Following the shooting of Congresswoman Gaby Giffords, President Obama implored the nation for a return to civility. Liberals will try and make the argument that since the President's call to tone down the rhetoric, both the Left and the Right have been equally guilty of less than civil language, however, the speech from the Left has been far more extreme. Here are just a few examples. At a community summit in her district, Congresswoman Maxine Waters (D-CA) said, "As far as I'm concerned, the Tea Party can go straight to hell." Speaking at a Labor Day address to union members, Vice President Biden, told the AFL/CIO audience, "You are the only folks keeping the barbarians from the gates." So, in VP Biden's mind, anyone who is in favor of "Right to Work" laws is a barbarian. While speaking to a group of Hispanics, the President urged them to "Punish their enemies." He was referring to their "fellow Americans" who want immigration laws enforced. At a Labor Day union event prior to President Obama addressing the crowd, Teamsters President, Jimmy Hoffa said, "President Obama, this is your army, we are ready to march." and referring to Tea Party supporting lawmakers, Hoffa also said, "Let's take these son of a bitches out." Did the President remind Hoffa to tone down the inflammatory rhetoric? Well no. As a matter of fact, when Republicans called for Mr. Obama to denounce Mr. Hoffa's words, the White House released a statement later saying, "The President isn't going to be the language police." Maybe Hoffa merely meant take out as in, "to a nice suburban Detroit steak house like the one where his father was abducted and never seen again." Um, no wait that's no good. Lastly, Congressman Andre Carson (D-IN) said, “Some of them in Congress right now with this tea party movement would love to see you and me — I’m sorry, Tamron — hanging on a tree.” Carson is an African-American.
So where does all this vitriol come from? A keen bit of insight comes from an unlikely source - Guido the Killer Pimp from the movie "Risky Business." In the movie, Guido, a Chicago pimp, (played by Joe Pantoliano) gives aspiring Princeton University student, Joel, (played by a young Tom Cruise) some sage advice: "Let me give you a little advice so you know. In times of economic uncertainty, never ever f**k with another man's livelihood." And there you have it! We are definitely in times of economic uncertainty and by pushing for lower taxes and limited government, the Tea Party is messing with the livelihood of liberal Democrats and their paid for constituents.
Democrats of course would counter that conservatives and Republicans who mainly make up the Tea Party give tax breaks to the "rich" and "big business" so they also have their paid constituency. Here is where the comparison falls apart. In the case of Democrats, they pay-off their voters with government largess which mainly means other people's money - the socialist redistribution of wealth from the so-called rich to those they believe deserve it more - past and future Democrat voters. Republicans, on the other hand, want Americans to keep more of their own money - the money they earned. Understanding the difference is critical to the survival of our nation.
In the end, socialism will fail as it always has because the Democrats, like all the others who have tried it before them, will eventually run out of other people's money. Given our current debt situation, eventually is already here. Conservatives and Republicans must take back the White House and the Senate in 2012 in order to put a stop to the Democrat Party's socialist agenda and force them and their hand-out constituents to find a new livelihood.
Reader's comments are welcomed.
Today, however well intentioned, our President has one- upped George Bush and set a dangerous precedent. By killing American citizen Anwar Al-Awlaki Obama has gone beyond torture.
ReplyDeleteHere I find common cause with Ron Paul and the black helicopter crowd. "Al-Awlaki was born here, he's an American citizen, he was never tried or charged for any crimes," Paul said today. "To start assassinating American citizens without charges - we should think very seriously about this." I agree. What guarantees to Americans anywhere have that they will not be targeted with lethal force by their own government? Indeed, am I the next Georgi Markov? Dick Cheney must be rubbing his hands in glee.
We are living in a very different world that requires a new paradigm. Al-Awlaki and Markov are hardly in the same catagory. Markov was simply a dissident. As far as I know, he never called for the murder of his fellow countrymen wherever they are in the world. Further, he never called for attacks against Bulgaria.
ReplyDeleteWe are in a worldwide war. What are the charges in a war? What were the charges against the approximately 258,000 confederate soldiers killed by their government during the Civil War? Were they not Americans?
The guarantee Americans have that they won't be targeted is that if they don't openly wage war against their country and their fellow Americans, they won't be considered a legitimate target.
The next thing you will be telling me is that calling for attacks on the country and the murder of American citizens, is just exercising one's free speech so there is nothing to charge against them anyway. Come on.
