for patriotism," Maines resumes, through gritted teeth. "Why do you have to be a patriot? About what? This land is our land? Why? You can like where you live and like your life, but as for loving the whole country… I don't see why people care about patriotism."

Maines is obviously out of touch with mainstream America, as most Americans do see a reason to care about patriotisim, do support our troops serving in Iraq, as well as their mission.

What do we have to be patriotic about? Lot's of things!

America has for over two hundred years been the world's foremost bastion of liberty, and as President push put it, "liberty is the desire of every soul."

The Statue of Liberty is still the world's most significant symbol of liberty.

America has fought against tyranny on every corner of the globe, either overtly, such as in World War 2, the Korean War, Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq; and sometimes covertly, such as the failed Bay of Pigs, where we failed to support our Cuban allies as promised, or in Central and South America, and Africa as communist insurgencies took hold in those regions of the world, and sometimes supplying bad people to fight other bad people, such as when Afghanistan was fighting against a Soviet invasion.

Even with our failures, such as Vietnam (thanks to the Democrats in Congress, who forced the abandonement of yet another ally) and the Bay of Pigs fiasco, America has done more to spread liberty throughout the world.

America enjoys greater freedoms than any othr country, including freedom of speech, to protect politcal discourse, and the right to kep and bear arms, without which, we could not hope to preserve any of our other rights.

America leads the world both technogically as well as economically, and this is yet another reason to be patriotic. American innovation.

Natalie Maines may not see a reason to be patriotic, but I sure as heck do.

Natalie Maines, congratulations, you are a Moonbat!

Tags:
Natalie Maines
Dixie Chicks
Moonbat
Patriotism
Country Music
Shutup and Sing

Posted by Sqotty at 6:11 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

Thanks to the Palm Beach Post for running an article on Basil E. Dalack, who recently filed suit in order to be able to accept the office of city councilman without taking the oath of office.

Dalack, an appellate lawyer who recently won a seat on the Tequesta Village Council, is refusing to take the oath of office because it requires him to "support, protect and defend" the federal and state governments. To him, that's the equivalent of "blind support" of the war and of Bush administration policies. If Dalack took the oath, he says, he'd have "the blood of all those Iraqi and American kids on my hands."

Dalack has proven he is Moonbat in his attempt to warp the meaning of a councilman's oath of office as defacto support for the current administration and the war for Iraq. As an elected office holder myself, I know otherwise.

Any person seeking elected office is aware that they must be sworn in to office if elected, and that they will be expected to support and defend the Constitution. This is not the same as saying they will support a given administration.

Dalack is twisting the meaning of the oath to meet his own personal political agenda, and since he has refused to take the oath of office, he should be denied that elected office and the Tequesta Village Council should take immediate action to find a suitable replacement for this week's Moonbat of the Week.

Posted by Sqotty at 8:41 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

This week's Moonbat of the Week is Congressman Cynthia McKinney (D-GA) for her assault on a Capitol Police officer while he was performing his duties, then claiming she was a victim of racism. Some of th highlights of the incident include:

From Fox News:

Rep. Cynthia McKinney, the Georgia congresswoman who had an altercation with a Capitol Police officer, said Friday the officer started the incident by "inappropriately touching and stopping" her after she walked past a security checkpoint.

Let's be clear about something here…she blew past the security checkpoint, ignored requests to stop and be identified, then, when an officer stepped up to detain her, as she was in clear violation of security procedures, she hit him.

Now, if any average citizen, regardless of skin color, had done the same, they would have been hauled off to jail, no passing "go" and no "collecting $200."

On Thursday, the Congressman for Georgia made the following statement:

"There should not have been any physical contact in this incident," McKinney said.

"I am sorry that this misunderstanding happened at all, and I regret its escalation and I apologize," she said surrounded by colleagues on the House floor.

In the first part, she is right, she should not have hit the police officer,

Unfortunately, that is not what she is referring to, but to the officer stopping her when she blasted past the security checkpoint.

As for the rest of her "apology", I think McKinney, as well as many others in the Democratic Party, have taken the line of Capt. Brittles (John Wayne) in "She Wore A Yellow Ribbon", "never apologize; it's a sign of weakness" way too seriously, and have applied this philosophy to mastering the non-apology "apology".

Posted by Sqotty at 11:49 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

Moonbat of the Week (February 18) this time around goes to Minnesota's own, Nick Coleman, columnist and far-left hack for the Star Tribune. Coleman earned distinction for his recent column on slamming the MidwestHeroes.com commercial supporting the war on terror and the U.S. mission in Iraq.

In his column, Coleman claims:

But for those devoted to political spin more than truth, there was a positive development in the war, a development which, oddly, took place on TV sets in Minnesota.

A commercial featuring veterans of the war in Iraq began airing here, telling viewers that the war in Iraq is against the terrorists of 9/11 and that it is going swimmingly.

These are dubious assertions, given that the war was billed as a war against Saddam Hussein and that it had cost the lives of 2,267 Americans as of Friday (almost 1,800 since the president said the mission was accomplished).

This is not what the commercial states. You can view the ad, along with a second ad that contains testimony of military families, at midwestheroes.com.

The ad opens by establishing who the speakers are, all three of whom are veterans, having served in Iraq.

It then states that the main stream media only prints the bad news, not the remarkably good things our troops (and those of the coalition) are performing in Iraq.

I'm trying to figure out if Coleman believes that the enemy our troops currently face are al-Qaida terrorists or something else. He states that the commercial is claiming "that the war in Iraq is against the terrorists of 9/11 and that it is going swimmingly." This is not what the commercial claims. It does mention that we are currently fighting al-Qaida, the terrorists that brought us 9/11, as well as many other terrorist attacks, but it does not set forth the

In a second column, Coleman again attacks the Midwest Heroes, this time assaulting their second TV commercial. The new commercial contains testimony from the families of soldiers who gave their lives in spreading liberty in the Middle East.

The main thrust of Coleman's second column is that Chief Warrant Officer Erik Kesterson, who is one of the slain heroes featured in the ad, had his father and stepmother speaking about the loss of their son. Coleman has a tizzy in that it was his stepmother, and not his "real" mother, and carries on as though a stepmother has no love for a stepchild, and goes on about how his real mother is a an anti-war zealot cut of the same cloth as Cindy Sheehan. He mentions only in passing that Kesterson's father is featured in the commercial, focusing instead on his stepmother, and attempting to moonbat a controversy where none exists.

Congratualations, Nick, you are Monnbat of the Week. I suspect we will see you on this list in the future

Posted by Sqotty at 9:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

I am a little late on getting this up. This week I am premiering a new topic: Moonbat of the Week.

The winner for the week of February 5-12 is former President Jimmy Carter for the outrageous manner in which he Wellstoned the memorial of Coretta Scott King. Instead of focusing on the good works of King and her late husband, Dr. Marin Luther King, he focused on secret government wiretapping, and suggested that the disaster in the gulf from Hurricane Katrina and how relief efforts had been handled were tainted with racism.

We only have to recall the color of the faces of those in Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi. Those who are most devastated by Katrina to know that there are not yet equal opportunities for all Americans.

Jimmy Carter receives the Kahuna's inaugaral Moonbat of the Week Award.

Posted by Sqotty at 9:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions