John Kerry better get back on the pander-horse double-quick and ride him like a real cowboy. Democrats in Ohio (see Rasmussen) are nervous. They’re warning black voters not to get “Bush-whacked” (so clever, aren’t they?):
If Ohio is a battleground state in this year’s presidential election, these are some of the foot soldiers. Their mission is to maximize black voter turnout on Nov. 2 — a mission that will likely decide the Democrats’ chances of taking Ohio.“The African-American vote in Ohio is tremendously important,” said Bill Lynch, deputy national campaign manager for the Kerry-John Edwards team. “If we don’t get strong turnout, we don’t win” the state.
This will be particularly true if the race is close.
“He is not going to win on the black vote alone; but the only way Kerry is going to win is if he has good black voter turnout,” said David Bositis, senior political analyst at the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies in Washington, D.C.
The issue is not whether black voters, who have historically voted Democratic, will back Kerry.
In the 2000 election, about 90 percent of black voters cast their ballots for Democratic candidate Al Gore, exit polls showed. And a recent Plain Dealer poll shows Kerry with an equally commanding lead over President Bush among Ohio’s black voters.
“The election for many African-Americans is not between Kerry and Bush, but voting for Kerry or staying at home,” said Meryl Johnson, first vice president of the Cleveland Teachers Union, which has endorsed Kerry.
While 58 percent of Ohio voters cast ballots in 2000, the turnout was lower — 54 percent — among eligible black voters, according to census data. About 500,000 black Ohioans voted in the election; another 100,000 who were registered to vote sat out.
My advice to John Kerry: If you want to bring black voters to the polls, less war talk, more race talk, i.e., Section 8 housing and conservatives-are-racists.
Also see Ohio poll.
{ 39 comments }
I will be voting for Bush, but I will be holding my nose…
This message is intended to provide the media and anyone who will listen with one view of this election and the how I view the state of world affairs as they relate to this MYTHICAL “war” on terror. I’m sorry, but it has become more than apparent that although President Bush is a good man. A Christian man. A sincere man….he still no matter how I want it to be true, lacks the spine, where withal and intestinal fortitude to command US military forces in times of war. Is John Kerry a viable alternative? Absolutely not. In fact, John Forbes Kerry is the face of the very enemy slithering around within this nation intent on weakening her institutions and very definition even further. So please do not interpret this as a sign of getting weak kneed on the President.
I will without question vote for President Bush. There is no other alternative. We can only hope and pray that a TRUE conservative and TRUE warrior emerges between now and the 2008 election. America needs not just a man (sorry Hillary) at the helm, but a WARRIOR. America needs a man who understands the nature of battle. A man who understands that any undertaking that takes on the moniker of “war” must be prosecuted with only one goal in mind and that is winning.
I regretfully agree with Senator Kerry latest position on President Bush’s handling of the Iraq Battle. I’m sure it will change sometime in the next 24 hours, but let’s just go with the bit for right now. John Kerry is right that President Bush is showing abject incompetence in fighting the terrorists. The reasons are simple and have been repeated by me ad nauseum in previous messages. George W. Bush contrary to what the talking points have said about him IS indeed afraid of public opinion. He IS indeed being politically correct. He IS indeed answering to polls and the fickle winds that constantly shift the opinions of the American people. President Bush does not have the stomach for finishing properly what began on 9/11. While it is true that President Bush never claimed that Saddam Hussein and Iraq had a hand in the 9/11 attacks, he did have enough common since to understand the threat that muslims from that region of the planet posed to the United States and the world. With that in mind, he took proper action in beginning to destroy that evil, but lo and behold, he punked up and started second guessing himself. He started listening to the 5th column propagandists within our walls. He started listening to the one brain cell sharing Democrats whose only goal is getting their power in the Congress, Senate and White House back. Somewhere in this war on terror and battle in Iraq, George W. Bush ceases being a war time PRESIDENT and once again became a politician. He became a loathsome figure who negotiates with terrorists, lets American deaths go unavenged, shows public respect for an enemy cult some mistakenly call a “religion” and the biggest insult, ties the hands of American soldiers who are more than willing to spill blood in a show of loyalty to their Commander-in-Chief and to the nation they so love. How is this loyalty and honor repaid? It is repaid by letting murderous Sunni clerics negotiate their freedom. It is repaid by letting mosques that housed snipers and arms wielding terrorists who killed our Marines and Soldiers stand in defiance of the basic principles of humanity. It is repaid by not forcefully and angrily rebuking American filth like Nancy Pelosi, Terry McAuliffe, Al Gore, John Kerry and Ted Kennedy for the demoralizing garbage that spews incessantly from the toilets on their faces disguised as mouths.
