Any group that includes Michelle Bachman is automatically declared looney tune eligible.
Her husband, you know, runs a clinic that can "cure" homosexuality.
Tot tithes unto that clinic.
I certainly won't. But I' not sure that anybody knows what our foreign policy actually IS anymore - especially where Syria is concerned. Also - when I get on the computer tomorrow, I'll post several links where over the years Democrats traveled to foreign countries and engaged in similar activity which "undermined official U.S. foreign policy" when a Republican was in the White House. It wasn't acceptable on those occasions, and it 's not acceptable now. But it doesn't surprise me. When the Democrats did it, they claimed that they were conducting their "foreign travels" in the capacity of PRIVATE CITIZENS, despite the fact that they were elected members of Congress. I thought that was pretty ridiculous. I'll post the links tomorrow.
Something I've found particularly ridiculous is "ambassador" Dennis Rodman's "shuttle diplomacy" to North Korea. I'll post a link tomorrow about his expletive-laden prss conferences.
With all these goings-on, it's no wonder our adversaries have us on our heels diplomatically.
Here we go.
The President was George W. Bush - the favorite target of the left - and the record is filled with examples of Democrats "undermining" the "official foreign policy of United States" during his term. Here are the ones that got the most press at the time of their occurrence:
*"A few months after 9/11 and a full year before Bush announced his plan to depose the Hussein regime in Iraq, Democrat Senator Jay Rockefeller traveled to the Middle East, acting on his own, to warn Iraq through its friends in the region, that America was going to depose the Hussein regime on the basis of their 17 broken UN resolutions and continued pursuit of WMD."
"Over the months and years that followed, Democrats publicly warned our international enemies of America’s counter-terrorism surveillance, interrogation and detention programs. Democrats repeatedly disclosed TOP SECTRET national security information (under the guise of the people’s right to know, which ha(d) never before included TOP SECRET security operations during a time of war). Democrats repeatedly worked to demoralize our troops and embolden our enemy by “outing” our battle plans and making outlandish attacks on our military personnel while demanding civil rights for terrorists devoted to killing an open ended number of innocent civilians around the globe.”
*In the fall of 2002, Congressional Democrats Jim McDermott and David Bonior traveled to Baghdad (one was quoted as saying they were there as “private citizens”) and appeared before television cameras, telling viewers around the world that they would take the word of Saddam Hussein over that of the President of the United States. From an article in the Washington Post by George F. Will which reports what they said (in addition to Will’s opinion of it):
“Not since Jane Fonda posed for photographers at a Hanoi antiaircraft gun has there been anything like Rep. Jim McDermott, speaking to ABC's "This Week" from Baghdad, saying Americans should take Saddam Hussein at his word but should not take President Bush at his. . . ."
"Bonior, until recently second-ranking in the House Democratic leadership, said sources no less reliable than Hussein's minions told them that inspectors would have an "unrestricted ability to go where they want." McDermott said: "I think you have to take the Iraqis on their value -- at their face value." And: "I think the president would mislead the American people."
McDermott and Bonior are two specimens of what Lenin, referring to Westerners who denied the existence of Lenin's police-state terror, called "useful idiots."”
These “ridiculous” comments and actions by McDermott and Bonior were further criticized by Mara Liasson, NPR Correspondent and frequent spokesperson for the viewpoint of the left on FNC:
“These guys are a disgrace. Look, everybody knows it's 101, Politics 101, that you don't go to an adversary country, an enemy country, and bad-mouth the United States, its policies and the president of the United States. I mean, these guys ought to, I don't know, resign."
(The above link is replete with examples of prominent Democrats “undermining” the official foreign policy of the United States.)
So historically – Democrats are in a very weak position to criticize ANYBODY who speaks out against President Obama’s foreign policy in an forum anywhere in the world. When it comes to “going low” and undermining the actions of a U.S. president, the Democrats wrote the playbook.
(Let's try that last link again:
....and speaking of ridiculous:
Every time President Obama is criticized for ANYTHING, his supporters play the race card. It's always "they would never treat him this way if he was WHITE," or "There is so much HATE for the President because he is BLACK," etc., etc., etc. MALE BOVINE SCATOLOGY.
