The broadcast network evening news shows on Wednesday night pounced on President Bush's reminder that the U.S. pullout from Vietnam led to millions being killed, as all three shows featured historians to discredit Bush's parallel to what may happen if the U.S. withdraws from Iraq, and NBC portrayed Bush as hypocritical for raising Vietnam after earlier rejecting comparisons to Iraq as a Vietnam-like quagmire. Only ABC, leading into Bush recalling “killing fields,” showed a picture of stacks of skulls and ABC also uniquely featured two Vietnam vets who backed Bush's case.
NBC anchor Brian Williams asserted that “after years of rejecting any comparisons to Vietnam, today President Bush invoked the Vietnam War as a way of saying the U.S. must stay the course and not pull out.” Reporter Kelly O'Donnell noted that “after years of pushback rejecting the Vietnam-Iraq comparison, today in Kansas City, before the Veterans of Foreign Wars, the President made a turn and embraced his own Vietnam analogy.” O'Donnell insisted: “Mr. Bush's comments to the VFW today contrast with what he said last year when asked if he saw an Iraq-Vietnam connection.” Viewers then got just this very short soundbite from Bush at a June 14, 2006 press conference: “I don't see the parallels.” Contrary to NBC's implication, there is no conflict between scorning of a liberal comparison of Iraq to a Vietnam-like quagmire and suggesting other lesson about Vietnam.
The actual exchange at that June of 2006 press conference shows Bush simply rejected the Iraq as a quagmire assessment:
REPORTER: Do you see, as some of your critics do, a parallel between what's going on in Iraq now and Vietnam?THE PRESIDENT: No.
REPORTER: Why?
THE PRESIDENT: Because there's a duly-elected government; 12 million people voted. They said, we want something different from tyranny, we want to live in a free society. And not only did they vote for a government, they voted for a constitution. Obviously, there is sectarian violence, but this is, in many ways, religious in nature, and I don't see the parallels.
O'Donnell proceeded to highlight how “some historians claim his use today of Vietnam was too simple and not accurate” and “Democrat and Vietnam veteran John Kerry calls the President's comparison irresponsible.”
On the CBS Evening News, Bill Plante ran a clip of Bush explaining that “one unmistakable legacy of Vietnam is that the price of America's withdrawal was paid by millions of innocent citizens whose agonies would add to our vocabulary new terms like 'boat people,' 're-education camps,' and 'killing fields.'” But then Plante countered: “Historian Douglas Brinkley says there's no real parallel.”
Over on ABC's World News, Martha Raddatz forwarded how “for years, administration critics have likened the war in Iraq to the quagmire in Vietnam, a comparison President Bush has strongly rejected. But today, speaking before a supportive audience of veterans, Mr. Bush found a comparison to Vietnam he embraced.” As Raddatz described how “the President asserted that it was the American retreat from Southeast Asia that led directly to the carnage and displacement that followed,” viewers saw a zoom out from a picture of a big stack of skulls.
Like NBC and CBS, Raddatz featured an historian who rejected Bush's premise, but unlike the other network reporters Raddatz showcased how “at the Vietnam Memorial in Washington today, veterans offered support to the President.” One vet declared: “I think he's right. If we pull out now, it's going to be Vietnam all over again.” A second maintained: “We should have kept the politicians out of it, let the generals fight the war.”
The White House's text of Bush's August 22 address to the VFW convention in Kansas City.
he MRC's Brad Wilmouth corrected the closed-captioning against the video to provide transcripts of the Wednesday, August 22 evening newscast stories:
NBC Nightly News:
BRIAN WILLIAMS: Two developments today in Iraqi politics today. In this country, a new ad campaign designed to get people to support the war in Iraq was revealed. And after years of rejecting any comparisons to Vietnam, today President Bush invoked the Vietnam War as a way of saying the U.S. must stay the course and not pull out. NBC's Kelly O'Donnell is traveling with the President.
KELLY O'DONNELL: After years of pushback rejecting the Vietnam-Iraq comparison, today in Kansas City, before the Veterans of Foreign Wars, the President made a turn and embraced his own Vietnam analogy.
GEORGE W. BUSH, AT VFW CONCENTION: Here at home, some can argue our withdrawal from Vietnam carried no price for American credibility. But the terrorists see it differently.
