Another MSM Moonbat Loses Their Mind
OK. We've all borne witness to the wackiness of the MSM over the last few years. We watched the New York Times pardon Jayson Blair over and over again. We watched as Eason Jordan slandered our troops; Dan Rather slandering the president. We've heard from "Uncle Walter" on the state of affairs in America, and how we're "losing" the war. We've watched Jack Cafferty lose his mind in front of America, the LA Times go from bad to worse, and the New York Times sink to new lows never truly expected by anyone. We've dealt wirth Maureen Dowd's screeds, Willliam Safire's scathing critiques, and even Helen Thomas' senile and hilariously stupid questions during White House press briefings.
But Molly Ivins has finally lost it. In her lastest screed she wrote the following:
I’d like to make it clear to the people who run the Democratic Party that I will not support Hillary Clinton for president.
Enough. Enough triangulation, calculation and equivocation. Enough clever straddling, enough not offending anyone This is not a Dick Morris election. Sen. Clinton is apparently incapable of taking a clear stand on the war in Iraq, and that alone is enough to disqualify her. Her failure to speak out on Terri Schiavo, not to mention that gross pandering on flag-burning, are just contemptible little dodges.
The recent death of Gene McCarthy reminded me of a lesson I spent a long, long time unlearning, so now I have to re-learn it. It’s about political courage and heroes, and when a country is desperate for leadership. There are times when regular politics will not do, and this is one of those times. There are times a country is so tired of bull that only the truth can provide relief.
"Come Watson; the game's afoot," is what Sherlock Holmes would exclaim after reading something like this. The Democrats are pouring everything into one last lunge to get their power back. It is make or break; go time for the last dog to try to take downt he top dogs right now. If they lose, and lose big, this year they're in a sad, sad state of affairs, and that message should be clear-cut from mom-and-pop America. Worse yet, Ivins represents everything to do with the moonbat fringe of the party. She belongs to the Michael Moore crowd; a willing accomplice to the machinations of MoveOn.org. No, this is no conspiracy theory. They're using the same talking points.
This supposedly pits Howard Dean, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, emboldened by “a string of bad new from the Middle East … into calling for premature retreat from Iraq,” versus those pragmatic folk like Steny Hoyer, Rahm Emmanuel, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden and Joe Lieberman.
Oh come on, people — get a grip on the concept of leadership. Look at this war — from the lies that led us into it, to the lies they continue to dump on us daily.
Whoa. Hillary and Biden are pragmatic, but we lied to get into the war? Somewhere I miss her logic. The only thing seemingly "pragmatic" in Ms. Ivins thick skull is obviously her bias to the Left. As for lying, I'm sure Sen. Clinton could fill Ms. Ivins in on it seeing as how her husband was impeached for lying. They did it for eight years to the public. And I guess that Ms. Ivins forgot the reasons we decided to go to war. She might want to pay attention to the part involving ending the ties to terrorism, and the movement on the regime change voted on by Congress in 1998. See, facts like this miss Ms. Ivins intellect the way 17 resolutions in 12 years couldn't convey to the UN that they were being played like a fiddle.
Add to the fact, as I have detailed before, Iraq did have WMDs; we've found enough evidence that they didn't destroy all of their chemical weapons. Even better, we obtained a wealth of information about his programs, and how far he actually was on them. Not nearly as close as our intelligence agencies stated, but close enough to be a threat to the region--just like Iran is now. Was the intelligence in the beginning faulty? Yes, some of it, but another fact that Ivins forgets is much of the intelligence from 1998 was used in the run up to the war. But here is where she completely jumps the tracks.
Bush, Cheney and Co. will continue to play the patriotic bully card just as long as you let them. I’ve said it before: War brings out the patriotic bullies.
Well Molly, we need patriots with fifth-column sorts like you, and your willing accomplices with the MSM and the Democrat Party, running around slandering administration officials and military people in an attempt to kill the morale of the nation. And I fail to see what she believes constitutes a "bully." If being a bully means standing up for what's right, what has to be done, and defending this nation then call me a bully. I'd rather be a bully fighting these animals than cowering, bowing, and scraping before them. They either want us dead or subserviant. Sorry Molly, I'm not living on my knees. But I am living in reality which is more than I can say for you.
