Saturday, December 16, 2006

Did Americans Vote Against Iraq War?

Ms. Ellen Goodman, the hyper-liberal extremist who writes for the Boston Globe, suggested that the Iraqis should have another election; this one to determine if U.S. troops should continue to fight terrorists in Iraq noting "we (Americans) already voted against the Iraq War in November (Boston Globe, December 15, A23)."

Below is a list of 8 incumbent Senate Democrats, who voted for the war in October 2002, for $60 billion in additional war funding on October 7, 2005 and for $70 billion in additional war funding on September 7, 2006, with their margin of victory from November, 2006:

Feinstein (CA) - 1.7 million!
Lieberman (CT) - 115,000
Carper (DE) - 101,000
Nelson (FL) - 1.052 million!
Nelson (NE) - 160,000
Clinton (NY) - 1.491 million!
Cantwell (WA) - 349,000
Kohl (WI) - 807,000

As I noted earlier, Virginians voted for James Webb by less than 8,000 votes in a race where Mr. Webb fully exploited an unscripted joke by Sen. George Allen (Mr. Allen not getting the apologist support from the liberal media that Sen. John F. Kerry received). By only 3,000 votes, Montanans elected a Democratic challenger who ran against a Senator tainted by lobbyist Jack Abramoff. And, West Virginians returned former Ku Klux Klan member, Robert Byrd, by 139,000 votes.

Anyway, forgive me if I don't drink the Americans-voted-against-the-War-kool-aid that liberal extremists are peddling.

2 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

lol. the liberals would say all eight are individually an aberration. eight aberrations? but even the president aknowledged americans voted against his policies. as usual, everything is down the middle, where i live.

7:00 PM  
Blogger Zack said...

true centrist,

You picked up on my point, as far as the Democrats are concerned, perfectly. Engage in a conversation with a liberal extremist and they will cling to the belief that the 2006 election was about the War. Then, bring up each of these Senators and you will hear each one explained away. "Well, Hillary is different because . . . and, Feinstein, well she . . . Lieberman is unique because . . . ." Again, we get it. State a rule then have no evidence to support the rule. And, for the many, many exceptions, have an explanation.

I was pre-mature in caling Rep. Jean Schmidt a winner in Ohio, but sometime this week she was offically declared the winner. Rep. Schmidt should have been the first Republican ousted if 2006 was about rejecting the War. The libeal extremists, I'm sure, have an explanation for her victory.

The 2006 elections were about the War except when they weren't . . . and I think we are seeing in many cases that they weren't.

I invite a liberal extremist to comment here and explain the margin of victories I cite, the Webb victory, the Schmidt victory and the Maj. Tammy Duckworth loss so that we all understand how the elections were about the War.

9:41 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home