With our enemy getting so much help from America's Fourth Estate and Dean's Fifth Column, Dean could be right about the outcome of the war. Dean would know best … what he and his party are capable of, and how low they’re willing to go. If somehow, funding for the war gets cut off tomorrow, by Democrats in Congress with the help of America’s defeatist Bush-hating mainstream press, then America can't win. We won't win. Zarqawi will win in the same fashion that Ho Chi Minh won.

Dafydd, Dean was extremely successful until the point that he intersected with terebi.
I always liked what the Economist said, "...Dean was revealed as the red-faced, egomanical dwarf that consituents had always suspected..."
He could have been elected, if he could have stayed off of television.
I think short people can't be elected president...it just isn't, umm, presidential?
;)

wow--congratz on the Malkin link--i bet you cherish that one!
;)

O.K., smartypants -- what's an eloi?

Beebop,
Time Machine

How become you are a Lovecraftian but not a Wellsian?

It is difficult to win a *WAR* when half of one's country supports the enemy. Dean and the Democrat Party have added a new 'Dimension' to the term, Divide and Conquer.

This December 15th Vote in Iraq clearly has the Dems imploding. They and their MSM had predicted "5,000 body bags" within the first year in Afghanistan. Then they all predicted "5,000 body bags" within the first year in Iraq. Then on the Third Day of the Iraq invasion, they all claimed that our Troops were "bogged down".

Then came the first Iraqi Vote (on the heels of a successful Vote in Afghanistan), and they all predicted a "blood bath"...when, the second Vote rolled around in Iraq, their predictions started to slow down a lot, as it seemed that they were just hoping for failure this time around.

Well, the *THIRD* Vote in Iraq comes on December 15th, and the turnout this time looks to be much higher than the first two, and the first two were high.

Merriam-Webster defines 'imploding' thusly:

to collapse inward as if from external pressure

President George W Bush's *ACTION* is the "external pressure". Hillary is strangling on attempts at "Triangulation", as Dean moves the Democrat Party further to the 'Left' (as in, right next to the Abyss of Abysses), with the help of Nancy "Flip-Flopping" Pelosi and John "Cut and Run" Murtha.

Dems...this *BATTLE* in Iraq is nothing more than the *BATTLE* in Afganistan, and America's enemies know it. The Islamic world needed to be shocked ("Bitch-Slapped")...and, W let them know what he thought of them following the likes of a Saddam or Osama.

Americans clearly has two choices in 2006:

1) Support the Democrat Party and place American Women in Burkas.
2) Support W.

BTW...Leftists and Islamics are trying to change the looks of a Burka, even over the Internet, but it remains the same...

Osama

The new look is like 'tHiS'

Blue is out, and the head-hood is gone, so surrender to Islam now!!!

KårmiÇømmünîs†

The problem with all this is that 40% of the voters don't care one iota about the sickness in the Democrat (not Democratic...........why are people changing the name?) party and will vote for Democrats no matter what. 40% already know they are sick and anti-American, and would never vote for a Democrat, leaving the 20% who call themselves "independent" to decide. 90% of that 20% get all their news from TV network news.......so they'll never know how sick the Dems are. They think Repebulicans are making this stuff up.

Come election time next year the Dems and the MSM will have the independents convinced that the economy is the worst in 75 years.......there are no jobs......illegal immigrants are terrorists (with that one they have a bit of help from the right wing nut side or the Republican party), the war is a lost cause and Bush should be tried for war crimes.

You all underestimate the stupidity of the American "independent"

Senorlechero:

You all underestimate the stupidity of the American "independent"

To the contrary, I believe that stupidity in general is vastly overestimated in this country.

Dafydd

As a native Vermonter who spent 10 years under Dean's rule as our Governor, I am mystified at his transformation into a Moore/MoveOn shill. When he was our Governor, his greatest enemy was the left-left wing of the Democrat Party. He routinely vetoed/jawboned away their requests for massive increases in social funding and generally did a good job in managing the state's finances and restoring its bond rating. Hell, as a Democrat Governor, he had an A- rating from the National Rifle Association. As soon as he got the Presidential bug, he went stark raving nutters on us without any explanation as to the sea change in his thoughts.

