- WARNING TIGHT-ASSED LIBS: IF YOU CAN'T TAKE A JOKE, DON'T READ THIS BLOG!
- JOHN F. KERRY'S COMMENTS REFLECT WHAT THE DEMOCRATS TRULY THINK ABOUT OUR TROOPS
- WE ARE "pro-America" "pro-Wal-Mart" & "pro-Israel" BLOGGERS
- HOW MANY DAYS UNTIL THE LIBERAL MEDIA REPORTS ON LIBERAL SENATOR "DINGY" HARRY REID AND HIS LAND SCANDAL AND ILLEGAL USE OF CAMPAIGN FUNDS?
Tuesday, November 15, 2005
UH Daily Cougar Columnist David Salinas 'Believes in GOP Shake-Up' (Doesn't see that libs are exposing who they really are -- America haters)
Salinas must have been watching Poker Superstars II last night, because he is hoping that we don't call his bluff of making President Bush look bad at by fighting back against those liberals who support al-Qaeda with their baseless criticisms. Which, by the way have been sopped up by liberal followers as if they were on bended knee if front of Der Slick Meister himself.
If this were the Clinton, Gore or Kerry Administration Salinas would either be dreadfully silent on the issue of his President taking a stand against his critics on wartime issues. But no, we have President Bush in the White House, a mean evil Republican that Salinas would rather spit on than give bended knee service too as he would with Clinton.
As usual with a David Salinas column don't forget to get out your permanent marker and write "lie" in big fat letters at a forty-five degree angle across the page.
In his tripe today "As right divides, left must unite," Salinas has more hope in a tattered political party that believes more in its right to abort its own future base, than he does in our country's future via maintaining a structured world order. With the liberals -- its always about abortion, which is big money by the way, and I wouldn't be surprised if liberals high in office are properly invested in that enterprise.
Today Salinas, who will leave the fighting overseas up to patriotic American's, does his anti-war best to take the President to task on his Veteran' Day speech in which the President spoke harshly of those al-Qaeda supporters who use their words as swords against the United States in the War on Terror -- the liberals in the Senate, House, and all liberals in between.
I saw the President's speech as a great comeback of sorts to stops the liberals constant barrage of negative items purposefully placed to change Americans minds from steadfast support of our troops to an attitude of wanting to spit on them. David saw the speech as "exploiting soldiers for political gain and questioning the patriotism of those critical of his policies." Which is a crock.
Salinas, who spent his Veterans Day plotting with the ACLU on betters ways to further the downfall of traditional American society, still harps on pre-war intelligence that brought the US into the war. Intelligence that in October 2002 many a Democrat, Republican, and multiple countries also believed with their hearts.
Salinas saw the President's speech as a "way to defend himself," but he maintains that the President was cornered. Nonsense. What the President said, "these baseless attacks send the wrong signal to our troops and to an enemy that is questioning America's will" is correct. Unlike Vietnam, we were really attacked on September 11th after years of complacency given us by the Clinton Administration, and wimpy responses to legitimate acts of terror on the US.
Salinas takes any on every angle to make President Bush look bad. He takes words out of contexts and even makes up lies. The liberals did not pick up any seats in the recent elections in Virginia and New Jersery. The status quo of those governorships was maintained, and those are mostly liberal states anyway. The candidate in the end is responsible for getting himself elected in the first place, but he would have you think it was a devastating loss for the GOP.
Salinas again tries to fool UH weak minded students by taking Arizona Congressman J.D. Hayworth's words and making them magically appear as Hayworth not wanting Bush to campaign with him in Arizona. The actual comment had to do with the border issue than it did with the President, but Salinas conviently forgets that his beloved President Clinton was avoided by his own party members, and many democrats switched to the Republican Party while under the limp wrist of President Clinton.
Salinas reliance on polls is his downfall. Unlike the Clinton Administration whose leadership depended on polls, President Bush looks at polls as worthless. The wording, if politically motivated, can make the worst people in the world look good, and vice versa. Hence, President Clinton got excellent poll numbers even after being impeached, and now President Bush couldn't buy a percentage point in the polls. Its all in how the questions are worded, which is why the polls are so wide ranging, and essentially useless.
Salinas sees a desperate White House that "deliberately misled the country into war" and uses a poll to prop that up. If polls were taken when most people were actually at home (Sunday evening), instead of just seniors and uninformed citizens on a midday afternoon we would get drastically different poll numbers.
Salinas wants the liberals to pare down their messages to just one idea. We have the gays, Negros and Hispanics, environmentalists wackos, abortion lovers, and its just to confusing. David is right, the liberals have no "message or alternative ideas" and for that the liberals are faulted.
For Christs sake, the Negros and Hispanics in Texas just voted overwhelming against the gays in their gay marriage battle. The Will Rogers analogy sums up the democrat party, "I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat." And with the notorious infighting that goes on in the democratic party, the chances of them coming together on just on issue to combat Republicans is doubtful.
Salinas' suggestion that the democrats unite single issue will undermine the party. Their are too single issue people in that party, too many strong heads, too many liberals that believe the Presidency is their birthright such as Hillary Clinton, or John Kerry. Thankfully Salinas see Hillary for the fraud she is, and she will go the way of the previous non-New York born Senator.
Salinas realizes that soon liberals will soon have to turn their attention to a different Republican standardbearer, but he does not realize that that should have already happened. All the attention being thrust upon President Bush and Hillary Clinton is in addition taking attention away from the true 2008 liberal nominee who will not remind anyone of the Clintons.
David's crying over democrat-on-democrat verbal squabbling over Iraq is hard to take. He obviously wants all liberals to go against the war, which will properly define the liberals, but they still have to get elected, and if another 9/11 happens liberals will sure to be the cause of the event just from the complacency factor alone. But that doesn't matter to wimpy Salinas, because he believes that if America is not fighting we will not be attacked. Tough luck, it ain't going to happen.
Talk of timetables and removal of troops from Iraq will embolden our enemies. A set timetable on the future of withdrawal from Iraq only invites more trouble in the future, which to liberals is to far -- they are impatient people and want results now. I know -- my father's a liberal. Timetables only work as al-Qaeda vacation schedules. They know how long to take off, so when the Americans leave, they can go right about their terror.
If Iraq is the issue that the libs unify under, if this is the issue that the "majority of them can get behind" to unite behind, then the Republicans will continue to maintain their majority with even more seats in the Senate and House in 2006.
Salinas can gloat over the polls, or of liberals hogging the Sunday shows. He can gloat over low Bush poll numbers, and the liberal domination of the press. But he can gloat over the liberals having a plan. He can't gloat over a liberal Contract With America, because it will most definitely be a lie.
Salinas hope for power and how for the liberals aim "to gain it back, along with the Senate and eventually the presidency, they need to take advantage of this current Republican freefall by doing what Bill Clinton never did: offering a foresighted agenda that can be sustained over time by more than one leader." Impossible.
Their is not going to be a "liberal revolution" because the liberals will never be able to agree on ten points much less one. And even if they do come up with a contract it will be shot so full of holes it'll sink in the first month.
See the liberals depend on the charisma of its Clintons, while the Conservatives simple depend on their Conservative philosophy. See people die, philosophies don't. We saw that when the folk of Germany invested all their emotions in Hitler, and when he died they had nothing.
Screw the libs!
Those packages that shift to the left are the ones that will get knocked off the pallet.
Links to this post: