Difference of opinion?

The tone today in politics is as nasty as most of us can remember, however, we need to put things into perspective.  Its always important to remember history.  Many feel the country is "split" with two different views on how to handle current events.  If there would have been a Gallup Poll in 1763, it would have shown how unpopular the idea of going to war was with England that created our country.  Lincoln was barely reelected in 1864... and that was just the Yankees voting!  I'm pretty sure Virginia would have been a 'blue state' in 1864.  The point is that we play politics today with too much theatrics and not enough common sense and logic.  The differences between Democratic  and Republican views on life, the world and personal responsibility are very complex, but more the two have more in common than it would seem.

First, lets make the assumption that every American, whether Democrat, Republican, Socialist or Libertarian, wants what is best for this country.  An assumption that requires far more of a  stretch of the human mind, however, can be stated that every American wants what is best for the long-term health of the United States and protecting the framework offering equality and freedom.  More likely is a large group of our population that are more concerned with the poltics of the day rather than doing what is best for this country's future.  Its easy to want to do what is popular and the quick fix, but a house built on quicksand is doomed to sink.

The Right versus the Wrong:  The Right versus the Left

OK.  Here's where I start pissing people off that are unable to argue with logic (liberals).  It must be a helpless feeling to not have control of any branch of government for the first time since shortly after the Civil War.  Finally with the upgrade at the Supreme Court (O'Connor for a much more conservative Alito), the liberals are helpless.  Helpless feelings that internally manifest turn into desperation and the Democratic Party in desperation is fun to watch.  But when American soldiers are fighting across the globe, it is irresponsible for the Democrats in Congress to offer aid and comfort to the enemy.

Mission Accomplished

Howard Dean's position is "We can't win this war."

Wake up Democrats.  Our objective was met 2 years ago when we deposed a rogue dictator who had violated 18 UN Resolutions.  The Mission Accomplished sign on the USS Kitty Hawk was played throughout the media as Bush's arrogance and us declaring victory too soon.  I can't tell you how many satirical comments I saw from the left and even has been prevalent in the so-called "mainstream media".  The mission of deposing a brutal dictator because of EIGHTEEN UN resolution that Saddam Hussein thumbed his nose at, including Resolution 1441, which gave Iraq a final, final, last, really this time, OK we mean it this time, last chance.

Our intelligence and the President's position on Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction is the same intelligence and position of the entire world.  Some just weren't willing to do what it takes, no matter how difficult it will be.  Americans have always been the first to provide aid when there is a world disaster.  The people of the United States contribute more than our government does and it can't be denied that. 

Doing the Right thing

We are just doing the right thing by staying to ensure that the Iraqi people are left in a situation where they are prepared to manage their own security.  If you want 100% of Iraqis supporting the changes, you are asking the unrealistic.  Look at our own country and the last few Presidential elections.  The Iraqi elections (3 of them now) haven't even had "hanging chad" problems and no one mistakenly voted for Pat Buchanan.

So far it looks like the Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds are working together to establish a government on their adopted and purple-thumbed Constitution.  The Taliban in Afghanistan were defeated in weeks when the Soviets couldn't do in 8 years.  Afghanistan's free elections should have democratic groups like NOW and the ACLU cheering as women now have the right to vote... Hell, they have rights period!  Afghanistan is the model Bush is working from in Iraq.  When Iraqis are strong enough to stand on their own two feet, we will gladly leave.  But until that time, we must stand by these people to give them half a chance of success. It took the United States seven years to write the Constitution and the Iraqis did it in seven months.  

I'm glad Howard Dean wasn't the committee chairman for the Torie party in 1782, when the going was very tough in a fight to gain independence from England.  Our soldiers were marching through the snow without shoes and if there would have been a Gallup Poll, a large majority would have been "against the war".  Lucky for you and me that there were a few men (and women) who did what was right rather than what was popular.  George Bush's positions aren't always the popular ones, but they are based on his honest belief that his final decision is based on what is best for America's present and future.  Bill Clinton was good at putting his thumb up to the breeze and making policy decisions based on public opinion polls.  Bill Clinton's positions were usually the popular ones, but they were based in a political calculation that his final decision is what is best for America's present rather than its future.  Big difference.  The guy had charisma.  You have to give him that and he is a great speaker and communicator, but so is Larry The Cable Guy.  I thank my lucky stars almost daily that we didn't have a President Gore or Kerry to lead us into battle.  What would they have done when they realized the French weren't ready to go into Iraq under a Democrat either?  Nothing.

