Barack Obama is only a viable presidential candidate because of his multicultural sounding name, not his political ideas. If he has any ideas that are unique, please tell me what they are. Ah, yes, leaving Iraq by March of 2008, his version of cut and run. Ho hum. Who can deny that if his name were Joe Jones, David Geffen and the Hollywood sheep wouldn’t be falling all over each other to have fundraisers for him at their carbon-neutral homes? The fact is that the left FEELS better when it promotes multiculturalism and Obama’s name is shorthand for that ideology. So little experience does Obama have in the world of big-time politics that it occurs to me the only “audacity” I associate with him is not the title of his latest book but those who take him seriously as a presidential candidate.
*****
The Dixie Chicks winning 5 Grammy Awards proves that mediocrity is today’s “great.” Their wins were payback from the liberal music academy voters for “speaking out” against the evil Bush in 2003, and taking heat for it, at the same time many elected Democrats were voting Yes to go to war in Iraq. The Grammys were the Chicks’ November elections. Their big wins presages Al Gore’s probable Academy Award for his movie “An Inconvenient Truth,” followed by a probable Nobel Peace Prize. (Why do I think the only thing “man-made” in the Global Warming debate is Global Warming itself?) So while Bush got two terms in the White House, Al will have to settle for two statuettes as his reward for his service to The Cause.
*****
If necessary, President George W. Bush will use force to remove Iran’s nuclear facilities during his presidency because he doesn’t trust a Democrat – should one become the next president – to deal effectively with this looming international threat. This is why he is caving on so many inconsequential “issues,” like Global Warming, which, in truth, he could probably care less about. His appeasement of Democrats on these non-issues may help soften the blow, however slightly, when we are forced to use our air power to circumvent Iran’s nukes. While the left tries to paint the president as someone who couldn’t string three words together, the opposite is actually true: he has consistently repeated in concise, measured tones, his major themes, one of which is that, vis-ŕ-vis Iran acquiring nuclear capability, “Historians will look back and ask why America’s leaders didn’t take action.” Thankfully, Bush gets it.
*****
Democratic Representative William Jefferson – he of the $90-thousand dollars found in his freezer last year – is still in office. Sandy Berger, former Clinton National Security Advisor, who pilfered sensitive documents from the National Archives, still hasn’t taken a court-ordered lie detector test about why he smuggled those documents out in his trousers and dumped them near a construction site. And House Speaker Nancy Pelosi still wants Americans to take her seriously when she paints Republicans as the “culture of corruption?”
******
While the left unabashedly roots against a U.S. success in securing Baghdad, a great political sideshow of a success there would be almost every Democratic candidate having to explain, yet again, that they were originally FOR the war, before they were AGAINST it, and now are FOR it again. It explains why Hillary continues to not apologize for her original vote of Yes on the war: She thinks Bush’s plan may succeed!
*****
Steny Hoyer, a responsible Democrat in the old tradition, has to be the unhappiest camper in the party, having to play second-fiddle to the Get-Bush-At-Any-Cost Majority Leader and her sidekick in defeatism, John Murtha. These are rough days for Hoyer, who has to be pretend he’s with the program a lot more than he really seems to be.
*****
There are two world religions that get equally angry when you dare criticize them: Islam and Liberalism. It partly explains why they are allies in their War Against America.
*****
These prophetic words were spoken by one of the great men (a Democrat) of our times, Senator Henry “Scoop” Jackson, in 1979, in Jerusalem: “I believe that international terrorism is a modern form of warfare against liberal democracies. I believe that the ultimate but seldom stated goal of these terrorists is to destroy the very fabric of democracy. I believe that it is both wrong and foolhardy for any democratic state to consider international terrorism to be ’someone else’s’ problem…. Liberal democracies must acknowledge that international terrorism is a ‘collective problem.’” Oh, if you could lead the party now, Senator!
Have PoliticalMavens.com delivered to your inbox in a daily digest by clicking here