O'DONNELL: The President claimed America's modern enemy, al-Qaeda, saw weakness, that if a war became unpopular enough, the U.S. would leave. A parallel campaign launched today involves new TV ads fighting the PR battle.
US SOLDIER IN AD BY FREEDOM'S WATCH: I know what I lost. I also know that if we pull out now, everything I've given in sacrifice will mean nothing.
O'DONNELL: Injured veterans and military families appear in these spots from a group backed by Bush donors, friends and former Press Secretary Ari Fleischer. The spots target 20 congressional districts.
US SOLDIER IN AD: It's no time to quit. It's no time for politics.
O'DONNELL: On the other side, a TV campaign from a group long critical of many Bush policies, targeting Republicans, like Maine Senator Susan Collins.
VOICE IN AD FROM AMERICANS UNITED FOR CHANGE: Tell Susan Collins it's time to take a stand. End the war.
O'DONNELL: Mr. Bush's comments to the VFW today contrast what he said last year when asked if he saw an Iraq-Vietnam connection.
BUSH, June 14, 2006: I don't see the parallels.
O'DONNELL: Some historians claim his use today of Vietnam was too simple and not accurate.
STANLEY KARNOW, Vietnam historian: He's invoking Vietnam for political purposes. What he says about Vietnam is not entirely true.
O'DONNELL: Democrat and Vietnam veteran John Kerry calls the President's comparison irresponsible, while presidential candidate Hillary Clinton reacted, saying the U.S. needs to stop refereeing the war and begin getting out now. Kelly O'Donnell, NBC News, Kansas City.
CBS Evening News, Bill Plante's story joined in progress:
PLANTE: Speaking today to the Veterans of Foreign Wars, Mr. Bush offered a new rationale for staying the course: Don't let Iraq become another Vietnam.
BUSH, AT VFW CONVENTION: One unmistakable legacy of Vietnam is that the price of America's withdrawal was paid by millions of innocent citizens whose agonies would add to our vocabulary new terms like 'boat people,' 're-education camps,' and 'killing fields.'
PLANTE: Historian Douglas Brinkley says there's no real parallel.
DOUGLS BRINKLEY: You're not going to be able to sell the lessons of Vietnam being we should have stayed a decade longer.
PLANTE: But if things don't get better soon in Iraq, members of Congress aren't going to care as much about past history as they are about future elections. Bill Plante, CBS News, the White House.
ABC's World News:
FILL-IN ANCHOR ELIZABETH VARGAS: President Bush launched an aggressive new defense of his Iraq policy today. Facing a showdown with Congress over the war, the President urged perseverance. He told veterans in Kansas City that America's withdrawal from Vietnam was a mistake with tragic consequences, and that leaving Iraq now would be just as disastrous. Our chief Washington correspondent, Martha Raddatz, reports from Washington.
MARTHA RADDATZ: For years, administration critics have likened the war in Iraq to the quagmire in Vietnam, a comparison President Bush has strongly rejected. But today, speaking before a supportive audience of veterans, Mr. Bush found a comparison to Vietnam he embraced.
GEORGE W. BUSH: Then as now, people argued the real problem was America's presence, and that if we would just withdraw, the killing would end.
RADDATZ: The President asserted that it was the American retreat from Southeast Asia that led directly to the carnage and displacement that followed.
BUSH: The price of America's withdrawal was paid by millions of innocent citizens whose agonies would add to our vocabulary new terms like "boat people," "re-education camps" and "killing fields."
RADDATZ: Historians quickly seized on the President's remarks.
Prof. ROBERT DALLEK, Boston University: What is Mr. Bush suggesting? We should have stayed there forever? We should have invaded North Vietnam? It just doesn't make any historical sense to me.
RADDATZ: Reaction from Democrats was swift, as well, with some making their own comparisons.
Senator JOSEPH BIDEN (D-DE) If, in fact, the President does not change policy, we're going to see a repeat of what we saw in Saigon at the end of that war with helicopters lifting people desperately clinging to the ladder of a helicopter to get out of Iraq.
RADDATZ: At the Vietnam Memorial in Washington today, veterans offered support to the President.
UNIDENTIFIED VETERAN #1: I think he's right. If we pull out now, it's going to be Vietnam all over again.
UNIDENTIFIED VETERAN #2: We should have kept the politicians out of it, let the generals fight the war.