It appears that no one in this vast land has the will to do what it takes to win the dadgum war. No one. The Capitol Hill GOP “leaders” folded up a long time ago. Forget about the RINO lunatics like McCain, Chafee, Collins, Snowe and Spectre. The so called “real” Republican leaders are afraid to open their mouths and tell the President to let loose on Iraq. Not even Delay and Tancredo have the correct genitalia to tell our president to destroy Iraq.
The fact that there are lights, running water and buildings still standing in Fallujah and Najaf is testimony to FAILURE! Our troops no matter how you slice it didn’t win JACK! They were defeated. Iraq is DEFINITLEY A QUAGMIRE AND WE ARE LOSING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Oh how I hate to say this, but it is. Is the situation correctable? Yes it is, but not until we find a MAN with a steel and concrete encased heart who is willing to do the unthinkable in order to SAVE lives. We need a MAN who is willing to call back the big birds and the big guns and declare all out war on ISLAM ITSELF! We need a president who can set aside temporarily set aside his humanity and transform into an animal and crawl down into Al-Zarqawi’s lair. We need a leader who will not flinch at the inevitable news stories depicting the aftermath of a month long B-52 attack on Iraq. We need a president who doesn’t draw distinctions between women, children and enemy combatants. We need a LEADER who will NOT RULE OUT THE USE OF WHATEVER IT TAKESTO END THIS THING. While we show weakness, Iran and China are watching.
President Bush, I stand by whatever decisions you make, but I respectfully submit that you are going about this whole thing wrong. I wouldn’t worry about Senator Kerry too much. He is a toothless enemy of the domestic variety. He would of course be more dangerous if he could put a solid message together. Even his followers are confused. With that in mind, you still must understand that your re-election is not what is important. Your legacy will take care of itself. What America needs from you right now is FIRE AND BRIMSTONE REIGNING DOWN ON OUR ENEMIES. Put the bullhorns down and send the negotiators home. No more cutely named operations either. You need to declare this war BACK ON and get to the business of winning. Winning is all that matters. Uncuff the troops and pull the chocks from under the wheels of the hell birds.
AMERICA SCREAMS FOR A VICTORY! Your move.
Ray Coleman
Tampa, FL
Seems like every 2 and 4 years the Dems pull out that ol race card scare tactic.Republicans are burning black churches,dragging black people on the backs of their pickup trucks,and now they have armed Klu Klux Klan members preventing black people from voting in Florida.If I were a Black american I would feel insulted and outraged by the DNC.
Raymond, I understand your point of view, though I disagree profoundly. In fact, I think many (if not most) Americans would- to some degree or another- have been impressed by a leveling of Fallujah or Najaf; I know I felt that way myself.
But there are two points to be made here. Fallujah and Najaf were (and in the case of Fallujah, are) essentially hostage crisis situations. You don’t solve such situations by killing everyone involved. Even targeted killing in the cities would involve ‘collateral damage’. And both destroying the terrorists when we first had the difficulty in Fallujh and waiting to destroy the terrorists until now involved ‘collateral damage’. Therefore it was obvious ‘collateral damage’ would be incurred, no matter what course of action was pursued.
