Pro-terrorist lobby
In my last post I used the phrase "pro-terrorist lobby" and I was called on it by a commentor. The commentor innocently missed my extreme, over-the-top sarcasm in using the phrase. I invite everyone to go back and read my letter to the editor from the last post and the exchange I had with Conscience in the comments section of the same to get caught up.
What is truly hysterical about this whole topic is that subsequent to the last post BUT PRIOR TO the exchange with Consciene, I submitted another letter to the editor that used the phrase "pro-terrorist lobby" four times!
I reproduce that letter for you here:
Editor,
It was no surprise to me that selectively chosen pieces of a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) were leaked to the pro-terrorist lobby for the sole purpose of harming the leader of the global war against terrorists, President George W. Bush (Report sees war fueling jihadists, September 27, A1).
And as it is true that Iraq is a breeding ground for terrorists, it is equally true that there is a substantial pro-terrorist lobby that's "fueled" daily right here in the United States. No doubt that if you print this letter, it may be next to a pro-terrorist letter! (Blogger's Note: Two letters were published in the Boston Globe on September 29; of course, both were critical of the President.)
Of course, I'm no more justified in taking President Clinton's now famous "I failed (to protect the American people from Osama bin Laden)" quote from the Chris Wallace interview out of context as anyone in the pro-terrorist lobby is in using the selectively leaked NIE data.
But then, wouldn't I be justified if the pro-terrorist lobby doesn't relent? (End of letter.)
Now, do I honestly believe the "pro-terrorist lobby" that I speak of actually proactively support terrorists? Of course, not. Do I think there are Americans sympathetic to the terrorist's causes. Of course, I do. There are 300 million Americans; there are definitely some that hate our Country and support the terrorists; the contrary cannot be reasonably argued. However, the folks I'm targeting in my letters and commentary are not the same Americans sympathetic to the terrorist's causes and I definitely think the latter group is extremely small and, of course, fantastically radical.
But, let's talk about the former group, the "pro-terrorist lobby" as I will indefinitely refer to them.
This group takes it as an article of faith that President George W. Bush "lied" about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. We've been over this several times in this space, but it is necessary to cover it again. In order for President Bush to have lied, he would have to have known Saddam Hussein DIDN'T have WMD. Of course, he didn't know this. That it is logically impossible to argue Bush lied, it does not stop the "pro-terrorist lobby".
This group takes it as an article of faith that President George W. Bush said "mission accomplished". LexisNexis and Google til your hearts content but you will never find the President saying this. This does not stop the "pro-terrorist lobby".
This group takes it as an article of faith that "cowboy", President George W. Bush is stupid and Sens. John F. Kerry and Hillary Clinton and former Sen. John Edwards are brilliant. They also take it as an article of faith that President Bush "misled" all three into voting to authorize the war in Iraq. It defies all logic that all three articles of faith are true. If you are smart and I'm an idiot but I convince you to buy my $1,000 car for $2,000, then at least one of three things is true: you really aren't smart; I'm really not an idiot; or I didn't convince you. As I'm not a member of the "pro-terrorist lobby" I really don't care which statement they relent on but they must stop telling me how brilliant Sens. Kerry, Clinton and Edwards are or stop telling me how stupid President Bush is or stop telling me how an idiot misled three geniuses. You want to turn the face of a member of the "pro-terrorist lobby" deep purple? Tell such a person that you agree with President Bush and Sens. Kerry and Clinton on the war in Iraq.
This group takes it as an article of faith that President Bush is manipulating the gasoline market (note the drastically falling gasoline prices) in advance of the November elections. Recall, he's an idiot and there is no smoking gun to prove this conspiracy. But, this doesn't stop the "pro-terrorist lobby."
This group take it as an article of faith that President Bush is manipulating the stock market to be at all time highs in advance of the November elections. Again, he's an idiot so how is he doing this exactly?
This group takes it as an article of faith that President Bush is manipulating the unemployment data to be near historic lows in advance of the November elections. Again, strong accusations against an idiot.
This group takes it as an article of faith that President Bush played a part in the downing of the Twin Towers; I saw a retired professor from the University of Wisconsin on television two nights ago making the argument so don't sit there reading this and deny it. Boy, this idiot sure can do extraordinary things while leaving no evidence. But, this doesn't even slow down the "pro-terrorist lobby".
This group takes it as an article of faith that President Bush is a racist. I know, he's done more for African-Americans than probably any President except Abraham Lincoln and it is completely lost. For those wondering what he's done, I point to the highest home-ownership rates among African-Americans in the history of the Country. I point to a Dow at 11,600. Yes, African-Americans own stock, too! I point to support for faith-based initiatives and other "values" issues (yes, that's code for "marriage" means a man and a woman). African-Americans go to church in huge numbers and I think they like a President that does the same. I could point to Dr. Condi Rice, Gen. Colin Powell, Alponso Jackson, and Rod Paige but these pale so miserably next to Dr. Joycelyn Elders. None of this dissuades the "pro-terrorist lobby".