Thankfully I can always count on the far right to reliably deliver one thing - ideologically based emotional overreach. So predictable. Wrap yourselves in the flag and let her rip. So lets deconstruct your impassioned argument with some inconvenient facts:
ReplyDelete++ Political assassinations were banned by President Gerald Ford in 1976, so people on the CIA list are assumed to be military enemies of the U.S. and therefore legitimate targets. The underlying issue with Al-Awlaki's assassination is that there is considerable argument about whether he had become "operational" and was actively plotting or whether he was merely inspiring terrorism. Conservatives rail against "political Islam" being an existential threat. So by conservative doctrine and political rhetoric, Al-Awlaki and his unfortunate partner Samir Khan - editor of the al Qaeda publication Inspire - were actually political targets, so off limits. I didn't write the order, but it seemed good enough for a Republican President to sign into law. Point established.
++ Al-Awlaki and Khan were American citizens - the Justice Dept. case for assassination is highly dubious. It was once possible to lose one's U.S. citizenship by fighting in another country's army against the United States but the Supreme Court has found that unconstitutional under the 14th amendment. Al-Awlaki and Samir Khan were therefore American citizens and should have been entitled to due process. Point established.
++ "We live in a very different world." But is it so different from 1956 when Joe McCarthy was on his witch hunt? "Now, Mr. Murrow, by his own admission, was a member of the IWW (that's the Industrial Workers of the World), a terrorist organization cited as subversive by an attorney general of the United States, who stated that it was an organization which seeks--and I quote--"to alter the government of the United States by unconstitutional means." Now, other government committees have had before them actors, screen writers, motion picture producers, and others, who admitted Communist affiliations but pleaded youth or ignorance. Now, Mr. Murrow can hardly make the same plea." So we should assassinate terrorists like E.R. Murrow just because some government official says that they're a terrorist...ridiculous. I've actually got some sympathy for McCarthy. Soviet Communism was an existential threat.
"President Obama, this is your army, we are ready to march." and referring to Tea Party supporting lawmakers, Hoffa also said, "Let's take these son of a bitches out." Not so different from Al-Alwlaki - send in the armed Predator. But be careful not to take the President out. That would violate a Presidential order...against political assassination...
I’m not sure which part of my initial reply you considered emotional and flag-wrapped but at least you can check these off your liberal talking points. Leave it to a liberal to always defend everyone against the U.S.
ReplyDeleteFirst, I will address your initial “fact.” One could argue over the semantics of “political Islam” and political target but political Islam isn’t a legitimate target but militant Islam is. I also feel compelled to point out your nice touches about the “unfortunate partner” (funny I didn’t realize they were a couple) and your attempt to appear unbiased by citing and agreeing with a Republican President. Nice try. I might also add that the other person believed to have been in the car with them to complete the ménage a trois of Terror was a known al Qaeda bomb-maker. Too bad we missed him!
On your next “fact”, once again a liberal can’t distinguish between a legal issue and a military one. Hopefully you just misspoke when you said, “…the Justice Dept.’s case for assassination is highly dubious.” Clearly, the Justice Dept. has no business making a case for assassination - prosecution yes; assassination no. Further, the SCOTUS decision you refer to was concerning the government’s right to revoke citizenship, not whether a US citizen fighting against his country and being killed by US forces is being denied due process. It is irrelevant in this case. A US passport isn’t a magic shield that protects one from being a target on the new battlefield.
Third “fact”: You have to be kidding. 1956, Joe McCarthy, Edward R. Morrow, the Red Scare? As far as I can recall, Morrow wasn’t suggesting anyone kill another citizen and McCarthy wasn’t plotting to have fellow Americans assassinated for crying out loud. Once again, the liberal proves to be incapable of distinguishing between legal and military actions and the one who overreaches.
Lastly, comparing Hoffa to Al-Alwlaki is a very grand bit of hyperbole to say the least. Conservatives aren’t thrilled about the language used by the union thug, Hoffa, but none of us are calling for him to be killed. We can leave that up to one of his own following a nice evening at a suburban Detroit Steak House.
If you and your fellow travelers are truly so outraged, then man up and call for the impeachment of President Obama. In the meantime, don’t expect the rest of us, who understand the nature of the modern threat, to don our three-sided hats and blue waistcoats, line up three deep and fire volleys at our enemies.