The difference in Afghanistan and Iraq is pretty simple.  The vast majority of the Taliban (except, surprisingly enough, Osama) fought to the death or capture.  The Iraqis chose a different path... the path of the French.  Run!  Most Iraqi soldiers realized that the Saddam regime was doomed and its days were numbered, so most ran and very few died in combat.  There is a minority of these soldiers (ones who picked the wrong horse to bet their future on) combined with foreign insurgents and radical Islamists banding together to try to create chaos in a country ready for freedom, democracy and a chance to better their lives.  This means you likely have tens of thousands of people that are either fanatics or ex-soldiers without the same amount of power they had before Saddam was ousted into a spiderhole west of nowhere.  That is your "insurgency".  They are a small percentage of the population desperate to hold onto something, whether it be power or belief they are dying for Allah in martyrdome.  They use terrorist tactics to fight against a stable free-elected Iraqi government.  

"Insurgents" read the papers too

Playing politics about war and when our soliders are in harms way is not only unpatriotic, but simply the wrong thing to do.  That is a big difference between most Republicans and most Democrats in The Beltway, the Republicans are led by a majority who have consistent positions and are based in logic and the Democrats are rules and controlled by emotion.  They make decisions based on emotion and will base their position on issues on opinion polls.  Name the last time Bush took a position based on an opinion poll.  He does what he does because he tries to make the Right Decision .  You can define a liberal as someone who can argue both sides of an issue and believe in your cause.  Some of the irresponsible rhetoric from our own Senate and House gives the terrorists hope.  Hopes that we'll quit.  It gives them strength and a belief that if they can hold out long enough, they can win. 

"I actually voted for the 87 billion dollars... before I voted against it"

John Kerry's position is the following, "There is no reason for American soldiers to come into people's houses in the middle of the night.. terrorize...kids, children and women".  Just a week earlier, his comment was "We don't want a timetable..just an estimated time table..and plan for success".  Recently he has said he regrets his vote in the Senate that authorized the war, but he still "supports the troops".

Are you kidding me?  Now it is the US soldiers who are terrorists.  A Democratic Presidential candidate is telling the world that it is us who are the terrorists.  Nice.  When is the last time you can remember a Democrat condemning Bush's war?  When is the last time you can remember a Democrat condemning a terrorist suicide bomber or an IAD blast that kills 4 Marines?  Amazing that you can recall many examples of the first question in a blink of an eye, but probably are still thinking of an example of the Democrat condemning the terrorist insurgency for killing an American soldier.

What the Democrats are doing is politicizing the war because they think they can hurt Bush if they do. When differences in opinion should stop at the waters edge because it is difficult to fight a war with an objective of rooting out terrorists on a global level. Part of the Bush mandate after 9/11/01 was to condemn those nations that harbored and sponsored terrorists.  Republicans supported our efforts under Clinton in Bosnia, Iraq and Somalia and never chose politics (and regaining poltical power) over policy.  The Republicans stood with.  I remember as I am a Republican voter, although would love to see a viable Libertarian candidate, who supported our campaign to stop the ethnic cleansing of Serbs.  Turns out that our intelligence was flawed there too.  The reports of mass graves  and the efforts to exterminate Muslims were greatly exaggerated.  Did we have the NY Times editorial pages filled with stories on how "Clinton lied about Intelligence".

The left say that we should have had the backing of the UN, Germany, France, Russia before going into Iraq.  Just let the inspectors and negotiations do their job and everything would be hunkey dorey.  How is that working out in North Korea?  How is that working out in Iran?  Reports are that North Korea has somewhere between 2 and 10 nuclear bombs at present and Iran could be just months away (likely years)  from their first nuclear weapon.  

As for Cindy Sheehan, don't get me started.  According to her, the US troops also were illegally occupying New Orleans after Katrina.  Look it up.  Google it.  She said it.  She also talked about the damage our nuclear weapons have done to the area in Iraq.  Did I miss something?  When did we use nuclear weapons in Iraq?  Its been over 60 years since Hiroshima and Nagasaki.  Our government hasn't kept a bit of land it conquered since the Mexican-American War.  The U.S., France and England  relinquished their control over Germany while Russia kept their quarter of Germany and Berlin after WWII.

The U.S. has given total control of Afghanstan to a democratically elected government and have about 15,000 troops left in the country.  This is because Hamid Karzai wants us there.  We are still in Germany 60 years after World War II because it is good for Germany that we are there.  The pullout will come when the Iraqis are strong enough to have an overwhelming force ready for Baathists and extremists and their attempts to create a civil war.  

G.W. Bush is far from a perfect man, but he is a principled one.  He does what he believes is right after surrounding himself with a cabinet worthy of respect and hearing their thoughts on the matters at hand.  No one can accuse Donald Rumsfeld of being unqualified.  Dick Cheney's resume' contained very few "missing years".  No one can accuse Condoleeza Rice as being inexperienced.  Bush's entire cabinet, including Colin Powell, have been selections based on qualifications, not race or gender.  Arguments could be made however for some less important posts, such as the former FEMA Director, Michael Brown, going to political appointees.  Sad that politics is so slimy where you appoint cronies to positions that impact society.  It happens on both sides of the aisle, sad to say.