This group takes it as an article of faith that the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001, that was also just extended, infringes on the American public, that it violates civil rights. The vote to pass in the Senate was 98 - 1. Only Sen. Russ Feingold voted against it. You want to see a purple head explode? Tell the same person that you told up above about your opinion on Iraq that you agree with President Bush and Sens. Kerry and Clinton on the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001.
This group takes it as an article of faith that President Bush is a divider not a uniter. Well, in the past I have listed significant pieces of legislation that the White House supported that received incredible support in the U.S. Senate and U.S. House (see the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001 above as just one example). Just yesterday, the Senate, with 12 cross-over votes from the Democrats, passed legislation to authorize military tribunals and specific interrogation methods for terrorists. The same day, the Senate voted 100 - 0 for $70 billion in additional funding for the war in Iraq. Not even a speed bump to the "pro-terrorist lobby".
This group takes it as an article of faith that President Bush is a mysogynist. Well, given how it seems every bloody advisor, those closest to him, are women, this article is just ridiculous. And, of course, I mean, Laura Bush, Dr. Condi Rice and Karen Hughes. Throw in Frances Townsend, Margaret Spellings, Mary Matalin, and Dr. Chao and I wonder if this President isn't close with any men. Donna Shalala(cane) was such a tower of femanism in the Clinton Administration. Where are the middle-aged white guys in this Administration? All ignored by the "pro-terrorist lobby".
Finally, the pro-terrorist lobby takes it as an article of faith that the President supports torture. That is precisely how all of this got started. The Boston Globe printed 5 letters critical of the President and none supporting him with regard to questioning terrorists. One letter writer was allowed to use the phrase "pro-torture lobby".
I will use the phrase "pro-terrorist lobby" exactly like I use the phrase "liberal extremists". I will try to make my point that the center is not going to be just to the right of Howard Dean. As the Left labels us with impunity I will attempt to provide even this small consequence. I encourage anybody that has a conversation with a Leftist whose friendship you don't care for to work "pro-terrorist lobby" into your next conversation. You will never sleep so well.
In my last post I used the phrase "pro-terrorist lobby" and I was called on it by a commentor. The commentor innocently missed my extreme, over-the-top sarcasm in using the phrase. I invite everyone to go back and read my letter to the editor from the last post and the exchange I had with Conscience in the comments section of the same to get caught up.
What is truly hysterical about this whole topic is that subsequent to the last post BUT PRIOR TO the exchange with Consciene, I submitted another letter to the editor that used the phrase "pro-terrorist lobby" four times!
I reproduce that letter for you here:
Editor,
It was no surprise to me that selectively chosen pieces of a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) were leaked to the pro-terrorist lobby for the sole purpose of harming the leader of the global war against terrorists, President George W. Bush (Report sees war fueling jihadists, September 27, A1).
And as it is true that Iraq is a breeding ground for terrorists, it is equally true that there is a substantial pro-terrorist lobby that's "fueled" daily right here in the United States. No doubt that if you print this letter, it may be next to a pro-terrorist letter! (Blogger's Note: Two letters were published in the Boston Globe on September 29; of course, both were critical of the President.)
Of course, I'm no more justified in taking President Clinton's now famous "I failed (to protect the American people from Osama bin Laden)" quote from the Chris Wallace interview out of context as anyone in the pro-terrorist lobby is in using the selectively leaked NIE data.
But then, wouldn't I be justified if the pro-terrorist lobby doesn't relent? (End of letter.)
Now, do I honestly believe the "pro-terrorist lobby" that I speak of actually proactively support terrorists? Of course, not. Do I think there are Americans sympathetic to the terrorist's causes. Of course, I do. There are 300 million Americans; there are definitely some that hate our Country and support the terrorists; the contrary cannot be reasonably argued. However, the folks I'm targeting in my letters and commentary are not the same Americans sympathetic to the terrorist's causes and I definitely think the latter group is extremely small and, of course, fantastically radical.
But, let's talk about the former group, the "pro-terrorist lobby" as I will indefinitely refer to them.
This group takes it as an article of faith that President George W. Bush "lied" about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. We've been over this several times in this space, but it is necessary to cover it again. In order for President Bush to have lied, he would have to have known Saddam Hussein DIDN'T have WMD. Of course, he didn't know this. That it is logically impossible to argue Bush lied, it does not stop the "pro-terrorist lobby".
This group takes it as an article of faith that President George W. Bush said "mission accomplished". LexisNexis and Google til your hearts content but you will never find the President saying this. This does not stop the "pro-terrorist lobby".
