MoveOn.losers

Liberals and Dems who have the least bit of respect for our military should be raising their voices in outrage over the "General Betrayus" ad that MoveOn.org placed in the New York Times yesterday. There is no group in America at this time, other than the ACLU, that is more dedicated to making this the United Socialist States of America than the slimebags at MoveOn. The disgusting ad they placed is an insult not only to General Pratraeus, but to our entire military. George Soros, the money man behind MoveOn.losers, was not born in the United States, but he's spending his millions of dollars to turn it into the socialist quagmire that now inhabits the European continent.

Created to help us all move on after SlickWillie got his BJ in the Oval Office, MoveOn.losers is the largest collection of losers since the 1968 Democratic Convention in Chicago. Their standard format is libel, slander and character assassination based on their perverted vision of what the future of the United States should be. If you like "Big Government", if you think George Orwell was prophetic, then MoveOn.losers is the group for you.

For any American seeking to find middle ground, hoping to be able to bring our people together, MoveOn.losers is an object lesson in how NOT to do it. They are liars, scoundrels and charlatans of the worst sort, not worthy of respect or consideration. I wonder how it must feel to be a Democrat raised on the likes of Harry Truman and Jack Kennedy, and now find yourself and your party held hostage by the lunatic left-wing fringe of your party? I'm sure that Senator Joe Liberman or Zell Miller could tell us - just look at how MoveOn.losers have smeared Senator Liberman simply because he supports our efforts in Iraq. His own party dumped him, assisted by the MoveOn.losers, yet the people of Connecticut rejected the effluent drivel of MoveOn.losers, they rejected the automaton selected to replace Joe Liberman, and they sent Joe back to the Senate.

There should be no place in American politics for the likes of MoveOn.losers, but being a freedom loving nation, we let all the wingnuts have a voice - right and left. The depths to which MoveOn.losers sinks is deplorable, but not unexpected. Politics is a dirty business, regardless of what the politicians tell us, and though the Dems on the hill may try to distance themselves from this ad, most Americans will remember who MoveOn.losers speaks for. As one Democrat Senator noted yesterday, it wouldn't look good for a senator to call the General a liar, so they let this group of henchmen handle the task.

So, my Democrat friends, who will be the voice of your party? Will it be the west coast whack-jobs, or someone more grounded in reality?

My son asked me the other day that if I had to vote for a Democrat for President, who would it be. Having never given the question any thought previously, I quickly ran through the list of candidates in my mind:

John Edwards: Anybody who pays $400 for a haircut should be more concerned about what's growing "between" his ears than "over" his ear. A slick lawyer who just happens to be pretty, you get the impression that if he ever ran out of hairspray, his neck would not be strong enough to support his head, even though there is very little inside of it. All show - no substance.

Joe Biden: Apparently no one cares about plagiarism in college anymore, so Joe has jumped right back into the fray. Unfortunately for Joe, his train left the station a long time ago and he is the only person on that train.

Barack Obama: Or as Teddy Kennedy refers to him, Osama Obama. I can't find enough of a track record here to really tell me much about the man. As far as I can tell, he's black and that seems to be his main claim to fame, but when you listen to him speak, you get the impression that there is a substantial intellect at work, not necessarily restricted to party talking points. I don't think he'll get the nomination at this point, but the second spot on the ticket is his for the asking.

Dennis Kucinich: Do you think this is who Hillary and John Edwards were talking about when they said they needed to reduce the number of participants in the debates to the "serious" candidates? Dennis is a shining example of what you can become in America, despite the fact that you have a very hard time finding anyone who will take you seriously.

Bill Richardson: I can't honestly say that I know a lot about this man, but I do know that the times I have listened to him speak, he has seemed thoughtful and well informed. I don't see anyway for him to become the nominee, but as the only Hispanic candidate, he too would bring a lot to the ticket for the Dems.

Al Gore / Gen. Wesley Clark / Al Sharpton / Howard Dean: I list them only because I am so happy none of these idiots is running. I might make an exception though - I do wish the Rev. Al were running for President - I don't see enough of Don King and his hair anymore, so it's still a treat to see "do" the Rev. has. Come to think of it, Howard Dean screaming like a lunatic was entertaining too, but I guess you've got to draw the line somewhere.

Mike Gravel: Who?

Hillary Clinton: That's right my friends, we saved the best for last, because she was the answer to my son's question. If I had to vote for a Democrat for President and I had no other choice, I would vote for Hillary Clinton. (God, I'm going to be ill!)