RADDATZ: As for the criticism, the administration seems unphased. Elizabeth, the President will give a similar speech next week.
—Brent Baker is Vice President for Research and Publications at the Media Research Center



KELLY O'DONNELL: After years of pushback rejecting the Vietnam-Iraq comparison, today in Kansas City, before the Veterans of Foreign Wars, the President made a turn and embraced his own Vietnam analogy.
MARTHA RADDATZ: For years, administration critics have likened the war in Iraq to the quagmire in Vietnam, a comparison President Bush has strongly rejected. But today, speaking before a supportive audience of veterans, Mr. Bush found a comparison to Vietnam he embraced.
UNIDENTIFIED VETERAN #1: I think he's right. If we pull out now, it's going to be Vietnam all over again.












Editor at Large
Comments Policy
He said it will be like
August 22, 2007 - 22:13 ET by FishFace222He said it will be like Vienam IF WE LEAVE NOW; therefore, it is currently NOT like Vietnam.
The only similarity is the lefties spitting on our troops in both wars-one literally, one figuratively.
leaving millions to die
August 22, 2007 - 23:12 ET by austinhookI understand that the major loss of life in IndoChina after the US withdrew from VietNam was in Cambodia. So if withdrawals are a big problem shouldn't it be relative to when we withdrew from Cambodia? (BTW, I dont remember when that was. Does someone have the relative dates for the two countries?)
Perhaps we should have stayed in Cambodia where the real massive killing fields were, and why then bring VietNam into it where the after withdrawal losses were so much smaller?
I heard that it was the VietNamese who finally overthrew Pol Pot and his butchers? Wouldn't it have been better if the US had done it, and done it sooner?
Smaller then Cambodia
August 22, 2007 - 23:34 ET by well99Yes Pol Pot did kill 20-25 % of the population but the reeducation camps in Vietnam were also deadly.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reeducation_camp
Too many died in both countries.The media really didnt care nor the left wing.As a sociology professor said on my question about Pol Pot and the genocide."It was a political mistake".I never will understand extremist.Thank God.
The US never actually
August 23, 2007 - 19:09 ET by BDThe US never actually occupied Cambodia other than within a couple of Kilometers of the South Vietnamese border, and that location only for a month or so as the North Vietnamese infrastructure was removed by the 11th ACR and 1st Cav.
It was the US withdrawel from South Vietnam in 1973 which allowed the North Vietnamese to set loose the KR that caused the massive casualties.
Regarding the US deposing the KR in order to prevent the killing fields, we no longer had forces in South Vietnam and could no longer use it as a base to move into Cambodia. THErefore our actions were not feasible.
The North only removed their frineds int he KR when they decided to take out an embarrassing situation, and to remove competition.
Regarding small losses in Vietnam, I am sure the remnants of the Montagnard villagers, Nungs, and others would not believe that their losses were small. The NVA has effected them about as badly as the US Indians were treated if not worse (see yellow rain).
Spitting on the troops
August 23, 2007 - 07:50 ET by Six String SpiffYeah... Just wait untill they start coming home. I truely hate the MSM. I wonder why major media outlets are never targeted by terrorism. Could it be the terrorists know the MSM is their friend... for now. "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" Sounds appropriate.
The American Revolution Continued
So if you compare one
August 22, 2007 - 22:19 ET by general companySo if you compare one situation, then suddenly all situation are comparable? Do they really think folks cant see right through this nonsense?
GC, MSN has FAITH in public schooling! Hand ringing faith!!
August 22, 2007 - 23:07 ET by upcountrywaterCorrect, that's what they think, that is what their sales people yammer and that's why they are still in business.
HOWEVER
Good news is the # of viewers is falling, paper size is shrinking.
Entitlement over infrastructure every SINGLE time.
You can always tell
August 22, 2007 - 22:26 ET by 10ksnookerWhere the liberal is invested, and it's never in the truth.
MSM Revisionism
August 22, 2007 - 23:04 ET by pocomocoIt’s obvious that Bush struck a raw nerve with the MSM. They don’t like being reminded of their part during Viet Nam in supporting Ho Chi Min, the anti-war movement, and the bloodbath that followed.