This group takes it as an article of faith that "cowboy", President George W. Bush is stupid and Sens. John F. Kerry and Hillary Clinton and former Sen. John Edwards are brilliant. They also take it as an article of faith that President Bush "misled" all three into voting to authorize the war in Iraq. It defies all logic that all three articles of faith are true. If you are smart and I'm an idiot but I convince you to buy my $1,000 car for $2,000, then at least one of three things is true: you really aren't smart; I'm really not an idiot; or I didn't convince you. As I'm not a member of the "pro-terrorist lobby" I really don't care which statement they relent on but they must stop telling me how brilliant Sens. Kerry, Clinton and Edwards are or stop telling me how stupid President Bush is or stop telling me how an idiot misled three geniuses. You want to turn the face of a member of the "pro-terrorist lobby" deep purple? Tell such a person that you agree with President Bush and Sens. Kerry and Clinton on the war in Iraq.
This group takes it as an article of faith that President Bush is manipulating the gasoline market (note the drastically falling gasoline prices) in advance of the November elections. Recall, he's an idiot and there is no smoking gun to prove this conspiracy. But, this doesn't stop the "pro-terrorist lobby."
This group take it as an article of faith that President Bush is manipulating the stock market to be at all time highs in advance of the November elections. Again, he's an idiot so how is he doing this exactly?
This group takes it as an article of faith that President Bush is manipulating the unemployment data to be near historic lows in advance of the November elections. Again, strong accusations against an idiot.
This group takes it as an article of faith that President Bush played a part in the downing of the Twin Towers; I saw a retired professor from the University of Wisconsin on television two nights ago making the argument so don't sit there reading this and deny it. Boy, this idiot sure can do extraordinary things while leaving no evidence. But, this doesn't even slow down the "pro-terrorist lobby".
This group takes it as an article of faith that President Bush is a racist. I know, he's done more for African-Americans than probably any President except Abraham Lincoln and it is completely lost. For those wondering what he's done, I point to the highest home-ownership rates among African-Americans in the history of the Country. I point to a Dow at 11,600. Yes, African-Americans own stock, too! I point to support for faith-based initiatives and other "values" issues (yes, that's code for "marriage" means a man and a woman). African-Americans go to church in huge numbers and I think they like a President that does the same. I could point to Dr. Condi Rice, Gen. Colin Powell, Alponso Jackson, and Rod Paige but these pale so miserably next to Dr. Joycelyn Elders. None of this dissuades the "pro-terrorist lobby".
This group takes it as an article of faith that the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001, that was also just extended, infringes on the American public, that it violates civil rights. The vote to pass in the Senate was 98 - 1. Only Sen. Russ Feingold voted against it. You want to see a purple head explode? Tell the same person that you told up above about your opinion on Iraq that you agree with President Bush and Sens. Kerry and Clinton on the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001.
This group takes it as an article of faith that President Bush is a divider not a uniter. Well, in the past I have listed significant pieces of legislation that the White House supported that received incredible support in the U.S. Senate and U.S. House (see the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001 above as just one example). Just yesterday, the Senate, with 12 cross-over votes from the Democrats, passed legislation to authorize military tribunals and specific interrogation methods for terrorists. The same day, the Senate voted 100 - 0 for $70 billion in additional funding for the war in Iraq. Not even a speed bump to the "pro-terrorist lobby".
This group takes it as an article of faith that President Bush is a mysogynist. Well, given how it seems every bloody advisor, those closest to him, are women, this article is just ridiculous. And, of course, I mean, Laura Bush, Dr. Condi Rice and Karen Hughes. Throw in Frances Townsend, Margaret Spellings, Mary Matalin, and Dr. Chao and I wonder if this President isn't close with any men. Donna Shalala(cane) was such a tower of femanism in the Clinton Administration. Where are the middle-aged white guys in this Administration? All ignored by the "pro-terrorist lobby".
Finally, the pro-terrorist lobby takes it as an article of faith that the President supports torture. That is precisely how all of this got started. The Boston Globe printed 5 letters critical of the President and none supporting him with regard to questioning terrorists. One letter writer was allowed to use the phrase "pro-torture lobby".
I will use the phrase "pro-terrorist lobby" exactly like I use the phrase "liberal extremists". I will try to make my point that the center is not going to be just to the right of Howard Dean. As the Left labels us with impunity I will attempt to provide even this small consequence. I encourage anybody that has a conversation with a Leftist whose friendship you don't care for to work "pro-terrorist lobby" into your next conversation. You will never sleep so well.
posted by Zack at 5:26 PM
2 Comments:
You're definitely back from the summer doldrums!
Now, I've let it slip by quite a few times, but you've got to get off the "he didn't say 'mission accomplished'" bandwagon. He may not have said those words, and he words he said did say there's a lot of work to do, but he stood there making a speech in front of a huge sign prepared by his PR folks that did say "mission accomplished". We all know that he did so to create a certain impression in the minds of the people, and although the other side pushes it beyond what he said, it is not anywhere close to as off the mark as you make it sound. While you may be technically correct, it's ultimately a losing point.
Conscience,
If I write 2 gazillion words in my last post and your only comment is on the "mission accomplished" paragraph, then you should seriously think about re-naming yourself, "zacklyright's echo".
Again, I'll still put it on the Bush Communication team that they should be pointing out the things a brilliant blogger in Massachusetts is pointing out.
Post a Comment
<< Home