Plain Lies, War Lies and Partisanship
By David Limbaugh
Friday, September 1, 2006
Democrats are furious over Defense Secretary Rumsfeld's speech to the American Legion this week, in which he compared today's appeasers to those of the World War II era and warned that we mustn't turn a blind eye to today's terrorists like many did to yesterday's Nazis. Such talk is off limits because it offends the appeasers, who, by the way, deny they're appeasers, insisting they're "tough and smart" scavengers on the hunt for the only terrorist on the planet, Osama bin Laden.
[Democrats] explain their sudden affinity for the truth -- in contrast to their cynically dismissive attitude toward it during the Clinton years -- as a matter of the singular importance of the war. While lying per se isn't particularly wrong under their relativist standards -- and lying about adulterous relations is even virtuous to protect one's family -- lying about war, at least by a Republican president, is so evil it pretty much drives them to the obnoxious Christian state of moral absolutism. This distinction is interesting given their own pattern of deceit concerning all aspects of the war.
One of the many lies Democrats fervently wish were true...
They claim Bush asserted a connection between Saddam and 9/11, when he explicitly said otherwise. He said Saddam had close ties to terrorists, including Al Qaeda and the Taliban, which is undeniably true and which Democrats also persist in falsely denying. Indeed, Iraq was on Clinton's watch list of terrorist nations.
PERSONAL NOTE: The format for this piece is strictly three quotes. I'd have happily included more. I have to agree with Limbaugh here; Democrats have been lying about the War in Iraq, the Valarie Plame/Wilson non-affair, and the President personally since before he was elected... not selected. It's getting tiresome, but I don't see it changing anytime soon. So, vigilance is still the order of the day.
The problem isn't so much the average democrat Joe down at Vern's vegetable stand; full of vim, vigor, fire and democratic talking points-- he believes what he's told by those who ARE the real problem. Very few in this country seem to know how to think for themselves. And THAT is perhaps what's most tragic about all this. America has become a nation of spineless puppets for the old establishment [media and liberalism]. And while liberal ideals are losing left and right across this nation, Liberals are not. Sometimes the process of dying is long and difficult. Giving up the ghost would be the best thing Liberalism could do for this nation.
7 Comments:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Ditto what ER said. How do you know that YOU'RE not the one who's believing what you've been told?
Myself, I don't trust the Dems particularly. They've not proven themselves. EXCEPT inasmuch as they've demonstrated, based upon the facts, that they're not AS corrupt and wrongheaded as the Republicans.
I get accused of "defending the left." BS. I "defend" myself and those who stand with me, issue by issue. My take on most of this country's most burning issues right now places me on the left -- but not all!
Gun control. No thanks. I may have to rely on the Second Amendment to defend the First Amendment some day.
War. Taliban-led Afghanistan, for it. Iran, if it comes to it and at least a plurality of the rest of the world is willing to go with us, for it. Iraq, no, it's immoral, and the president and veep should be impeached for lying, and continuing to lie, about it. "War on terror," for it, but it depends on what your definition of "war" is!
Environment, for it, and most of what that implies.
Business, for it, especially what's left of American business and moms-and-pops. Multinationals can go to hell -- and so can ANY "American" company that ships jobs overseas. I am a protectionist that way.
Abortion, against it. Choice, for it. Deal with it. I stand with most Americans.
Church, for it.
State, for it.
Church-led state -- will fight it like the "enemy domestic" it is!
That's all that comes to mind at the moment.
(For what does a man profit, if he should gain the whole market and suffer the loss of his ecosystem? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?)
And I'm with the majority of the US on this, as well. After all, what could be more conservative than, well, being conservative?
Dude. I don't know what translation you're reading, but that's seriously not in there.