The key to the matter is neither the terrorists nor the US spheres of perception; it is the Iraqi sphere of perception. A massive attack on Fallujah earlier this year resulting in serious civilian casualties quite possibly would not have been understood by the majority of Iraqis, perhaps seriously damaging the process of building Iraq into a free nation. Conversely, the collateral damage incurred by NOT taking out Fallujah early- car bombs, the reign of terror in Fallujah and Najaf, and so forth- is demonstrating to the average Iraqi that the terrorists are actually working against Iraq. And from what I have been reading, many now understand why it is necessary to take out Fallujah, and understand why it will be necessary to risk civilian casualties to do so.
If Iraq is to be a free nation, it must be able to take care of its security situation itself. Allowing Iraqis to recognize the problem, giving them the tools to do their part, and working with them to destroy the terrorists is vital (and takes much time). Freedom cannot be forced on anyone; and the administration has chosen a path that is encouraging and enabling Iraqis to help win their freedom, and ultimately fulfill the responsibilities of a nation.
And my second major point is that the administration has chosen to follow a strategy based upon the Iraqi sphere of perception despite the fact that it looks worse in the US sphere of perception- something quite in keeping with the past actions of the President. I may not always agree with him; but I trust that he does what he believes to be right- not what he thinks looks good politically.
Raymond,
Pasting ultra-long posts into the multiple threads on the same blog is not cool.
I apologize for the breach of etiquette. I am fairly new to this format.
No problem, Raymond. Welcome to the blog!
Thanks for your reply, but I just don’t believe in negotiating with terrorists or those suspected of being so. I put achievement of the objective before speculative outcomes. Peace as a consequence of war is achieved only when there is a clear victor. You win and THEN you negotiate with what survives. “Collateral damage” is a cute little politcally charged buzzword and nothing more. War in and of itself unlike other things IS inherently evil. It manner of usage however alters that definition.
What happens during war is not as relevant as the outcome. You cannot fight a war too focused on the objectives. You must achieve the goal. What the Iraqis think is irrelevant. Especially if they are dead. I subscribe to President Nixon’s view that is you kick ‘em in the behind, their hearts and minds will follow (or something like that).
Peace through superior firepower is a proven tenet of war fighting. The ancient Chinese put forth a an effective, but sinisterly applied truth that if you kill one, you control many. This can STILL be applied to Iraq. By ratcheting up the violence, and leveling cities instead of adobe huts, we control the discourse and show steely resolve. We need a body count. Iraqis good and bad need to understand that the United States of America IS the ONLY force for good on the planet with our capabilities, but conversely will apply that force with a mighty hand when evil seeks to redefine or destroy us.
American blood cries out for victory. Another American hostage was apprently killed by those animals over there. For every American killed, they should lose a city. Up to an including MECCA!
They either behave or they disappear. Simple. We’ll deal with public opinion and the Arab street AFTER we win the war.
If Bush wins the election, the war in Iraq is going to get hotter,and that won’t be a good thing for the insurgents.
The problem with race-bating poltics during elections:
I’ve talked to MANY black Americans who are disenchanted (very different that disenfranchised, like Kerry claims) with the American poltical system. The facts are not good when it comes to government and black people. The outcome of the government sponsored programs that supposedly lift up black American is bleak.
But, why don’t they vote? The fact is a large number of black Americans think the deal is rigged. They think white people get rich and black people get stepped on. Some of this idea is based on personal experiences related to real racism in America. But, a lot of it is the culture, entertainment, marketing, etc. There is a lot of money behind selling black Americans on the idea that they are part of a underprivileged group. This is amplified by race-bating politics.
If you tell black people, who already believe they can’t make a difference, that the government is out to block their vote, does that realy motivate them to go vote? Think about it. How can you tell someone they can make a difference while hilighting the very thing they fear in their paranoid inactive state. It doesn’t motivate young black Americans to vote to tell them it won’t be counted. It’s a bad sales pitch that plays to fears. It’s not an empowering motivation.
