They’re going to get us all killed
A great piece by Jeff Jacoby on the appalling silence of the Democrats in the war against militant Islam: Democrats’ silence on jihad is deadly
For McCain, a Republican presidential hopeful, the struggle against the Islamists is the paramount issue of the day. His campaign website, while spare, highlights a recent speech in which McCain called stopping radical Islam “our most important moral obligation.” He described the jihadists as “moral monsters but . . . also a disciplined, dedicated movement driven by an apocalyptic religious zeal, which celebrates martyrdom and murder.”
Sounding nearly as resolute is former governor Mitt Romney, whose campaign website puts “Defeating the Jihadists” first in its list of key campaign issues. “The jihadists are waging a global war against the United States and its allies,” Romney is quoted as saying, “with the ambition of replacing legitimate governments with a caliphate — a theocracy.” Speaking in Israel yesterday, Romney asserted that “a central purpose of NATO should be to defeat radical Islam,” through means both military and ideological.
The Democratic candidates, by contrast, are virtually silent on the subject.
Barack Obama launched his exploratory committee with an online video that mentioned the economy, healthcare, vanishing pensions, college costs, and the fractiousness of partisan politics. His only nod to national security was a passing reference to the war in Iraq, which he opposes. But 9/11 and its aftermath? The worldwide jihad? The global conflict between democratic freedom and Taliban-style repression? Not a word.
Hillary Clinton’s highly praised kickoff video likewise included nothing about the overriding threat of our time. Her website does contain a speech she gave at the Council on Foreign Relations last October, but it is filled with vague rhetoric about diplomacy and international conferences and how we must address the “troubled conditions terrorists seek out.” New Yorkers don’t need to be told “that we are in a war against terrorists who seek to do us harm,” Clinton says. But if she recognizes that the future of the civilized world depends on winning that war, she shows little sign of it.
What is true of Obama and Clinton is more or less true of Edwards, Richardson, and the others. The Democrats seem prepared to emulate John Kerry, who insisted in 2004 that “we have to get back to the place we were” before 9/11. Back, that is, to treating Islamist terrorism not as “the focus of our lives,” but merely as “a nuisance” that we need “to reduce” — like gambling, he said, or prostitution.
H/T LGF
For McCain, a Republican presidential hopeful, the struggle against the Islamists is the paramount issue of the day. His campaign website, while spare, highlights a recent speech in which McCain called stopping radical Islam “our most important moral obligation.” He described the jihadists as “moral monsters but . . . also a disciplined, dedicated movement driven by an apocalyptic religious zeal, which celebrates martyrdom and murder.”
Sounding nearly as resolute is former governor Mitt Romney, whose campaign website puts “Defeating the Jihadists” first in its list of key campaign issues. “The jihadists are waging a global war against the United States and its allies,” Romney is quoted as saying, “with the ambition of replacing legitimate governments with a caliphate — a theocracy.” Speaking in Israel yesterday, Romney asserted that “a central purpose of NATO should be to defeat radical Islam,” through means both military and ideological.
The Democratic candidates, by contrast, are virtually silent on the subject.
Barack Obama launched his exploratory committee with an online video that mentioned the economy, healthcare, vanishing pensions, college costs, and the fractiousness of partisan politics. His only nod to national security was a passing reference to the war in Iraq, which he opposes. But 9/11 and its aftermath? The worldwide jihad? The global conflict between democratic freedom and Taliban-style repression? Not a word.
Hillary Clinton’s highly praised kickoff video likewise included nothing about the overriding threat of our time. Her website does contain a speech she gave at the Council on Foreign Relations last October, but it is filled with vague rhetoric about diplomacy and international conferences and how we must address the “troubled conditions terrorists seek out.” New Yorkers don’t need to be told “that we are in a war against terrorists who seek to do us harm,” Clinton says. But if she recognizes that the future of the civilized world depends on winning that war, she shows little sign of it.
What is true of Obama and Clinton is more or less true of Edwards, Richardson, and the others. The Democrats seem prepared to emulate John Kerry, who insisted in 2004 that “we have to get back to the place we were” before 9/11. Back, that is, to treating Islamist terrorism not as “the focus of our lives,” but merely as “a nuisance” that we need “to reduce” — like gambling, he said, or prostitution.
H/T LGF
posted by the boodge at 11:51 AM
8 Comments:
to me terrorism is not the most important issue. Have the republicans sponsored a bill in congress that supports the middle class and small business'? i'm still waiting...
Have the democrats?
Do you call a tax increase on small busines a good thing for me and million's of other small business owners?
I hear the DEMOCRATS calling for TAX INCREASE every other day! Thats all they talk about, raise the taxes, tax that, tax this, put some more rules and laws on that... Blah, Blah, Blah...
we're working on it. to put it broadly we're strenthening unions, improving healthcare- one our way to universal healthcare.
taxing eh. well yes, taxing corporations, which have been getting breaks for years. also taxing the top 1%. what's wrong with that? a simple explanation is that they use government systems to excess (ie judicial system..)
qualms?
yeah, ok, let me tell you something my taxes are going throught the fucking roof and i'm not near the top 1%, im what you would call getting by.
FUCK the UNIONS! Lazy assholes is what they are! Why doesn't your liberal pal, Pelosi, have unions within here companies, if they're so great?
Pete, you should just do us all a favor and please kill yourself! I mean you guys are all for abortion so why not consider a late term one on yourself!
Have a nice fucking day you liberal commie piece of shit!
taxes through the roof? well, someone's got to pay off the debt (which is into the trillions) to this bullshit war. who's going to be paying the taxes for this debt? the next generation, which includes your children and me. we're going to be paying taxes for what you vaginal secretions led us into. i guess i'll thank you in advance..
unions are lazy assholes? i don't see your logic. why haven't the workers in Pelosi's company unionized? i don't know.
why don't republicans pass laws favoring the middle class? you don't know.
have a swell day too.
but back to the minimum wage gig.
MYTH #1 — Raising the minimum wage will hurt businesses. A study by the Center for American Progress found that employment in small businesses, the number of small businesses, and inflation-adjusted small business payroll growth grew more in states with higher minimum wages than federal minimum wage states. Almost 300 large and small business owners across the country have signed on to Business for a Fair Minimum Wage, which is pushing Congress to raise the federal minimum wage. A recent Gallup poll found that “three out of four small businesses said that an increase in the minimum wage would have no effect on their company.”
MYTH #2 — Businesses can’t afford to give workers a wage increase. In the past 10 years, Congress has “showered corporations with $276 billion in tax breaks, plus another $36 billion aimed exclusively at small businesses.” Steven Pearlstein of the Washington Post adds that even though the Bush administration has gifted declining tax rates to small businesses over the past several years, “according to the Internal Revenue Service, small-business owners, sole proprietors and the self-employed are, as a group, the biggest tax cheats in America, responsible for $153 billion of the estimated $345 billion tax gap in 2001.”
Source with links to original ..
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/25/conservatives-minimum-wage/
so now your calling me a tax cheat, FUCK YOU, you ignorant asshole. One day our paths will cross and I will be the one fucking your sorry ass up!
well yes, taxing corporations,
pete,
corporations don't pay taxes, they never have and never will. if you raise taxes on corporations they are simply going to pass this cost on to the consumers of their goods/services or cut the jobs of their employees in order to cover this expense.
so yeah, you go right on ahead and tax those evil corporations. people will really appreciate it when they have to pay more and the employees of these companies will be even more appreciative when they lose their jobs.
Post a Comment
<< Home