The Democrats Continue To Tighten Their Own Noose***Updated and Bumped to the top of the page***Early this morning (after a wonderful reception last night) I reintroduced myself to the readers of The Asylum. It's beenb a long time since I've done some writing, and despite being away fro some time, it's nioce to see that I still have the ability to write effectively. It's a lot like riding a bike; you'll never forget how to do it. However what Democrats seem to have forgotten is that we are at war and Hugh Hewitt observes this in a striking fashion today. H.R. 6166 is the new detainee bill that authorizes the military tribunals for the detainees we capture in this war. There are 201 Democrats in the House, and 160 of them voted AGAINST this bill. According to Dennis Kucinich this bill "is everything we don't believe in." Rep. John Murtha, whom the extremem fringe is pushing to be the majority leader should the Democrats retake the House, jumped into the mix, and the NY Sun quotes him:"It gives too much leeway to the president," Rep. John Murtha, a Democrat of Pennsylvania, said. "And I think when you tamper with the Geneva Conventions ... you hurt our ability to protect the troops."That fails logic on every level. The president is the commander-in-chief of the military, and the leader of the united States. His powers are explicitly enumerated in the Constitution. He has the ability to prosecute this war any way he sees fit, provided it doesn't violate the law. The Supreme Court ruled that because Congress hadn't, in fact, authorized the tribunals that they had to tackle that. (That is also within the Constitution: Article I, Section 8, to be exact where it states that they have the power "To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court.")That what this bill was to do, but 160 Democrats in the House disagreed that we shouldn't be creating tribunals to prosecute these detainees. We're talking about our enemies here. These people want to kill us. And the Democrats--a good majority of them--disagree with this approach. Their logic boggles the mind. And in this election season the more they pull stunts like this, the tighter the noose they're wearing is going to get. In short, dear readers, I don't buy the polls. I don't trust them (most of them), and I disagree with the assessemnt the DNC is making that they can and will retake both Houses. The kids have pointed out that the races coming up this november, while they are tight for some, they are not unwinnable by the GOP. In fact, a few of them are well within the margin of error, or within striking distance with a strong finish. It falls to us, the base, to ensure they return. I know that a lot of people in the GOP base are unhappy with the dawdling the party has been engaged in for a couple of years, and the simple fact that they don't seem to have the stomach or spine for a good, old-fashioned, knock-down, drag-out political fight. But they had better locate it soon, otherwise the Democrats will put their noose around the nation, and hang us all. This vote shows that these people can't handle the idea of holding our enemies accountable for their actions.Their talking points regarding a withdrawal from Iraq, and possibly Afghanistan, are purely nuts. Our enemies are in those two nations, so does a withdrawal mean the Democrats would rather have them over here? To top that off, we see their response to the president's programs to track these people down. They're against them. They'd like to extend any and all Constitutional protections to these people, and put them through the criminal justice system. Our criminal justice system wasn't created to handle such things. In a war, the prisoners have always gone through the military justice system. President Clinton opted to run the '93 WTC bombers through the criminal justice system, and we see how well that worked out. Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman (the blind Sheik) who was convicted and sentenced to life in prison, used Lynne Stewart, a member of his legal team, to facilitate communications between himself and Al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya--a radical terrorist group from Egypt. She was convicted in 2005 for doing this. But it shows that our system can't handle people like this. Another example is, of course, the recent verdict in the Moussaoui trial. The tribunals are absolutely necessary for our enemies. We can't allow civilians to preside over the justice deserved for these individuals. We're too lenient on heinous offenders in our nation--our own citizens--and the moral relevance that attorneys will draw on for their clients could prove disastrous. A threat that we face, should we put these people through the criminal justice system, is recruitment in prisons. Do we really want to see homegrown radical jihadists coming out of our prisons? I wouldn't like it, and I doubt a fair majority of the nation wouldn't like it either. They're simply too dangerous to go through our criminal system.Let this vote, and the actions of the Democrat Party, be a