Of course, it does further alienate black youth and continues the lie that a black person can’t make it in America. It contributes to high-school dropout rates, drug use, feelings of uselessness, fear and inaction of every kind. We should be telling black youth that most of us in this country, Republican or Democrat, are on their side, in their corner and that there’s no vast white wing conspiracy to keep them down. But, Kerry’s not capable of empowering people. He’s not a leader. And the Democrat party has lost it’s will to actually improve people’s lives.
So, if you want to help black Americans, go take a black American to the polls to show them the system works. Take them to a Republican congregation somewhere and let them see that all colors of people want them, long to bring them in the party and that there’s a home for them if they want better for their families and themselves. Take them to a college and show them all the black faces there. Make sure no black child is tricked into thinking their future can’t be bright. Empower someone to break through the other side of racist behavior, the kind of racist behavior we see in the Democrat party. Teach someone to break free of the bonds of mental slavery. And, if they want to be an educated, empowered black Democrat, that’s great. But, at least they won’t be suckers.
A quick comment for Raymond: I would argue (it is the argument of the just-war tradition) that war is not inherently evil. Which means that people carrying on a war don’t have (moral) right not to ponder the morality of the means they employ. I’m not recommending, mind you, that the U.S. go weak-kneed just when we need to be strong. I’m just saying that in warfare, as in every other enterprise susceptible of moral evaluation, success doesn’t justify any and every means to attaining it. If it did, then it would be impossible to make a distinction between the savages who destoryed the Twin Towers and the American soldiers dispatched to Afghanistan and Iraq to protect innocent people from further savagery of the same kind.
Adrian
Adrian, I see your point, but my twist on nothing being inherently evil stands with respect to war. I think war is an evil endeavor. It is an action of last resort. The fact that you organize a body of the willing and/or unwilling in a controlled effort to go out and deliberately end life is not a notion that bode well in the Light. I do however think that noble intent and subsequent victory that fosters lasting good changes the nature of this awful beast.
War that seeks only to bring pain and misery is not the way the US has ever, does or ever will do battle. Sometimes you have to sacrifice a few thousand to save billions. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. The Normandy invasion was an excellent example of this principle in the European Theater of WW2. The atomic bombs were the equivalent in the Pacific Theater. We saved millions of lives, because we ferociaoulsy took thousands of lives.
We FFRIGHTENED the world into seeing the futility of war against the US and we now have this opportunity to do so against Al Qaeda and the islmo-fascists.
We will not win by appeasement and negotiation. We will win by being better killers than they are because that is all they will respect. Very sad but true. We either surrender to them or we start thinning them out until they behave.
Raymond – it’s easy to say here what you think Bush should and shouldn’t be doing, but remember that you are not getting the full pictures – there are stuff going on that no one will ever know. My husband was in the Army for over 10 years and he says that Special Forces can and will do things that nobody needs to know about. We do not know if they’re doing it right now, or do we need to know. The picture on the actual front line may be very different than what you’re seeing in the media.
Yes, I’m frustrated as you are at the slow progress, but, remember that we have smart people in the military. And yes, I’ll be voting for Bush – there’s just no way I can tolerate Kerry flip-flopping and giving away the secrets according to the polls.
Raymond:
thanks for your honest and powerful (re)statement of your position.
I agree that current pieties about a “kinder, gentler warfare” are unrealistic and can be downright dangerous. However, it doesn’t follow from this that the only moral criterion that can and should govern warfare is the rawly utilitarian one you seem to be advocating. There are certain acts that no one may commit at any time or for any reason. Butchering innocent civilians would be one of those. Which, to repeat, is what the 9-11 hijackers did. To see what raw utilitarianism applied to warfare looks like, all you have to do is watch the film of the planes flying into the Twin Towers.
If a War on Terror is justified, it’s not because our animal instinct for self-preservation has been offended. It’s because there are, to use Bush’s phrase, evil people out there who have to be stopped from perpetrating any further wickedness on innocents. But in order to be able to offer such a justification without inconsistency or hypocrisy, we have to care about the morality of means.
