How The Left Thinks About Terrorism...
One of the mantras of the left, is that George Bush has made America less safe from terrorism. Of course, there hasn't been an attack on American soil for nearly 5 years, but lets not confuse that fact with the fantasy.
So this guy, despite saying over and over that one death from a terrorist on American soil is too much, goes on to calculate the advantages if there was an attack just days before the mid-term elections therefore giving both Houses of Congress to the [undeserving-ed.] DemNOcrats. All kinds of wonderful positive things that would magically happen that would save untold millions of lives and the world would be a happy place again.
Some of the good ones...
Be in a position to elevate the party's chances for a regime change in 2008. A regime change that would:Additionally, by winning the election, Bush would not have the ability to install one of his nutjob right-wing ideologues into the next vacant Supreme Court seat, therefore, Roe vs. Wade would not be overturned and hundreds of thousands if not millions of women would be saved from being forced into back-alley, dirty and dangerous abortion clinics risking their lives and civility.
Save hundreds of thousands of American lives by enacting universal health care;
Save untold numbers of lives by pushing for cleaner air standards that would greatly reduce heart and lung diseases;
More enthusiastically address the need for mass transit, the greater availability of which would surely cut highway deaths;
Enact meaningful gun control legislation that would reduce crime and cut fatalities by thousands a year;
Fund stem cell research that could result in cures saving millions of lives;
Boost the minimum wage, helping to cut down on poverty which helps spawn violent crime and the deaths that spring from those acts;
Be less inclined to launch foolish wars, absence of which would save thousands of soldiers' lives- and quite likely moderate the likelihood of further terror acts.
So, of course, another attack would 'prove' that we are not safer from terrorism under GW Bush and people would skidaddle over to the magically more prepared DemNOcrats who would presumably capture Bin-Laden and make the world safer for everyone. Additionally, we would get all of those fringe benefits and we can all expect to live to be 150 years old since we will have all these great things happening.
I am not exactly sure how DemNOcrats would magically find the will or the way to achieve all of this but I also wonder if the terrorists would then lay down their arms and sing Kumbaya while holding hands with the rest of the world. We will withdraw from Iraq and the Iraqis would take responsibility for their own security and everything would be hunky-dory there. Peace would break out around the globe and the US would finally invade Israel and destroy it once-and-for-all. The war would be known as 'Israeli blood for oil.' Arabs would then become our best friends and we would get all the oil that we want for nothing and gas prices drop to 35 cents a gallon. Detroit makes a bundle of money selling monstrous SUVs that get 2 miles to the gallon but they are outlawed by the DemNOcrats and Toyota sells everyone in the US a Camry.
I have to say, that after reading the ramblings of people like this, I can see that the GOP has one huge insurmountable advantage in American elections..... and that is that they are thankfully running against Democrats. Democrats just aren't serious about the real world and live in a world of fantasy and hyperbole. If only the terrorists killed some of us a few days before the mid-term elections, everything would be great!
5 Comments:
This is one of those things the right loves to do, accuse the left of hyperbole - yet the previous paragraph is nothing except conservative hyperbole. I guess you're hoping that no one will notice, right?
Talking Right: How Conservatives Turned Liberalism into a Tax-Raising, Latte-Drinking, Sushi-Eating, Volvo-Driving, New York Times-Reading, Body-Piercing, Hollywood-Loving, Left-Wing Freak Show
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1586483862/sr=1-1/qid=1156614517/ref=pd_bbs_1/102-0688384-5409725?ie=UTF8&s=books
Who was it who wrote "leeching on to one piece of information and using it to bash someone does a disservice to lots of people"?
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Leeching onto what I considered to be potentially unreliable or out-of-context information. Taking simple statements and trying to paint a picture beyond the words.
However, the guy that wrote this piece went way too far, and did enough fantasising for the rest of us. He wrote every word, and I took it from I considered to absurd and looney and summarized it into the preposterous.
That paragraph is not as much hyperbole, but pure exageration and fantasy. I haven't heard anyone from either party desiting to invade Israel but I think that there is a movement afoot to defund the defence of Israel and I am against that. But the previous paragraph is something that I made up. I usually think of hyperbole more as something like the DemNOcrats claiming that they will will capture of kill Bin-Laden... "The Democrats have a better idea. First we will conclude the negotiations with the Chinese and the North Koreans to disarm North Korea. Secondly, under no circumstances will a Democratic Administration ever allow Iran to become a nuclear power. Three, we will kill or capture Osama bin Laden and four, the authority and the control of the ports of the United States must be retained by American companies." -Howard Dean They probably won;t get the chance to do any of this the way they sound.
Post a Comment
<< Home