To send a message of "thanks" to our troops serving in 177 countries around the world, text your message to "8-9-2-7-9."
Starting this Saturday, November 17, through Thanksgiving Day, the Department of Defense will be collecting these text messages and sending them on to our troops.
They give so much---some give all. Please send them your gratitude this week.
CLICK HERE for more information.
As we await the President's speech tonight, a thought on this week's congressional testimony by General David Petraeus, U.S. Commander in Iraq.
When the Democrats on Capitol Hill pose and posture on Iraq, when they beat up on Petraeus, when they ask him questions and then proceed to answer them themselves, when they do all of this, they are doing only one thing:
They are all avoiding responsibility for any of it. To wit:
Hillary Clinton's tap dance about Petraeus being a puppet for an administration with a "failed policy."
Barack Obama's tap dance that the Iraq hearings shouldn't have been held on September 11th.
Chris Dodd's tap dance that the General was engaged in delusional "happy talk."
Joe Biden's tap dance that Petraeus wasn't telling the truth.
Here is what each and every one of these sanctimonious boobs should be asked. Senator Clinton/Obama/Biden/Dodd: Are you, or are you not, willing to accept the consequences of a U.S. pullout?
That's what you say you want. OK. Are you prepared to accept responsibility for what comes next? The General is telling you that a premature U.S. withdrawal will lead to an epic slaughter. What are you going to do about that? If that comes to pass because of YOUR policy, are you willing to take responsibility for it?
You have spent years bashing the president for not having a post-war plan. What is your post-WITHDRAWAL plan?
What do you do when the troops come home and there is catastrophe? Are you willing to bear that responsibility?
Yes or no? It's a simple question. Is it not?
For an interesting---and surprising---view on Iraq, please see Michael O'Hanlon's piece in this week's New York Times. LINK
He just got back from Iraq, and he'll be a guest on the program this weekend. Please join us.
Today there are more holes in the ship of fools known as the Republican party. About two weeks ago, Senators Richard Lugar (R-Indiana) and George Voinovich (R(?)-Ohio) announced that they could no longer support the current troop deployment in Iraq; instead, they said, they were going to support withdrawal.
Over the past day or two, three more blind mice joined them: Senators Lamar Alexander (R-Tennessee), Judd Gregg (R-New Hampshire), and Pete Domenici (R-New Mexico). They called for a "clear blueprint" and "new" strategy. (Excuse me, but isn't the troop surge a "clear blueprint" and "new" strategy? And didn't these same senators decide to give that "new" strategy a fair chance when the president announced it? Apparently, they think a few weeks is enough of a chance.)
The reason for the Republican mutiny? The 2008 election. Voinovich is a RINO, so that explains where he's coming from. But Lugar, Domenici, Alexander, and Gregg are all up for re-election next year. So they are reading the polls on Iraq and running for the hills.
The Democrats never do this. When one of their own---or one of their policies---gets into trouble, and they all rally to the defense. Democratic president getting impeached? No problem! It was only about sex and besides, his Republican opponents are crazed Inspector Javerts. Democratic Congressman found with $100,000 in cash in his freezer? No problem! It was just an unorthodox safe.
Republicans never do this. One of their own gets into trouble, and the party splinters and falls apart. They've got too much "class" to cohere around a faltering colleague. Every man for himself! Wounded man overboard---don't throw him a lifeline! Throw bait instead to bring the sharks!
At the exact moment when al Qaeda's number two, Ayman al-Zawahiri, has announced that the jihad in Iraq isn't going so well, these Republican Senators want to pull the rug out from our effort there. At the exact moment when the troop surge is reaching a critical turning point, these Senators want to bolt for the tall grass. At the exact moment when Iraq itself is at a tipping point, these Senators are running.
Oh, they're running all right: for re-election. All four---Lugar, Alexander, Gregg, and Domenici---are pathetically and desperately putting their political careers ahead of success in Iraq. Good luck with your campaigns next year, guys! The left never liked you, and now the right thinks you're a bunch of sniveling sell-outs. It takes real talent to alienate the ENTIRE electorate.
As noted above, Democrats never do this. Would it kill you, GOP, to watch them and perhaps learn?