That’s just the way it works in a moral universe, I’m afraid. Of course, if you don’t believe that’s the kind of universe we’re living in, then we need to restart the argument at another level.
Ciao.
Adrian
Lola,
I do indeed understand there are things that are going on behind the scenes. It is just so hard to imagine WHAT! What could be going such that it ties the hands of an American President.
Lola, your points are well taken, but at some point, you have to put the senarios to rest and get the thing done!
I am a veteran of The Prsian Gulf War. I also served as a member of the SpecOps community as a member of the 3rd Battalion/75th Ranger Regiment at Ft. Benning (Black Beret: EARNED). Maybe it is this warrior spirit still burning in me that causes me to breathe fire at the news of American warriors dying without being given the opportunity to return fire effectively. Couple this tragedy with yet ANOTHER American civilian dying so savagely and I just have to vent.
Adrian,
Of course I would provide an exit for those wishing to leave the cities before we destroy them. Anyone who remains will be considered enemy and destroyed. This is an age old, accepted battle tactic and does indeed “insulate” you from a charge of blind rage.
Moral universe? Quite an assumption maybe?
What slow progress?
What are you talking about? Change ALWAYS takes time!
This isn’t a CBS miniseries where the problem is solved in 20 episodes.
The birth/rebirth of nations takes a long time (of course it a short time in historical time frames).
I wonder what life would have been like if we had network news in our faces (like we do now and the way we have it) during the following:
The Revolutionary War
The Civil War
WWI
WWII
I wonder what we would have said if we say these wars ‘up close and personal’ in the ‘Fair and Balanced’ way of the networks!
Who would be free?
Just some thoughts.
The quick, decisive Gulf War and its made for TV “special effects”, quick victories and low casualties softened America and fooled her citizens into thinking all wars could be prosecuted in such “painless” manner.
One of the worst technologies ever invented with respect to the effect it has on a nation’s psyche was that darned “smart” bomb and other precision guided munitions.
Somehow e became spoiled and mistakenly believed we could now, through technology, fight sanitary wars and actually WIN them.
WRONG!
Raymond: I respect your warrior spirit (and experience). I, too, object to “politically correct” war. But there’s a difference between just war and savagery. And yes, I’m assuming we live in a moral universe, but it’s an assumption I’d be willing to argue about. In any case, if it can be shown that raw utilitarianism isn’t a reasonable option, then we’re probably going to be stuck with a distinction between just war and savagery. Of course, and here I repeat myself, just war is not PC war, and, in that respect, you’re right.
Cordially,
Adrian
Ratso,
Blacks do get offended by those kind of comments. Then they mistakenly vote for the Democrats cause they don’t realize from where the comments are coming. It’s an old democrat trick that keeps on working. Thanks to are Reverend Pimps, ie. Jesse, Al, etc.
I have a similar post at my blog: blackmanforbush.blogspot.com
Based on my own interaction with Black people, it seems to me that their devotion to the Democrat party is mainly motivated by a fear of the yuppie/white/Republican system that has a latent desire to bring back ‘white’ and ‘colored’ drinking fountains (do whe even *have* drinking fountains anymore, or does it all come in bottles –sorry).
Bear in mind that these are not stupid people, nor drug-dealers, junkies, bums, etc. but hard-working, family-oriented Black people who express this sentiment to me.
Can the various races ever get along so that we are ‘a people’ (and yes, any nation, even our nation, is a representation of “a people” not merely a political construct — an idea we seem to forget)? It seems to me that there are groups that actually benefit from balkanizing the races in this country, Sadly.
As for Iraq, one of the reasons we left Saddam Hussein in place after the Gulf War is because the leaders of that time understood that that region would be difficult to govern without a strong, indiginous potentate. Without such a leader, the political area that we call Iraq would be an nearly-ungovernable morass (as we are finding out).