Both Democrat and Republican Senate and House members are too reliant on the "finger in the wind" policy positions and do what's best for the short term, rather than make the tough decisions for the long term.  Too much pork buried in already bloated spending programs.  It would be easy to argue that Republicans have taken the fiscally irresponsible role held by the Congress for 40 years of Democratic control.  However, consider the cost of the war we are fighting against global Islamic terrorism..  It has taken us to Afghanistan, Iraq, but given a reason for rogue nations like Libya to abandon its nuclear ambitions.

When John Kerry says, "I actually voted for the 87 billion dollars, before I voted against it", he says he mispoke.  George W. Bush may misspeak when he pronounces nuclear, nucular, but when is the last time he mispoke on his position?  Bush is a Reagan without the communication skills or the confidence to be a true conservative.  The ideals and intiatives can be compared.  The Left accused of Reagan of being a cowboy in his black and white view of the U.S.S.R. Howard Dean claimed his last comments were "taken a little out of context".  How many positions has Hillary Rodham Clinton had on Iraq since she was elected by New York in 2000?  Five? Six?  You tell me.  I'll bet each position has been based on pollsters data rather than her genuine belief in what is right and what is wrong.

2,000 casualities and counting

The United States military lost more casualties in preparation and training for D-Day than we have in Afghanistan and Iraq combined.  Does that make the loss of over two thousand of our countries finest any better or any less painful?  No.   We were in Germany and Japan for years after World War II and if you research the New York Times from 1945-1948, you'll see that things weren't always "rosy" after the cease fire in 1945.  Both of these countries are allies with the US today.  The United States lost soldiers when Lincoln fought against its own brother in order to preserve this country.  Two thousand lives lost is painful to think about and you can't help but pray for their families.  The harsh reality is we lost more lives before lunch on September 11, 2001 than we have in two wars spanning 4 years.  The people we are fighting are trying and planning to do that to us again and would take out every living American, if they had the means.

Blame Bush

Bush is blamed for the response to Hurricane Katrina.  Current testimony on The Hill and the memos from Louisiana Governor Blanco show that Bush wasn't to blame for Katrina response, it was a giant helping of the Kathleen Blanco with a big slice of Mayor Ray Nagan pie at the root of all the inept response. 

I recently saw the movie Team America:  World Police.  Although a self-admitted South Park fan (Trey Stone and Matt), I couldn't bring myself to watch a movie about puppets about America being the World Police.  I thought it might ruin my enjoyment for their work.  Amazing stuff.  They explain more through comedy about politics than you could ever assimilated in a 36 hour viewing of CSPAN2.

PerspectiveMore people have died in Chinese mine accidents this year than fighting 2 wars on the other side of the world (5,491 coal miners were killed in 2,939 accidents by Dec. 11, 2005).  It is not saying every life lost during this conflict is not tragic and something that should be remembered, but it is saying that it is always important to put things into proper perspective.  Stop and think as you are fed information.  Assume it is biased and flat wrong and make them prove to you that it is right.

They say "Bush lied".  Give me one example of where Bush lied.  Please.  Send me an email.  It is possible to argue that intelligence from the World Police (along with France, Russia, Germany and the U.N.) was faulty, overexaggerated and outdated, but it is also possible to argue that Saddam had these weapons, he used them on his neighbors and even his own people.  The U.N. sanctions said he must destroy all of them and verify that he destroyed them.  He never did and subsequently defied 18 United Nations resolutions.  The left says we should have given peace a chance.

Dr. Dean and your Democratic friends, we accomplished the mission objective, taking out Saddam Hussein, the cost to stabilize the country has been high and we are doing our best to turn the country back over to the Iraqis.  So... Mission Accomplished.  Now lets work together militarily and politically to get our troops home as soon as possible.  Irresponsible rhetoric because you see it as a way to bash bush is wrong.  Its time to put politics aside and be an American.  Its easy to be a problem spotter, but more productive to be a problem solver.

OK.. so, its George Bush's fault that "global warming" is causing hurricanes, melting the ice caps and killing the Earth.  I would love to ask Al Gore if Bush is also responsible for global warming on Mars and Jupiter.  In actuality, our sun (that we all share, Al) is getting warmer.

Global Warming... on Mars and Jupiter!

Kennedy is all for environmentalism... as long as it doesn't affect his million-dollar view off Nantucket. 

Blowhard Ted Kennedy's Wind Farm