While researching the links for the above post I came across these historical (and hysterical) links - which remind us of "the way it was" when BUSH was in the cross-hairs of the left:
Part I - From “Democrats.com”:
"What are the top reasons for impeaching Bush?
• Invading Iraq without any threat to the U.S.
• Lying about Iraqi WMD's to Congress and the American people
• Causing the deaths of over 2,000 U.S. troops and the maiming of over 10,000 more
• Failing to provide adequate equipment and armor to U.S. troops
• Allowing illegal torture and murder of prisoners
• Causing the deaths of 100,000 Iraqi civilians
• Spending $300 billion in just two years for an occupation that could last for decades
• Letting Halliburton steal billions through no-bid contracts
• Using vast quantities of depleted uranium weapons that will poison Iraq now and for generations to come
• Ignoring countless warnings of an attack in the U.S.
• Reading "My Pet Goat" during the attack
• Letting Osama Bin Laden escape from Afghanistan
• Holding no bureaucrat accountable for ignoring warnings
• Delaying and obstructing the 911 Commission investigation
• Turning Afghanistan into the world's largest opium producer
• Allowing international terrorism incidents to quadruple and trying to cover up the facts
• Failing to secure our borders and ports to prevent terrorism
• Creating a new generation of terrorists through the invasion of Iraq and the killing of 100,000 civilians
• Letting terrorists buy high-powered weapons inside the U.S.
• Letting North Korea build nuclear bombs and missiles that can cross the Pacific Ocean
• Refusing to shut down Pakistan's nuclear weapons exports
• Turning the world against the United States
• Preparing for another war with Iran
• Signing treaties that cost America jobs and undermine American laws
• Letting gasoline prices double at devastating cost to the economy while oil companies make record profits
• Letting corrupt companies like Enron steal billions from consumers and employees
• Cutting taxes for the rich and turning a $5 trillion budget surplus into a $5 trillion budget deficit
• Adding trillions to the national debt, which our children and grandchildren will have to pay off with interest
• Letting millions of American jobs go overseas
• Letting bureaucrats wiretap Americans without a court order
• Locking up suspects for years without charges or trials
• Arresting nonviolent protesters at Bush events
• Packing the courts with right-wing judges to outlaw abortion
• Ordering federal courts to interfere in the Terri Schiavo tragedy
• Taking away our right to sue corporations through class actions
• Taking away our right to declare bankruptcy under Chapter 7 and forcing middle-class Americans into debt slavery
• Stealing the Presidential elections of 2000 and 2004
• Refusing to investigate the disenfranchisement of tens of thousands of voters in Florida and Ohio
• Promoting black-box electronic voting machines without paper trails
• Embracing dictators in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Russia, and China
• Overthrowing democratically-elected leaders in Haiti and Venezuela
• Allowing global warming, which will cause massive environmental damage
• Allowing more toxic mercury in the air and water
• Allowing oil drilling in wilderness areas
• Illegally "outing" CIA agent Valerie Plame, an important anti-terrorism official
• Letting a gay male prostitute (Jeff Gannon) roam free in the White House
• Paying journalists to give favorable coverage to the administration
• Relying on an earpiece for answers during debates and press conferences
• Going AWOL from the Texas Air National Guard in 1972 and covering it up ever since
• Defending the most corrupt Member of Congress (Tom DeLay)"
(I especially like the "scandal" they cite above - to wit: "Relying on an earpiece for answers during debates and press conferences." If that is a "scandal" worthy of Bush getting impeached, then the ObamaScandals have enough comparative gravity and significance for Mr. Obama's confinement at hard labor on diminished rations.)
Putting things into proper perspective is this buzzfeed.com page which cites "7 Things Democrats Would Have Freaked Out About If Bush Had Done Them." This page focuses on the fact that President "Obama’s national security policy has continued some of the most controversial moves of the Bush administration. (and has garnered nothing but) Silence from much of the left."
...and I didn't forget about "ambassador" Dennis Rodman's visit to North Korea, during which he called "North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un his "friend for life," while using expletives to refer to President Obama and former secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton."