With this in mind, it was only when Saddam was proven to be far too mischievous to be any kind of stabilizing force over there in respect for our interests did we remove him from power. These interests include: Oil [what do you thing makes our trucks run?] Israel [American Jews and Christians have an affinity for this nation that is beyond politics, with good reason] and supressing belligerent Mohammedanism.
I consider the idea that “democracy” to flourish in Iraq like the flowers in springtime to be cock-and-bull. I believe best we can hope is for a pro-Western monarch, like the Shah of Iran (If only Carter hadn’t left him hangin’ back in ‘78).
Mark Slater,
>Can the various races ever get along so that we are ‘a people’
YES! Most of us already do.
But, explaining the difference between National Security adviser Condoleeza Rice and the young black person who doens’t understand that all that real racism and all that real discrimination doesn’t have to keep them from their goals is another discussion altogether.
BTW, I do know how to spell bait
Adrian,
You’ve got me thinking. Interesting, but I think savagery is a strong term for us to even interject into a debate about PROFESSIONAL American military forces. I know you haven’t done that so don’t interpret that as an indictment or putting words in your mouth. I simply want to be clear that to win a war, soldiers MUST be allowed to do what they are trained to do, otherwise they lose morale, make mistakes, second guess their purpose, and lose faith in their commanders. A recipe for disaster.
Fighting IS savagery. You must be relentless with those who threaten who and what you are. Now Adrain, if you are saying that tactical action should not be “savage” in nature, then I respectfully disagree.
It is very clear however that your heart is in the correct place. Someone has to be there for end game balance and decompression of the force.
Very true Mark! I tend to agree on your middle eastern “democracy” inference.
And just to correct the record made by another poster, DEMOCRATS created the “Jim Crow” laws. Just like they sought to perpetuate the slavery institution, formed the Ku Klux Klan under Nathan Bedford Forest, created the literacy tests and poll taxes, physically raised the confederate flag over the SC state capitol (Sen. Fritz Hollings), elected an admitted Klan member (Sen. Robert Byrd) as the President of the US Senate Pro Tempore, allows its House members to racially segregate in exclusive caucuses and claim to want racial unity and created the poverty inducing and hope draining social welfare system (FDR) that has imprisoned Blacks.
The GOP was formed because it OPPOSED slavery. It was born in a split from the Wig Party who also supported slavery.
The GOP was created in direct opposition to the ONE MAJOR FALL BACK POSITION that ill-educated blacks use as their main weapon in making excuses for failure.
Ray — well, I seems you haven’t clicked on my homepage, but I’ll let that go…
As far as your argument goes, I’ll quote Arsenio Hall, who in 1992 said on his show “The Republicans say ‘we’re the party of Lincoln’. Excuse me, that was ONE HUNRED and THIRTY YEARS AGO!”. This is in response to the National Convention of that year. So the thinking of this stripe is, that the Republican solidarity with the Black voter is a thing long in the past.
My guess is, the low Black turnout means that they are just as non-plussed in their choices as we are (whites, Hispanics, etc)
Sorry Mark,
I will definitely get there.
As I said on the other stream, the peculiar event troubling the President is an election, where he must operate as a politician. Expect him to return to being a “war time” President post election.
Economically, the Democratic party has always been the party of the worker. The Republican party has always been the party of business. Socially, the Democratic party has evolved into the party of the liberal minded. The Republican party has always been the party of the conservative minded.
Because the liberal minded are more open to change, the Democrats have a very good record supporting social change; womens suffrage, black civil rights, gay rights, etc.
While the conservatives are resistant to change and therefore Republicans have a poor record on social changes.
If you are a conservative black worker you have to decide which is more important to you, your social values, your civil rights, or your economic needs. Since the Democratic party satisfies two out of three of these interests for you, it would make logical sense to vote Democratic. But if you give much more weight to your conservative values due to religious beliefs, etc. then Republican candidates would make more sense for you.
