Jimmy Carter Redux

If you crossed Jimmy Carter with Ross Perot you would get this dufus. Talk about clueless.

He talks a good talk. I love watching him rip into the others. He’s right about how corrupt some of the others are, but his understanding of the way the world works is why lefties never win in the US. He calls the efforts and lives lost in Iraq and Vietnam a complete waste. But really, the only waste comes from mismanagement of our troops and resources in those wars, which is undeniable. It will be a waste if we pull out before we finish the job.

For this guy to be proud to sell out the Vietnamese is disgraceful. Millions of people died or were imprisoned and tortured by the communists in South East Asia when we pulled out of the region. Millions were displaced. Many came here or Canada and Europe. The same thing will happen if we pull out of Iraq too soon. But did the Democrats learn anything from Vietnam? Of course not. They are just trying to end the war to score political points. By making Iraq a failure they damage the credibility of Republicans. This is why they, and their enablers in the press, have tried to discredit the war from day one. Only 4 years earlier they were calling Saddam a threat that must be dealt with and warning us of his WMDs. Now they act like they never said those things and Bush is a liar. Every so called lie Bush has told was uttered by the Democrats first.

This guy doesn’t have a chance, but I would love to see him become a spoiler like Perot for the Dems. He’s entertaining.

UPDATE: Examples of Dems talking like Bush

The problem is that there were no WMDs that could be found and every indication that I’ve seen was that any proof of them shown to Congress was a stretch of speculation at best, presented as known fact.

Rumsfeld said before hand that they were around Baghdad, but after no WMDs could be found, he changed his tune and denied ever saying any such thing.

Another White House figure said that the war would cost us $1B to $2B, now, it’s past $500B.

The White House said that there were enough troops, when that wasn’t the case.

We were told that we would be greeted by liberators, but it turns out, they either had no clue or were lying.

They said that pre-war Iraq was a breeding ground and training area for for Al Queda, when that was not found to be the case, and now we can’t leave because it will become a breeding ground and training aree.

They denied that it is now a civil war when it fits the conditions of practically every objective definition in use.

Where does it stop?  The White House doublespeak is getting to be Orwellian.  Escalation or not, if the administration is unwilling to put pressure on the Iraqi government to shape up, then the US would never be able to leave.  We may as well cut our losses now.

Posted by  on  04/29  at  06:04 PM

There’sa big difference between lying and being wrong. The way he Bus haters throw around the L word is laughable considering how much lies come from teh left. They also made a lot of claims that weren’t true. As for some of your points:

The first bunch are, IMO< bad decisions by Rumsfeld.


“We were told that we would be greeted by liberators, but it turns out, they either had no clue or were lying.”

No, we were greeted that wy by many Iraqis and still are. The media chooses not to pay attention to that. But there are other factions who want to take control of Iraq and are doing the violence to try to force us out. This wasn’t a lie on the administrations part, but the press and liars on the left try to confuse the issue, on purpose. For political gain.

“They said that pre-war Iraq was a breeding ground and training area for for Al Queda, when that was not found to be the case, and now we can’t leave because it will become a breeding ground and training are.”

We found terrorist training camps in Iraq, including a jumbo jet used for training purposes. Documents discovered in various government buildings show there was some connection. The extent has been obscured.

“They denied that it is now a civil war when it fits the conditions of practically every objective definition in use.”

Well, I don’t know about that. In some parts if Iraq you have sectarian violence.  In other parts, not so much. The Kurdish area, for example, has had freedom since the gulf war. It is the most stable reason. In time, the rest of the country could be that way. But once Saddam fell that left a power vacuum that several players want to fill. We need to prevent the wrong people from winning. If we pull out, it will basically hand over control to Iran or some other monsters.

All of this is stuff the administration could explain better. I think the big problem is they do a poor job of it. The media is no big help, either. And unscrupulous politicians try to take advantage of this to win elections.

Posted by James Hudnall  on  04/29  at  07:08 PM

Looky here what Charles (and other Lizardoids) found about Mike Gravel: he uses neo-Nazi sites to back up his contentions!
Reminds me of Lyndon LaRouche from 20 years ago.

Posted by Macker  on  04/30  at  03:32 AM
Page 1 of 1 pages

<< Back to main