FOUNDED: February 9, 2001
If you prefer to make a donation by check,
send an email to Support for the mailing address.
|09-10-2006, 02:55 PM||#1|
Advanced Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Central NJ
Pathetic liberal sissies
Pathetic liberal sissies
By Kevin McCullough
Sunday, September 10, 2006
Unable to compete in the world of free debate with transparent facts, liberals behaved like children this week - proving that in the end national security and even national identity are always subservient to their own ego, reputation, and appearance.
It was pathetic, cowardly, and sickening.
It is also far too typical.
Liberals, who in large part are people devoid of true substance and belief, who also have great contempt for God, morality and truth, are often unable to deal with facts that reflect poorly upon them. And using pathetic, self-serving, cry-baby tactics is how they are commemorating this week - the fifth memorial of 9/11.
By now, you've no doubt read all about the ABC Mini-Series "The Path to 9/11" and some of what it will contain on Sunday and Monday evening. This no holds barred look at mistakes that were made in both the Clinton and Bush administrations will criticize decisions made and the decision makers in the run up to September 11. Beginning just before the World Trade Center bombing in 1993, based upon the 9/11 Commission’s Report, it will trace events that led up to the horrific event we commemorate this week.
Every insider that I spoke to who has seen it has referenced it, "amazing, historical, and important." Others have called it an "even-handed critique." It sounds to me to be very faithful to the original Report.
But then came word that Bill Clinton, and four of his top staffers, objected to the way they were portrayed. But they didn't just object. They belly-ached, they threatened, and in the end they were able to force ABC television to cave on some material that took a critical look at their role in the years between 1993-2000.
Something that particularly irked them was the implication that the Clinton administration allowed Osama bin-Laden to escape. But this was no implication - it is fact. On at least two occasions OBL was within our grasp but it was our lack of initiative that let him slip through our fingers. While Clinton was being serviced by an intern, and Hillary was busy letting him, he bombed an aspirin factory in response to terrorist actions taken against us.
The Clinton staffers who squealed like pigs over the ABC series do so for the same reason they did most things when they were in power. The central focus of the Clinton years was not, "what is best for the nation." It was always, "what is best for the Clintons and the people they liked." As long as the dot.com boom held up we as a nation were told that the State of the Union was strong - even as our enemies plotted, planned, and even attacked us - and no response came.
Now that the ugly truth is about to be seen by millions of Americans, and because it will embarrass those in powerful positions, Clinton and his staff demand the facts be changed to assuage the people's opinion of them.
And one of those making the demands... none other than Mr. "stuff the papers down my pants" Sandy Berger.
But in reigniting this debate over the image of liberals in America, they have exposed themselves as something worse. Not only are they unable to deal with criticism - something that all leaders must do in order to be effective leaders - but they are a true danger to America.
The great sin of 9/11 was that we as a nation did not dare to imagine the destruction that our enemies could cook up for us.
In Clinton's time, his administration refused to!
And this holds true for us today. Where are the great voices from the Democratic Party ready to lead the charge to make America safe from the dangers of open borders? Where are the vibrant leaders in liberal America who are ready to deal justice to those who seek to kill Americans? Where are those on the ideological left who have any clue as to how to aggressively stop terror threats from re-emerging?
The few that used to exist have been run out of the party.
Because liberals are under the misguided notions that 1.) there is no such thing as moral absolutes, good and evil, right vs. wrong and 2.) if we just take the time to talk to them we can get them to like us, they are not even aware that the "infidels" the enemy seeks to kill first - would be their immoral, self-serving, hedonistic, wicked selves. And in that ignorance they are also blinded to the direct overtures that the enemy continues to make - recently even Mr. Ahmadinejhad saying directly, "bow down to Islam, or you will be forced to."
Liberals are pathetic because they serve selfish immoral purposes. That is also what makes them weak. In their twisted thinking they believe with all their hearts that such weakness is actually strength. And that perversion of reality is sealing their doom.
Their doom does not have to be America's end.
And whether they realize it or not, by preventing them from regaining power, we are saving them from themselves!
“Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not” — Thomas Jefferson.
"The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of 'liberalism,' they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened." - Norman Thomas, U.S. Socialist Party presidential candidate 1940, 1944 and 1948
|09-11-2006, 01:17 AM||#2|
Join Date: Apr 2003
Re: Pathetic liberal sissies
Glenn Beck brought up a great point about this on his show
the other day. Basically they are crying about this show not
being factual and accurate. One statement said that the events
of Sept. 11th should not be dramatized for profit or politicized
in any way. Where were they when that
socialist Michael Moore presented that fairytale
called Farenheit 911 or when certain democratic leaders
accused Bush of knowing about the attacks in advance?