This is a logical way to approach your vote by just plugging in YOUR economic and social interests. But don’t leave out the ‘Candidate’ factor. If one seems to have better leadership skills and is moderate in the economic and social issues, the ‘gut’ feel could outweigh the logical approach.
I for one am glad to see more and more black people succeed in business, education, law etc. I am glad that President Bush selected truly good people for his cabinet and did not rely on the color of their skin in selecting top advisors. I hope we see more of this and less of the pandering to the
black vote–it is the American vote. As to the war, there is good news posted in iraqthemosel.blogspot.com,. today.Agroup of ordinary Iraqis went after a small group of terrorists, beat them up and turned them over to the Americans. They yelled at the terrorists, you are killing our youth. As more and more Iraqis accept the necessity of getting the terrorists under control, the more they accept Allawi and dependence on Americans to help the greater chance our military has of being successful without the Iraqi people again turning on them. Progress is slow, but it is happening.
Pat,
We don’t need slow progress when we can achieve a quick decisive victory. What we need is the erasure of some terrorist dens and staging areas posing as Iraqi cities and a VERY HIGH enemy bodycount achieved in a very short time.
As for President Bush now being a politician, that is true. Was I the only one wanting President Bush to turn towards Kofi Annan at the UN an punch him in his grill, then standing over his unconscious carcass telling him and the UN to descend into Hades and that the US was kicking them out of NYC and cutting their funding?
Maybe I was just dreaming.
Raymond:
“Savagery” is, I admit, an imprecise word. I’ll come back to it in a minute. For now, I’ll replace it with “immorality.” My point is twofold. On the one hand, an American soldier doing his job (which also means killing the enemy) in a just war is NOT therefore guilty of immorality (which is what pacifists claim). On the other hand, there are moral rules governing killing in warfare that no soldier can violate without therefore becoming guilty of immorality, e.g., raping civilian women. That, by the way, is the sort of thing I had in mind when I used the word “savagery.” I wasn’t thinking of the fighting spirit, which, provided the cause is just, is NOT immoral.
Adrian
I AM OUTRAGED AND I ORDER PRESIDENT BUSH TO DO WHAT WE ELECTED HIM TO DO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Enough is enough Mr. President. COME ON! What is it going to take? You could have at least beat up Kofi Annan when you stood next to him at that UN photo op? Is there ANY fight left in the American people? Are you the harbinger of a new nation of spineless, yellow backed, week kneed panzies? You have these savages running around Iraq beheading American citizens in the name of their cult and YOU DO NOTHING!
For God’s sake man, pull everyone back. Pull the contractors out for now. START THIS THING BACK UP GEORGE! Fight the war man!! WIN THE WAR!!!
How many black eyes is the US going to have to take before you guys wake up and start doing your job? QUIT APPEASING these practitioners of this awful religious cult? It doesn’t take a blind man to see that we are fighting pure and unadulterated evil. Tell the UN to either do what they were formed to do or cut their funding and kick them out of our country? Can you at least do that?
Grow a spine Mr. President. I am losing faith in you and I am losing it FAST!!!!! You paid attention when we told you to stay away from that stupid weapons ban, so listen to us now. America is SCREAMING FOR VENGEANCE. You must act. I have already taken the Bush-Cheney stickers off of my vehicles. If you want me to put them back on, then give me a reason to be proud of you again.
If we don’t start leveling some Iraqi cities soon, I’m just going to stay home and watch the poll results come in as if I am watching Monday Night Football. John Kerry is capitalizing on your inaction. You now seem as soft and unwilling as he is. Are you a man or just another RINO?
DO YOUR JOB MR. PRESIDENT!!!!!!!!!!!!! Win the war.
Raymond Coleman
Tampa, FL
Gotcha Adrian!