Why you ask? Have I taken leave of my senses? Have I finally started drinking kool-aid?

The reason is quite simple - she's a bitch.

Let me rephrase that.

In one of the local establishments designed to provide sustenance, a sign hangs on the wall that reads:

"I am not a bitch, I am the bitch!

All of the poor Dems out there who think that if Hillary is elected we'll immediately withdraw from Iraq will be sorely disappointed. She is well aware of the stakes we're playing for, and if there's one woman in the world that I would count upon to destroy our enemies, it's Hillary. Ask anyone who's ever got in her way, ask her adversaries, hell, ask her husband! If Hillary's desire for power weren't so overwhelming, Slick Willie would be carrying the family jewels in a case instead of the usual container by this time. There is nothing in this world more important to Hillary than the exercise of power, and if the Islamic terrorists think they would have free rein with her in charge, that would be another in the long list of miscalculations they've made.

The downside, and the reason she scares the hell out of me, is her desire to bring government into every aspect of our lives. From nationalized health care to abortion-on-demand, this desire of the left to have government in every aspect of our daily lives is frightening. Having become a proponent of the concept that "less government is good government", I find my libertarian streak growing stronger as each day passes, and I find my revulsion for all politicians growing proportionally.

There is a world of difference between a politician and a leader. The last leader we had was Ronald Reagan. Since then, we've had nothing but political hacks - George Bush included. It may surprise some of you, but as I noted in a blog a month or so back, George Bush has failed us as a leader. His inability to define this war in terms that bring us together is his major failure. Even though I agree with the approach that we are taking in Iraq, I find the lack of leadership on the part of the President to be his most glaring fault. To be sure, the Dems have played politics with the War in Iraq, and they continue to do so, but it is the President's lack of vision and his inability to put it into words that has created this rift in our country.

On either side of the aisle, I can find no leaders, only politicians. Love him or hate him, after the disaster of the Carter administration, Ronald Reagan lifted this country from the depression and hangover of Watergate, Vietnam, etc. - that's what a leader does. He made us feel good about ourselves and proud to be Americans again. Asked recently if I cared about what the rest of the world thinks of us, I replied no. For the most part, I don't care what they think because it doesn't have an immediate impact on my life. Like it or not, that's how most of us live - if it doesn't effect us directly, we don't care.

Having given it some additional thought, I still don't care what they think.

Twice in the past century Americans died in Europe because Europeans couldn't bring themselves to do what had to be done before the wars started. Appeasement and whiny diplomacy a la Neville Chamberlain (the Madeline Albright of the 1930's) proved to be as ineffective as anyone today trying to deal with Hamas.

So as far as Europe is concerned, I'd rather be right than loved.

Therein lies the conundrum for a lot of people who consider themselves to be Democrats - their overriding desire to be loved sometimes overshadows the dictates of common sense. We all suffer from the affliction - we all want to be loved - we'd all love to sit 'round the campfire and sing Kumbaya - we all hate violence and death - but I guess you could say that conservatives are those who have given up on Utopia.

One of the reasons I love science fiction is that in many of these creations, mankind has reached a point in their development where we are one world, one government. If you've ever heard a conservative say "One world - one government", they did so for one of three reasons:

1.) They hate the concept and some of them are certain that Bill Clinton would still be President

2.) They were held captive by the Chinese Communists and brainwashed to believe Bono will be the President

3.) The CIA slipped some acid into their martini and they've gone back to Haight-Ashbury to get in touch with their younger selves

Weak attempts at humor aside, the concept of one world, one government will be the next stop on our ride through history. Some threat from beyond our galaxy, some great political or seismic upheaval here on earth, some disaster never dreamt of - create your own story line, but eventually we must end up one world - one people.

What do you want that world to look like? Sharia Law or Democracy? Women as second class citizens or equal partners? Intolerance or freedom of speech? Fear or freedom to come and go as you please?

I can understand those who feel my whole argument here is somewhat grandiose, but if you take a step back and project yourself 100, 200, 1000 years from now, if we haven't killed ourselves off, what will the world look like?

I would prefer that my descendants live in a democracy; free to believe or not believe in God as they chose, free to speak their minds without fear of retribution, and free to follow the path in life that they chose.

If we stand idly by, clinging to concepts that are not yet ripe, and we fail to wage this battle to the full extent of our power and determination, then the one world that we hope to see come to fruition will bear unpalatable fruit.