The MSM, after Bush’s speech, are in full revisionist mode as they try to extricate themselves from their responsibilities during the Viet Nam war.
The MSM, like the Democrats, have blood on their hands, and they don’t like being reminded of it.
I don't think the MSM was
August 22, 2007 - 23:06 ET by balboaI don't think the MSM was reminded of anything by Bush's comparison. They obviously seized on the fact that Bush rejected one comparison to Vietnam, but is now using a different one.
he rejected the false
August 22, 2007 - 23:28 ET by TruthMongerhe rejected the false liberal "comparisons"
and today asserted the correct comparison
and oh are they pissed off:)
how dare a republican prez assert the truth once in a while:)!
Iraq is not the quagmire
August 22, 2007 - 23:34 ET by balboaIraq is not the quagmire that Vietnam was. I think somehow a fear of Iraq becoming a Vietnam has turned into it IS another Vietnam.
Our Troops May Never Leave Iraq
August 22, 2007 - 23:40 ET by Free StinkerYou know what?
We still have troops in Germany, Italy, and Japan. We will eventually remove most troops from Iraq but my guess is we will have some ten-twenty thousand troops there for the next 30 years.
Fred Thompson and Ann Coulter walk into a bar. The bar is instantly destroyed because that much awesome cannot be contained in one building.
...we had won in Viet Nam -
August 22, 2007 - 23:48 ET by TruthMonger...we had won in Viet Nam - no quagmire there...the VC was ready to surrender, and then - hmmm, what could have happened to encourage them and give them hope...?!?!?!?
...and Bal's notion of Iraq here is based entirely on MSM/DNC framing...
Saying it doesn't make it so.
August 23, 2007 - 01:14 ET by mattmWhat are the comparisons? Who came up with the term quagmire? Anything could be described as such. If we did what the Democrats want us to (by the way, what do they want us to do?) we'd still be in a so-called quagmire because we'd be at the mercy of the terrorists who have sworn themselves to our destruction.
Obviously comparisons can be made between any two things. You can compare Iraq to Vietnam, but you can also CONTRAST them. And the contrasts are much greater than the comaprisons. The Dems used a comparison to try to make the case for withdrawl (and that it was a mistake to begin with), Bush rejected that comparison - for good reason. Now he's making a comparison to show why pulling out before final victory is won would be a mistake.
History shows Bush's comparison is much more valid than the Democrats' comparisons were. But rather than try to learn from history and maybe even take what Bush is saying to heart so they can work together to beat down the terrorists and stabilize Iraq, they choose to dismiss Bush out of hand and try to make a mockery out of everything he does...and why? Is it because they believe their plan (do they have one?) would bring a greater benefit to mankind, or is it just to get the voters thinking negatively about Bush and his Party so they can gain political power?
The answer is all too obvious.
Just a thought Balboa
August 22, 2007 - 23:55 ET by well99Maybe Bush is comparing the possibility of bloodshed to the Iraqi people if we just pull out.Maybe he doesnt want what happen in Vietnam and Cambodia to happen again.See some people dont want to see the mass slaughter of innocent people.I know the MSM doesnt care about those folks over in Iraq unless they can use it to push thier agenda.I seen on some blogs where left wingers gloat when large numbers of Iraqi are killed in car bombings.Just so that can take a shot at Bush.If you look at all those killed in car bombings and other terrorist attacks do you see some lessening of the people killed by the fanatics?Because we leave?
Yawn, this is all totally
August 22, 2007 - 23:05 ET by Del DolemonteYawn, this is all totally predictable, and proves that there is a left-slanting bias in the mainstream media.
Vietnam Iraq War Comparison is Apples to Oranges...withdrawal
August 22, 2007 - 23:26 ET by Lame CherryThe problem here is Teddy Kennedy etc... in comparing Iraq to Vietnam were comparing the WAR.
Vietnam was conducted a stalemate attrition when US Marines took over for the failed French. Iraq was a liberation completed in several weeks.
Vietnam was then a series of kill zone actions against communist agents backed by Russia and China. Iraq was then a formed skirmish line around Baghdad to lure in Islamocommunist and Islamofascist terrorists from around the world to die there so they would not attack America, Europe or foment revolution in Muslim allied nations.
Vietnam was jungle warfare against thugs. Iraq was desert warfare against thugs.