Kerry is a socialist his image is at a commie museum they think of him as one of their own(socialist) and his evil bunch i wonder who he wants as his cabinet? clintons, gores, kennedys? gets you to wondering about his allegiance
raymod, you may want to open a history book, flip to the chapter about WWII, and read about the fire bombings. The allies dropped massive amounts of incidiary devices on cities in japan and germany trying to accopmlish the very thing you are suggesting. the logic was, if we keep killing more and more of them, they will lose their resolve and give up. Guess what happened. Their resolve was strengthened drastically. The same thing happened when the nazis fire bombed london. time and time again, the mass killing civillians has strenghtened the resolve of the people it was supposed to demoralize. The same thing happened after 9/11. How would oyu feel if terrorists came over here, occupied tampa, and startd killing civillians to gain a body count. 10 bucks says you would grap a gun and start fighting. Thats exactly whats happending in iraq. While our intetnions are certainly more just than those of our opponents, in their minds, we are the enemy, and killing lots of them will only piss them off more, which will make life harder for our troops. Everyone wants a speedy victory, but leveling cities would be suicide.
Phil, Raymond,
I think Dresden and other fire bombings strengthened resolve becasue A) it was understood, B) given the chance, the victim nation could (and did) respond. Hiroshima and Nagasaki worked to end the war in the pacific because it was neither A nor B. The notion that 1 bomb could wipe out an entire city in a moment…
And it took 2 cities to end the war. The Japanese thought the US had a stockpile of bombs, and could/would level city after city until the emperor surendered or Japan was cinder.
The world is different now, and I am glad to say that at the moment, our nation is not willing to visit holocaust on civilians on such a scale to get to our enemies. It is one of the things that sets us apart from them. But are enemies are, so we must do what we can to keep them from being in a posistion to do so again.
SCSIwuzzy, I’ll second that. Dresden et al was the equivalent of swapping chess pawns for pawns, unfortunately with a high cost of collateral damge & death. Dealing with the USSR was like facing off with kings. If our peacniks had their way, it would’ve been checkmate on democracy and liberty.
Raymond, I understand and sympathize with your sentiments, however the urge to turn Iraq into a glass desert would — a tactical win without risking our troops — be a profound strategic mistake. This pyrrhic smackdown would only serve to radicalize the rest of the world’s muslims, and cost us more unnecessary death & destruction in the long run, what with the millions living amongst the Western “heathen” nations.
This is the track that Russia took in fighting in Afghanistan and Chechnya with dismal results. If Bush had tried to fight as you suggest, I’m sure that the majority of our officer and NCO corp would have vehemently withdrawn support for the CINC. It is this kind of “kill ‘em all and let God sort ‘em” mentality that got Lt. William Calley and others court-martialed.
Instead of dealing with a muslim population that is 2 – 5% radicalized, we’d be dealing with 50% or more. How could we ever neutralize that? Granted that the relative few is bent on total subjugation or destruction of the world.
No, my friend, while it is indeed frustrating to see our guys and gals taking mortal hits on a daily basis, Dubya’s basic game plan is correct. The only way to win this war is to dig in, triangulate and eliminate the onesies-twosies radicals hiding amongst the general population in Iraq. That by necesscity means having to get in close enough to expose ourselves to their attacks. Rather than the zero-sum game that it appears, we are killing more of them faster than they can kill us.
The jihaii’s desperation is remarkably similar to the moonbat crowd. The further sKerry falls behind, the shriller the DNC and lefty 527s get. Likewise, the terrorists, by attacking innocent civilians and/or hiding behind women and children are not winning the hearts and minds of the very people they’re seeking to dominate.
On the flipside, our resolve is weakened, not by the coalition of the unwilling rather it is by the malfeasance of antiwar crowd and sKerry. As a nation, we gave Old-Europe & the UN their chance to provide constructive support, but the lack of it won’t ever stop us from going forward.
However, domestically, the sKerry, Teddy — his Sith Master — and the federation of BAMN’ers undermines our resoluteness by recklessly sowing fear, uncertainty and doubt into the political lanscape. For that sKerry and Kennedy need to be banished into political exile, but that’s up to Massachusetts voters.
Comments on this entry are closed.