.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

The Asylum

Welcome to the Asylum. This is a site devoted to politics and current events in America, and around the globe. The THREE lunatics posting here are unabashed conservatives that go after the liberal lies and deceit prevalent in the debate of the day. We'd like to add that the views expressed here do not reflect the views of other inmates, nor were any inmates harmed in the creation of this site.

Location: Mesa, Arizona, United States

Who are we? We're a married couple who has a passion for politics and current events. That's what this site is about. If you read us, you know what we stand for.

Tuesday, September 12, 2006

Path To 9/11 Epilogue: Who Really Won This Round?

Dean Barnett, who is guest-blogging @ Hugh's site, and he brings up the ratings for the Path to 9/11 from the weekend. As Dean points out, he was correct that the docudrama would not be the bread-winner on Sunday night. It was defeated, handily, by a match-up of two famous football brother: Eli and Peyton Manning.

However Monday was a much different story. It took the lead in the ratings on Monday, and never looked back. (This was a point that Thomas made to me; the anniversary was sure to bring viewers, especially on Monday. That was the night that the movie was leading up to.) But Dean also states this:

I do feel compelled to offer a little prediction of what if any effect PT 9/11 will have on this fall’s elections. The scenes revolving around the Clinton Keystone cops will have no effect; equally effect-less will be Condi Rice’s scenes with the controversial Presidential Daily Briefing.

The fact is, post 9/11, the parties have come to two very different places on terror. The Republicans may be wrong (I think they’re more right than wrong, but that’s neither here nor there), but at least they’re serious. The Democrats are both wrong and frivolous. So anything that makes people think about terrorism and national security works to the Republicans’ advantage.

Will this docudrama focue in on the elections this year. We believe they will, but in two different areas.

First, obviously with regards to national security, the movie will help, but only a little bit. It does not pain the Clinton administration in an extremely bad light. It does, however, emphasize the policies of that administration. They were more focused on the law enforcement aspect of the war, and less on the military side. Whether that was because President Clinton had no respect for the military, or because he was worried about losing soldiers does not make a lick of difference. Subpoenas, warrants, and indictments are scoffed at by our enemy. They will never respect such moves of a civilized, ordered society. They live, quite literally, in the Seventh Century. So national security will be in the minds of the voters. However, by comparison, the GOP can do more in campaigning than ABC could do with its docudrama.

Second comes the controversy; such fries of "foul" made more noise than the movie did. The moment these people say any of it or heard anything about it, they lost their minds. They accused ABC of making "partisan" entertainment in an attempt to "taint the facts" regarding President Clinton's legacy. To be frank, his legacy lay at the foot of Ground Zero smoldering for months. This is our personal opinion because we cannot excuse the previous president for not taking acts of war seriously enough. But their rhetoric, and attempts to stop this docudrama from being shown bordered on illegal. The threat of ABC's broadcast license was beyond the pale, and those elected Democrats who initiated that threat should be slapped with an ethics investigation; for the benefit of Senator Reid, it is about extortion, stupid. The attempt by President Clinton's lawyers bordered on a violation of legal ethics.

When CBS decided to go ahead with "The Reagans," it was the public who through a fit. The threat to boycott the station and its advertisers rang loud and clear to CBS, and they opted to pull it. ABC was no0t threatened by the public. It was pressure applied by elected officials, and former elected officials. And it was all over nothing. Anyone who has been paying attention about the story how 9/11 came about realize that neither the Clinton or Bush administration did much to stop al-Qaeda. President Clinton's complicity came in the ineptitude of those below him and his own decisions. President Bush's has come post-9/11; where most of the GOP's gripes lay. (You cannot blame the president for doing nothing in the first eight months of his administration; he did not even have a full cabinet yet because of the obstruction in the Senate.)

We agree with Dean Barnett when it comes to who does this better. The Republicans have the right idea. And we may complain of their lack of prompt action, or even interference in the war, but they have the right ideas. And they are making serious headway in comparison.

But to look at the Democrats, all we can do is shake our heads. These people want to pull out of Iraq, feeling that is it a failure, and that we can do nothing more there. And if we leave, we will abandon a nation and its people to the very animlas we are fighting. If we pull out now, the Iraqi forces trained will be overwhelmed in a matter of weeks. Leaving is not an option, and we would also lose a key ally int he region. The Iraqis, contrary to dinosaur media reports, and tyhe talking points of the Left, do not want us to leave.

And with that sort of attitude, I cringe with them in power. Today four Islamic men attampted to detonate a car bomb outside of the United States embassy in Damascus. Syrian military engaged in a gunfight with the man. No Americans were killed. Thirteen people were injured. Do the Democrats still want to end this war with these sorts of people running loose intending to do us harm? We are not in Syria, but our embassy was targeted. We are not in Bali, but yet we have lost American lives in bombings there. These people want to kill us, and running away from them is not the answer. You run towards them with the intent to make sure they will not harm us. The Democrats do not believe in this. They may think they do, when they click their tongues at us, and think we are so simple-minded, but in the end their tactics do not work.

If the Path to 9/11 has any impact at the ballot box, and I doubt it will, it will be in showing the populace that their strategy for the war on terrorism will not work. Holding hands and singing "kumaya" will not stop them. They will not give up no matter how nicely we ask, no matter how many cherries we put on the top of the ice cream we offer them. And while they accept certain carrots (like if we were to sell out Israel, Australia, or Great Britain) in the end their hatred lies in us; it burns for the death of America.

The Democrats do not get this. We cannot live in a happy, happy joy, joy world with people who despise a secularized, civil society. It does not fit into their worldview. They want it their way, or not at all. And the GOP is working to make sure that they get nothing except Hell.



Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Government still have to give answers of what happened on 911.


11:05 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

weight loss product