Imagine that - expletives being used to refer to the President and Hillary - and we don't have wall-to-wall 24/7 coverage on it by all the "mainstream" news outlets. I wonder if they - perish the thought - are actually CONSIDERING THE SOURCE? I wonder what the coverage would be if a white Republican - instead of a black former NBA basketball player and possible "celebrity" - had traveled to NK and buddied up to the dictator, while using EXPLETIVES to refer to the President of the United States?
The Bottom Line:
Jimmy and PN - let's not talk about "ridiculous" and "how low can you go" when it comes to three GOP bozos traveling to Cairo. Comparatively speaking, this is small potatoes compared to the actions of the Democrats over the years. Sure - Democrats can "justify" their actions by saying that they were expressing their "freedom of speech" or standing on their convictions. If so - GREAT - but the Republicans then deserve deference and respect when THEY express their freedom of speech or stand on their convictions.
To do otherwise really does expose Democrats to be "cut-rate hypocrites."
Okay - I'm finished. I look forward to your replies. Will be gone to Coumadin Clinic this afternoon. Will sign back on this evening.
Have a great day!
Gee Sebe, that sure is a lot of wind yer blowin' there! Talk about taking a sledge hammer to an ant bed! Geeze! Are you sure you are through? I missed any reference to Michelle the Miscreant in your War and Peace Trilogy above with it's additional three addendums. Was that on purpose or just an oversight? All I know is Karl Rove would be proud of the extensive work you have put in here. You have definitely earned your plaque on the wall of the Left's Rogues Gallery, my erudite friend.
If your trilogy...with addendums above is anything near to the opening up of cannon fire on Fort Sumpter, then we got us one hell of a fight coming before we usher in Hillary.
En garde, my articulate friend, and prepare for the on-coming political fire fight that is just over the bend.
Jimmy: No - my bad - I did forget about Dem. Rep. John Murtha, who went before the national television cameras in 2005 to denounce our President (guess who?) and our foreign policy in Iraq. There are numerous others - as I mentioned above - but I did try to keep it brief.
No - I didn't mention Michelle because my reply was to the "ridiculous" nature of the charge that these three GOP bozos were doing something unusual or unique in "deliberately undermining U.S. foreign policy." Shoot - the Democrats did that almost DAILY - that be THOUSANDS OF TIMES - during Bush's two terms. They don't get a pass because it was Bush. Read the stuff I posted above. What Rockefeller, McDermott and Bonior (as well as Murtha) did was every bit as undermining to U.S. foreign policy than what the GOP three stooges did. In fact, it is WORSE because we were literally at war at the time and the Dems comments certainly gave aid and comfort to our enemies by demonstrating that we were not united in a common cause.
Also note the extensive "ridiculous" nature of the "impeachable" offenses put forth by democrats.com. Let's see: why don't we impeach Bush for reading "My Pet Goat" during the 9/11 attack. Most of the stuff they list has been CONTINUED by President Obama. So should we impeach HIM for this nonsense? Of course not. But when we start calling things "ridiculous," we ought to pay more attention to history and realize that DEMOCRATS did exactly the same thing - but more often and with more venom.
PolNat: When you do have time, please address Rockefeller, McDermott, Bonior, and Murtha, and how their "undermining of U.S. foreign policy" was less ridiculous than the three GOPers you cite in your basic blog post.
The three stooges congressional membersare indicative of the body of voters who voted them into office. Their mindset are the same as the three stooges -congressional members.
SPF3 You must be talking about the stooges that voted Obama, Biden, Rangel, Grayson, Hank Johnson, Pelosi, Reid, etc. into office. I can't think of a bigger bunch of stooges.
Chief, you just exposed the hypocrisy of this blog. On one hand independents, conservatives and libertarians acknowledge that the Democrats are more than guilty of this act and that Bachman and her crew aren’t setting a good example for America either. However Democrats, liberals and progressives are acting like this is something new and hasn’t been done before because of a black man in the Whitehouse!
SF3, if you really cared and conducted research on Democrats, especially President Obama as you do diligently in regards to sports, I'm sure that your analysis in the political arena would be more favorable to free market enterprise and less government.