Makes me wonder if one requirement to be a Democrat candidate for President is to visit that mine in West Virginia that Mulder and Scully found and get your implant.

Honor Roll Of Democrat "Culture Of Corruption"

http://briartech.com/democrat/democrat.htm

Daffydd said ...."To the contrary, I believe that stupidity in general is vastly overestimated in this country."

EXACTLY, THANK YOU!

You think people are not as stupid as they seem to be, making my point.

How do you explain the vote on Prop 73 in CA? How do you explain Senator Kerry getting 49% of the vote in '04? How do you explain the continued support for the MSM when day after day they promote their agenda as opposed to report the news? How do you explain 60% of people in the US thinking the economy is "bad"? How do you explain the reaction of people to the Katrina disaster response? How do you explain our Universities being promoters of leftist values?

I could go on and on, but I think you won't be able to give a sensible answer except "stupidity". You can give it another name......gullibility....lazy mindedness.....whatever, but it's "stupid" to allow the left to ruin our country and sit on the sidelines and watch, which is exactly what the "independents" are doing

Senorlechero:

Rem acu tetigisti: you have redefined disagreement as stupidity. How is this different from what the Left does?

Somebody might have voted against Prop. 73 (parental notification before a minor can get an abortion) because he was worried that some girls might have been afraid to tell the father if the father were very violent or even just the type who would thereafter withhold love from his daughter. The voter might worry that trying to go to a judge for a judicial bypass would take so long, that the abortion would become much more medically dangerous.

I disagree with these reasons; I think they're wrong; but a person can be wrong without being stupid.

We must distinguish between error or even folly on the one hand and low intelligence on the other. That is precisely my point.

Dafydd

Dafydd

You assume I meant "stupid" in the literal sense.......lack of inteligence. I did not. I mean in in the sense that doing the wrong thing because your Union told you too or because you are are unwilling to learn the facts, leading to harmful consequences for yourself...is stupid. You would no doubt agree but use a different word to describe it......but come on.......error? folly? We're not talking about taking the wrong offramp in the middle of Watts.......or locking your keys in the car.

you said..."We must distinguish between error or even folly on the one hand and low intelligence on the other. That is precisely my point."

If a person voted against prop. 73 for the reasons you stated, they are ignorant, or phobic, irrational, and in the end....self destructive. At what point does some mixture of those "issues" become "stupid"?

My point was that you think voters will see the actions of Dean/Kerry (and the other pathetic losers in the Democrat leadership) as wacky and there will be a backlash at the polls. I think voters will be driven by their agendas to do exactly what Dean/Kerry want them to do.........VOTE AGAINST REPUBLICANS. If I'm correct, this would be an ignorant, irrational, self-destructive thing to do, whatever their motives, and I think that makes them pretty stupid

Senorlechero:

My point was that you think voters will see the actions of Dean/Kerry (and the other pathetic losers in the Democrat leadership) as wacky and there will be a backlash at the polls.

Wasn't there?

Dafydd

There was in '04, but not in '05.

I think it's wishful thinking to believe there will be in '06, with only negative reporting about Bush/Repubs and zero negative reporting on Dean/Kerry and the Dems

Senorlechero:

There was in '04, but not in '05.

Yes, you're quite right: the vote was held in 2004, not 2005. What is your point? People were claiming in 2003 that the Republicans were going to be creamed in 2004... now that they won all across the board, you're claiming in 2005 that they're going to be creamed in 2006.

I understand you believe it's just "wishful thinking" that Republicans will do well next year. My point is that you have no objective evidence of that; the only tangible data we have at this point, nearly a year before the election, is the electoral map -- and that favors the Republicans.

Dafydd

Thanks for hissing in, . Now you can slither in with a comment, o wise. (sign out)

(If you haven't hissed a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Hang loose; don't shed your skin!)

URL:
Remember me unto the end of days? AyeNay!

Comments: (Sssselect text and bite a button to apply HTML tagssssss...)