In those facts, liberals were ignorant in comparing Vietnam ever to Iraq. I stated from the beginning that Iraq was an "Indian War" and it still is akin to the Ohio genocide on whites waged by Indians and the northern plains Indian wars from 1860 to 1890. (Let us never forget for those who might jump on it was the Indian's land, that the Sioux are Canadian Indians who invaded America and were committing genocide on the Pawnee, Ree, Mandan and had driven the Cheyenne out of the Black Hills.)
What is correct though in withdrawal of US forces as Democrats refused to uphold agreements between the South Vietnam Government and the United States resulted in a blood bath, millions of refugees, piracy, rapes, reeducation camps and pure murder by the communist North Vietnamese. The same type of first wave of slaughter would occur in Iraq if Democrats withdrew American forces.
Unlike Vietnam though, the second wave of slaughter would be triggered by WMD's in use either against American cities, European cities, Israeli state cities or Muslims cities. This is backed by Russia to destroy world oil supply thereby allowing them to blackmail Europe into submission and the nuclear polluting of the Middle East would remove America from the entire region forever.
In the key point, President Bush is correct in withdrawal of the United States from Iraq like Vietnam would result in horrendous bloodshed, but Iraq would be far worse.
Fred Thompson as I have advocated in economic policy must start conveying the results of what will happen if America withdraws, because it is not about going back in 10 years to do it again. It will be the only alternative Americans have left their president to respond is nuclear weapons as Americans by Democrat lead have shut off diplomacy, shut off Muslim self rule and shut off conventional war.
This is what is incorrect about Democrats and the few Republicans like Dr. Ron Paul. None of them have equated where this is going like a rocket on a rail. Madame Clinton is aware in her nuking Muslims, but a policy must be formulated as President Bush is attempting yet to keep this from going nuclear.
The terrorists of Iraq have now spread back home to their host nations and will start operations there to topple pro west regimes and they are already enroute to Europe and the United States to cripple our economic structure.
Unlike Vietnam though Iraq has an expansive China bribing US Democrats, sitting in Panama and shipping terrorists around the world along with their munitions. Russia too is providing intelligence to terrorist operations. This is not going to be Angola nor Grenada, but the wave will plunge into the United States.
I know the President and especially Mr. Cheney is apraised of the entire scenarios.....and one reason they are not so concerned about the Mexican illegals is the first time nuclear bombs go off in America the Mexicans are all going to go back to Mexico in mass. This American nation though is not prepared and this nation requires more aggressive policies. I have noted them before:
1. Restore the 7 year food reserve along with essential supplies.
2. Restore the state militias organized on township levels coordinated by govenors offices.
3. Take all those wasted billions on "global warming" scams and use them as tax credits and grants to move Americans to build fallout shelters and stock them, so they will not be looking to the government and the government then can be free to fight a war and not internal strife.
Those are 3 measures which the next GOP leader must make part of the platform to lead America.
Vietnam was a cake walk for what is coming from the foolishness of liberal puppets led by cartel bankers out of what has become Iraq policy is going to shake America to its core.
God bless the good and may He keep them in His care. In His Name Amen.
*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS
the libs tried to make Iraq
August 22, 2007 - 23:30 ET by TruthMongerthe libs tried to make Iraq into Vietnam - they have only themselves to blame for bringing this up in the first place...
opening the door into their own faces? is that how rush puts it:)?
I agree that these two wars
August 22, 2007 - 23:42 ET by superconI agree that these two wars have lots of similarities.
1.Jane Fonda and John Kerry are against it.
2.The press is trying to portray American soldiers as disillusioned psychotic baby killers.
3.The hippies are against it.
4. The left can't wait to retreat.
5.We hear nightly body counts.
6.If we leave now thousands and thousands will die but it will be called peace.
7.A Democratic led Congress is willing to sell out the American military.
8. Dan Rather thought he could take down another President.
9.Conspiracy theorists are calling it war for profit.
10.We are winning and yet the left still wants to lose.
Victory in Iraq.
Newt for President.
Can you say Recruiting Tool, neighbor?
