«
»

Dems dislike clarity on their position

Posted 24 Jun 2005 in 9/11, Democrats, liberals, military, taxes, terrorism, war

honest_dems

After having their anti-American and anti-military views shown to the American public, the Democrats are eager to get the spotlight off themselves at any cost. And when Karl Rove (a favorite target of the liberals) spoke up about the Dems, they took no time in screaming for his head. Rove was quoted in the New York Times as speaking out against the Democrats’ policy of appeasement and “kinder, gentler” treatment of terrorists:

Conservatives saw the savagery of 9/11 in the attacks and prepared for war; liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers.

I fail to see why the liberals are so upset at what he said. After all, they’re the same folks offering therapy for “post election selection trauma”; therapy for people who just couldn’t cope with their candidate losing an election. They’re the party of choice for those who want to rehabilitate child molesters and murderers, claiming that they’ve just been misunderstood, or their difficult childhoods merit them a pass on their crimes (the same mindset described by Mr. Rove). These are also the same people who are quick to believe that the terrorists couldn’t possibly be lying about their treatment at Gitmo, and our soldiers couldn’t possibly be treating them in a humane way.

Don’t forget, Democrat John Kerry was the guy who said:

I believe I can fight a more effective, more thoughtful, more strategic, more proactive, more sensitive war on terror that reaches out to other nations and brings them to our side and lives up to American values in history.

“A more sensitive war on terror.” Come on, read it again. “More sensitive.” Those were the words of the Democrat candidate almost a year ago. Talking about being more sensitive in the way we conduct war against those who wanna kill us. That’s almost verbatim what Rove was talking about, with Democrats wanting “understanding” for those who wanna kill us.

How on Earth can liberals abide dimwits like Dick Durbin and John Kerry on their side, and then try to castigate someone like Karl Rove for simply pointing out the difference in approach between the two parties? Democrat senator Charles Schumer of New York was crying in the press about Rove’s comments being divisive.

At the risk of sounding petty, it takes one to know one.

I guess Schumer would be one to talk about being divisive. His party’s strategy is all about creating a have vs. have-not mentality among America’s voters. All about wanting the poor and middle classes to hate the rich, and to support the Democrats in their wealth redistribution (i.e. higher taxes on the wealthy). The Democrat party also never misses a chance to stir up hatred between blacks and whites, trying to position themselves as the only possible party to choose if you’re black. But that’s not divisive, right? Take it from Democrat party chairman, Howard “I hate Republicans and everything they stand for” Dean.

So after last week’s stoking of the terrorist hate engine by Senator Durbin, the liberals are now attempting to shift focus to the Republicans by screeching for Rove to apologize or resign.

I just don’t get it.

What did Rove say that would merit an apology? What did he say that would merit his resignation? He simply enunciated the Democrat position of moderation and restraint, especially as it relates to our war against terrorists.

How is it divisive to talk about the differences between the Democrats and Republicans in their approach to terrorism? What’s divisive about that?

Why do liberals not want Americans to remember the Democrats’ statements about appeasement and sensitivity?

And why do the Democrats keep losing public elections?

Maybe the answer to both questions is the same.

Posted by FullMetalPatriot
12th gen. American, Constitutionalist, Harley-riding Texan, gun owner & NRA member, blogger, illustrator, Florida Gator alumnus. #TCOT

Leave A Comment