Publius II
OK. We've all borne witness to the wackiness of the MSM over the last few years. We watched the New York Times pardon Jayson Blair over and over again. We watched as Eason Jordan slandered our troops; Dan Rather slandering the president. We've heard from "Uncle Walter" on the state of affairs in America, and how we're "losing" the war. We've watched Jack Cafferty lose his mind in front of America, the LA Times go from bad to worse, and the New York Times sink to new lows never truly expected by anyone. We've dealt wirth Maureen Dowd's screeds, Willliam Safire's scathing critiques, and even Helen Thomas' senile and hilariously stupid questions during White House press briefings.
But Molly Ivins has finally lost it. In her lastest screed she wrote the following:
I’d like to make it clear to the people who run the Democratic Party that I will not support Hillary Clinton for president.
Enough. Enough triangulation, calculation and equivocation. Enough clever straddling, enough not offending anyone This is not a Dick Morris election. Sen. Clinton is apparently incapable of taking a clear stand on the war in Iraq, and that alone is enough to disqualify her. Her failure to speak out on Terri Schiavo, not to mention that gross pandering on flag-burning, are just contemptible little dodges.
The recent death of Gene McCarthy reminded me of a lesson I spent a long, long time unlearning, so now I have to re-learn it. It’s about political courage and heroes, and when a country is desperate for leadership. There are times when regular politics will not do, and this is one of those times. There are times a country is so tired of bull that only the truth can provide relief.
"Come Watson; the game's afoot," is what Sherlock Holmes would exclaim after reading something like this. The Democrats are pouring everything into one last lunge to get their power back. It is make or break; go time for the last dog to try to take downt he top dogs right now. If they lose, and lose big, this year they're in a sad, sad state of affairs, and that message should be clear-cut from mom-and-pop America. Worse yet, Ivins represents everything to do with the moonbat fringe of the party. She belongs to the Michael Moore crowd; a willing accomplice to the machinations of MoveOn.org. No, this is no conspiracy theory. They're using the same talking points.
This supposedly pits Howard Dean, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, emboldened by “a string of bad new from the Middle East … into calling for premature retreat from Iraq,” versus those pragmatic folk like Steny Hoyer, Rahm Emmanuel, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden and Joe Lieberman.
Oh come on, people — get a grip on the concept of leadership. Look at this war — from the lies that led us into it, to the lies they continue to dump on us daily.
Whoa. Hillary and Biden are pragmatic, but we lied to get into the war? Somewhere I miss her logic. The only thing seemingly "pragmatic" in Ms. Ivins thick skull is obviously her bias to the Left. As for lying, I'm sure Sen. Clinton could fill Ms. Ivins in on it seeing as how her husband was impeached for lying. They did it for eight years to the public. And I guess that Ms. Ivins forgot the reasons we decided to go to war. She might want to pay attention to the part involving ending the ties to terrorism, and the movement on the regime change voted on by Congress in 1998. See, facts like this miss Ms. Ivins intellect the way 17 resolutions in 12 years couldn't convey to the UN that they were being played like a fiddle.
Add to the fact, as I have detailed before, Iraq did have WMDs; we've found enough evidence that they didn't destroy all of their chemical weapons. Even better, we obtained a wealth of information about his programs, and how far he actually was on them. Not nearly as close as our intelligence agencies stated, but close enough to be a threat to the region--just like Iran is now. Was the intelligence in the beginning faulty? Yes, some of it, but another fact that Ivins forgets is much of the intelligence from 1998 was used in the run up to the war. But here is where she completely jumps the tracks.
Bush, Cheney and Co. will continue to play the patriotic bully card just as long as you let them. I’ve said it before: War brings out the patriotic bullies.
Well Molly, we need patriots with fifth-column sorts like you, and your willing accomplices with the MSM and the Democrat Party, running around slandering administration officials and military people in an attempt to kill the morale of the nation. And I fail to see what she believes constitutes a "bully." If being a bully means standing up for what's right, what has to be done, and defending this nation then call me a bully. I'd rather be a bully fighting these animals than cowering, bowing, and scraping before them. They either want us dead or subserviant. Sorry Molly, I'm not living on my knees. But I am living in reality which is more than I can say for you.
Publius II
posted by Syd And Vaughn | 1:07 AM
1 Comments:
Good blog. Who is Molly Ivins? Not that I give a hoot. Golly, gee whiz, I bet hillary is glad to hear from molly. LOL Rawriter
Post a Comment
<< Home