notice for the nation. They are weak on the issue of the war. I don't like the idea that the war has been politicized, but the Democrats started this right after their votes. They voted for this, but immediately started giving the president heck over over how he was conducting it, how our troops were acting, and immediately branded the whole thing a failure. And that was just in the first week of fighting. The Democrats are completely weak on this front. They may have the odd and occasional good idea but when it comes to the war, they can't handle what is necessary to make this nation safe. If these people are given power back this November, this nation is in a great deal of trouble. And it goes beyond who the new Majority Leaders will be in either House. It goes beyond Rep. Rangel being the ranking member on the House Ways and Means committee. It goes beyond Sen. Leahy being in control of the Senate Judiciary Committee or Sen. Rockefeller being the chairman of the Senate Select Intelligence Committe. The kids are right, and they have been pushing this since Hugh Hewitt unveiled the platform for the GOP. If we do not stand strong on the war, and hold the line, nothing else in the nation matters. Forget tax cuts or hikes. Forget who will be the next nominee on the Supreme Court. If the GOP loses in November, we will be fighting this war from the worst position of weakness we have ever had to endure. Our hands will be tied. Our intelligence agencies will have their fangs ripped away. And our military will go back to where it was under President Clinton--emascualted because we don't want to "offend" anyone, and completely at the mercy of the United Nations. In short the Democrats will have achieved explicitly what John Kerry wanted in 2004.A United States that only does what the world allows it to do. That's not how we defend this nation, and the Democrats are 100% wrong in their assertions that this sort of strategy will help America. It won't. It's going to hurt us, and at a time when we really can't afford that. We not only have our enemies to deal with, but Iran and North Korea as well. Appeasement in the face of these regimes may be the Democrat's plan to "secure" this nation, but it's not a sound policy that will grant us the security we have now. And a Democrat victory in November turns President Bush into exactly what we don't need right now: A lame duck that will face obstruction in Congress every minute of every day. He's the leader of the nation, and he's fighting a war. The Democrats don't want us fighting this war any longer, and they're making that clear for everyone.So, for those in the GOP, please contribute to the people up for reelection this year, and support those running for a seat tfor the first time. Support: Mike DeWine, Rick Santorum, Conrad Burns, Michael Steele, Bob Corker. Mark Kennedy, and John Kyl for the Senate. Support those in the GOP for the House, including those that are fighting against the likes of John Murtha and the other "nutroots" candidates that are calling for appeasement and surrender in the face of an enemy that is intent on destroying this nation.Sabrina McKinneyUPDATE: Patrick Leahy has stated oin the floor of the Senate that he will vote against this bill. He cites Habeas Corpus several times in one sentence, proclaiming that the bill is stripping this from the detainees. Habeas Corpus legally doesn't apply to foreign-born people. It applies to American citizens, not our foreign terrorist enemies. These doddering old fools are out to get us killed with this sort of thought process. This is the fever swamp, dear readers. These people believe the garbage they read and hear from the fringe elements of the party. IF THEY CONTINUE down this path, with this sort of twisted, uneducated logic, they will lose in November in ways worse than they are predicting for the GOP. And IF this is their final leg platform--stating that they are against programs to protect this nation, and tribunals to prosecute our enemeis--then they are in for a very, very rude awakening on November 8th. I'd also like to point out that his statement sounds like it has either been paraphrased by the recent New York Times arguments regarding the National Intelligence Estimate report, or it's been written by a "journalist" from that a paper. It's full of the same talking points and the same stupid logic. I'm also reemphasizing the support for people like Conrad Burns, whose opponent--Jon Tester--stated yesterday that the Patriot Act needed to be revoked. THIS IS THE DEMOCRATS this year, dear readers, and they're just bound and determined to get us killed.
UPDATE: Sens. John Kerry and Dianne Feinstein want Habeas Corpus for terrorists. Thomas is flabbergasted, and he was just on Hugh's show stating he wants to avoid "whatever law school these guys attended." As a lawyer myself, I fail to comprehend how idiotic these people sound. Oh yes, and Sen. Kennedy is worried about water being thrown on any detainees. No, we're sorry, Mary Jo Kopechne was unavailable for comment.
Hat Tip: The Hugh Hewitt Show