August 22, 2007 - 23:56 ET by HeikiLibs like to point to the presence of American forces in Iraq as a recruiting tool for terrorists. Be that as it may (and we kill about 1,500 of the new "recruits" a month, in Iraq instead of in the USA), pulling out precipitously would allow the terrorists point to our "defeat" and their "victory", providing them with the best possible recruiting tool they could ask for. Iraq's not like Vietnam: this time around, we have a CIC who wants to win, and isn't shy about saying so. Pray that it's still the case after the '08 election.
It is not nice for
August 23, 2007 - 00:52 ET by nofateIt is not nice for conservatives to point out to liberals, the truth! As one poster pointed out, militarily we were winning. We blew them away during Tet. Guess who gave them back the momentum? Walter Cronkite and the U.S. Congress. Journalists and politicians playing military strategist. So, to ice the cake after forcing our pullout in '73, congress passed a law preventing any funding at all of the forces of South Viet Nam, who had been doing pretty well as long as they had us supplying them (note that China & Russia were supplying the NVA). This was after years of "Viet-Namization" following Tet, the goal of which was to help the South Viet Namese stand on their own feet and fight their own battles. So what did we do? Pull the rug out from under them! No supplies or any other help other than what a few honor bound men were able to scrabble together. The current similarity to Viet Nam is the radical, near insane left, the MSM and their blatant help to the enemy, and the Dumbocratic politicians who cannot tell the difference between George Bush and the face of evil, nor where their true loyalties should lie. The similarity is that after forcing defeat followed by the death of millions that they refuse to take the blame for (as in the ultimate self congratulatory movie "The Killing Fields", that pretends to honor Dith Pran, but is really a pean to the New York Times and its "heroic"- gag- reporters). The similarity is that they are hard at work again trying to force defeat. I heard Joe Lieberman talking to Sean Hannity today; Sean says something about the great differences in their outlook on things, but NOT on THE defining issue of this generation, and Lieberman's reply was, "Amen, brother".
An article in American Thinker lays it out better than I can, Testing Congress: Faith and Face by Michael J. O'Shea. Here is a brief excerpt:
You should read this. He is just getting warmed up!
"The future is not set. There is no fate but what we make for ourselves."
You have to scratch your
August 23, 2007 - 04:22 ET by USA4freedomYou have to scratch your head some times. We did not have
boots on the ground when the MSM was saying this is like Viet Nam..
Then when Bush said this is like Viet Nam in this way.. the
MSM says..OH, NO.. its not like Viet Nam at all?!?!?!?!
These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc.
Ronald Reagan- 40th Anniversary of D-Day
You cant use the term Viet
August 23, 2007 - 04:24 ET by USA4freedomYou cant use the term Viet Nam, that’s our term!!
These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc.
Ronald Reagan- 40th Anniversary of D-Day
"War is an ugly thing but
August 23, 2007 - 10:32 ET by JohnM"War is an ugly thing but not the ugliest of things; the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feelings which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."
-John Stuart Mill
Awesome quote
August 23, 2007 - 10:37 ET by Sergeant ROCKAnd so true.
From Newsmax: Levin, who
August 23, 2007 - 11:13 ET by pbanks7From Newsmax: Levin, who recently returned from Iraq, urged the Iraqi Parliament to oust al-Maliki and replace his government with one that is less sectarian and more unifying.
I'd like to oust him and replace him with someone that is less sectarian and more unifying.
Ignorance is bliss. It's easier to repeat a mindless slogan than to do some actual research.
You nailed it. I was
August 23, 2007 - 08:34 ET by Free ThinkerYou nailed it. I was surprised to see this caused such a big deal because it is obvious what he is talking about. The President is talking abpout the consequences of surrender and allowing murderous regimes to take over Iraq. The msm has taken his comments and spun them to fit their own Vietnam template which is far different then what the President is talking about. I know it is the template and it is contrived to control the news, but I would love to hear the administration take it to these talking heads and point out how ignorant they sound by twisting the President's words. What a great opportunity to expose the bias in a context that everyone can easily understand.
You nailed it. Liberals
August 23, 2007 - 11:16 ET by pbanks7You nailed it. Liberals never examine the consequences. Their intentions are what matter. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Ignorance is bliss. It's easier to repeat a mindless slogan than to do some actual research.
Collective Insanity is the rule of the day on the MSM
August 23, 2007 - 09:02 ET by LCT688The theater of the absurd that has always been the American political landscape has at last set off on the stygian ferry, the handbasket to hell. Have we become so clinically insane that concerns for “political correctness” and a self-imposed fear of offending our enemies has transformed our beloved Constitution into a suicide pact?