This is why Democrats should be seen but not heard---and certainly not given the reins of power. Today the United States Senate---supposedly the world's greatest deliberative body---voted "thumbs-up" on their White Flag Bill, which makes funding for troops in Iraq contingent on their withdrawal starting October 1.
After declaring last week that the war in Iraq was "lost," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid stood triumphantly in front of the cameras today and crowed how this vote was essentially a spanking for the president. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi took great joy in reminding us that her chamber had similarly spanked the president last week.
What these Clueless Wonders fail to realize is that the American people aren't the only ones watching and hearing this three-ring political circus. The U.S. troops are listening, too---in between continuing to dodge IEDs and kill the terrorist insurgents and help to stabilize Iraq. Despite all of their overheated, protesting-too-much rhetoric about "supporting the troops," no, they don't actually support the troops. If they did, they wouldn't be pulling the rug out from under them WHILE THEY ARE STILL FIGHTING THE WAR!
There's another group that's also listening to the Democrats: the enemy. If you are a terrorist operating in Iraq, you must be busting a gut, laughing at the weak will and utter stupidity of America's so-called "ruling class." You must also be wondering how the U.S. got to be such a superpower and stayed that way with such moronic opportunists running one of the two major political parties. You must also be rubbing your hands together in delight, as you realize your campaign of targeted violence has worked in whittling away the resolve of the greatest democracy on earth. You must also be thinking, "Wow. That was easy! It only took us four years to defeat America. Who knew they'd cave so fast?"
The president has indicated that he will veto this piece of surrender legislation, and the Democrats know they don't have the votes to override. But the damage has already been done: the troops have been dumped on by the Democrats, and the enemy knows they can inflict enough damage to get us to recoil.
President Bush has not been a perfect president. No president ever is. But at least he has demonstrated real resolve---not the phony "we support the troops" nonsense of the Democrats----but real strength of will to defeat the enemy. He knows that weakness provokes the enemy, encourages them, tempts them to act. And now the enemy knows that the opposition party in this country will hand them victory on a silver platter.
Last
Saturday, December 30, I took to the radio waves to discuss, among
other things, the execution of Saddam Hussein, which had literally just
happened hours before. There was a general sense of relief and
jubiliation in the streets of Baghdad, and although there were two car
bombings reported that day, the violence was much less than had been
anticipated. I reported, as did so many others that day, that Saddam's
execution was good riddance to bad rubbish. We were already talking
about the effect it might have on the healing and reconciliation
process in Iraq.
Fast forward 24 to 48 hours. The American media---indeed, the Western
world's media---got ahold of a cell phone video of Saddam's hanging and
promptly turned a bookend of an event into a new cause celebre.
"Saddam was taunted," they said. "The Shiites mocked him." "They hung
him on Eid." "This has sparked more sectarian wariness and violence."
Actually, no. In the first 24 hours after his hanging, Iraqis were
pretty OK with it. It was us---our media, our pundits, who want so
desperately for the US intervention in Iraq to fail---who decided to
turn the hanging into a PR nightmare for the United States. "WE were
at fault," they argued. "How could this have happened?" "Is THIS
what we've been fighting for?" Once some of our enemies got wind of
our handwringing and bellyaching, they ran with it. And who can blame
them? If we hand them the ammunition, they are going to use it.
Getting lost in all of this strum und drang is the simple fact that
this mass murderer deserved to be mocked, deserved to be taunted, and
deserved to be hanged. It's about time we started seeing our enemies
as they are, not as we wish them to be. And to stop making apologies
for our decision to fight them.
Iraqis are celebrating the news that their once brutal dicator will hang for his crimes against humanity. Saddam Hussein was convicted and sentenced
Sunday to hang for crimes against humanity in the 1982 killings of 148
people in a single Shiite town, as the ousted leader, trembling and
defiant, shouted "God is great!" Saddam wanted to die by firing squad, but unfortunately he won't get his request. He will now suffer the next best thing-- death by hanging. Saddam will have the right to appeal, but that process is exected to only take a few weeks and it's not expected to save his life. Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Maliki hailed the conviction
in a televised address, saying that the sentence was "not a sentence on
one man, but a sentence against all the dark period of his rule".