Tell me please just where I am wrong here. Our enemies openly march in our streets declaring their hatred for us, and our way of life, carrying signs advocating murder for all those who would insult their religion. But we must not complain about the enemy in our midst, that would be “profiling” based on religion or race, might infringe on their “free speech” rights or worse yet offend their religious sensibilities. Hardly a week goes by without another attack against us by a Muslim individual openly declaring that they are doing Allah’s work while they maim and kill with wild abandon. The reaction of the FBI in every case seems to be taken from the Wizard of Oz, “don’t look at the Imam behind the curtain, there’s no terrorism here, just the violent acts of deranged individuals”. We are asked to believe that none of this has anything to do with these Imams preaching sermons of hatred on a daily basis. In Iraq the fledgling government security forces are infiltrated with Jihadists who use the cover of their new uniform to sow havoc and death. So of course the Administration is now advocating we allow 7000 so called refugees from Iraq to come here! Yes sir we know exactly who each and every one of these people are and exactly what their motivations are! Are the inmates are in charge of the asylum? It’s not bad enough that the back door of our southern border is a leaking sieve, where we now prosecute our Border Agents and local law enforcement officials for doing their jobs, not because they have committed a crime but because the Mexican government has complained that it’s citizens are being injured while they’re committing a crime! Let’s open the front door then and let the murderers come in that way. We’ll even give them papers saying it’s ok for them to be here! Drunk with power, drooling buffoons called Congressman act as if simply walking away from our enemies will make everything ok. Foolishly presuming that we are dealing with rational individuals rather than bloodthirsty, religiously fanatical murderers. All of them, Republicans and Democrats alike, blissfully argue about the arrangement of the deck chairs, as the ship of state bears down on the iceberg hidden in the fog of war that many of them don’t even want to acknowledge exists. The animated rotten cadaver of Neville Chamberlain waves to us as we approach the opposite shore of the river Styx, while the twin siren songs of “Peace in our Time” and “War is not the answer” muffle the cries of those long dead, pleading to us to come to our senses before its too late.
Just when will those cries be heard, and our elected official put their petty squabbles behind them and start acting like the defenders of the Constitution and the Republic that they have sworn to be? Will it be before some unspeakable violent and evil act consumes thousands more, and they might be subject to question, scrutiny or even ridicule for that decision, or will it be after when we will all most assuredly be subject to histories condemnation for our failure to act in time?
This was
August 23, 2007 - 09:12 ET by Roseasily the best speech I have ever heard from GWB. I wish I could have gone.
Here it is in 2 parts, audio only -
http://kmbz-am.fimc....
Gnat brained "journalists" and legislators
August 23, 2007 - 09:24 ET by ThalpyWhy do we pay any attention to these undereducated, self serving people? Day after day they assult the viewers with their mindless nonsense. Although they are mistaken much of the time, they continue with their revisionist analysis. Our society and our people pay a dear price for this shoddy thing called the news; we pay with the erosion of our cultural values and belief. Some of them understand full well the consequences of their barrage, for that has been their intent. The rest continue with their routine, believing that they matter.
Here's another view of the
August 23, 2007 - 10:40 ET by sarcasmoHere's another view of the President's speech.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
And?
August 23, 2007 - 10:43 ET by Sergeant ROCKGiven the views of the candidates who have a realistic shot at the presidency, it’s tough to see how any president would get us out entirely much sooner.
And
August 23, 2007 - 10:56 ET by sarcasmoI think it makes sense.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
Sense?
August 23, 2007 - 11:02 ET by Sergeant ROCKSo, it makes sense to bash Bush for pointing out the need to stay in Iraq, even though all of the other candidates agree that we will most likely need to stay? Okay then..
Vietnam was lost by "our
August 23, 2007 - 20:23 ET by garvinVietnam was lost by "our Congress". Many peoples suffered and died because of "Our Congresses" desire to end funding and pull out. "Our Congress" reniged on our providing support after the pullout. A Quagmire: The Liberal definition is we anything that takes away from thier Pet Social Progams to support our fellow man. The only way the War in Iraq will be like Vietnam is if we pullout and let Iranian Facist over run the country, It will be the killing field redux.