Sunday, January 07, 2007

The Debilitating Philosophy of the Democrat Party

A Lesson In History

By de Andréa

If Freedom was threatened by defeat, the Democrats would run from the challenge of defence. They would much prefer "accommodations", negotiations, compromises, and apologies for their own actions.

Given a chance to defeat communism the Democrats wanted detente. They much prefer the Sandinistas in Nicaragua to political freedom. They love the dictatorship in China and hate the free nation of Taiwan. Jimmy Carter, and Michael Moore, prefer the Islamic Hezbollah Terrorists or any Muslim terrorists for that matter, over Israel.

Is it any wonder that the Democrats under Clinton tried to destroy the American military? They hate a free America, regardless of their words, look at their actions. For proof the Democrats hate Democracy, freedom, liberty and the like, just ask the enslaved people of Vietnam about the Democrats policies. Who will pay for the millions of Viet citizens that have been killed and enslaved by the vicious Hanoi government, the Democrats?

More troops, fewer troops, different troops, "redeployment" Who are they kidding? Democrats want to cut and run as fast as possible from Iraq, by betraying the Iraqis especially the Kurds who supported us, and rewarding our enemies exactly as they did to the South Vietnamese.

Liberals and G.I. Jane Fonda spent the entire Vietnam War rooting for the enemy and praying for America’s defeat, a tradition they have regurgitated for the Iraq war.

They insisted on calling the Chinese and Soviet-backed Vietcong "the National Liberation Front of Vietnam," just as they call Muslim terrorist killing Americans in Iraq "insurgents and freedom fighters.” Ho Chi Minh was hailed as a "Jeffersonian Democrat," just as Michael Moore compares the Muslim terrorists in Iraq, to the Minute Men of the American Revolution in our fight for freedom and independence.

After a half-dozen years of Democrat presidents creating a looming disaster in Vietnam and President Johnson blindly choosing bombing targets from the Oval Office; in 1969, Nixon a Republican became president and the world was safe again.

Nixon began a phased withdrawal of American ground troops, while protecting the South Vietnamese by increasing the bombings of the North, mining North Vietnamese harbors and attacking North Vietnamese military supplies in Cambodia — all actions hysterically denounced by American liberal Democrats, eager for the communists to defeat America.

Despite the massive anti-war protests staged by the new brainwashed Generation of liberal flower children, their takeovers of university buildings and their bombings of federal property to protest the bombing of North Vietnam and the Communist Vietcong, Nixon’s Vietnam policy was apparently popular with normal Americans. In 1972, he won re-election against "peace" candidate George McGovern in a 49-state landslide.

In January 1973, the United States signed the Paris Peace talks, which would have ended the war with honor. But in order to achieve a ceasefire, Nixon compromised with the liberals and agreed to jamming lousy terms down the South Vietnamese throat, such as allowing Vietcong troops to remain in the South. But in return, we promised South Vietnam that we would resume bombing missions and provide military aid if the North attacked.

It would have worked, but the Democrats were desperate for America to lose. They invented "Watergate," the corpus-delicti of which wouldn’t have merited a Columnist to fill his ink pen during the Clinton years, much less a threat of impeachment, but they hounded Nixon out of office. I wonder how Sandy Berger is weathering that painful wrist-slap, after accidentally filling his sox and his pants full of Clinton damaging classified documents and then shredding them, also by accident.

Three months after Nixon was gone, we got the Watergate Congress and with it, the new Democrat Party. In lieu of the old Democrat Party, which lost wars out of incompetence and naiveté, the new Democrat Party would lose wars on purpose. Just one month after the Watergate Congress was elected; North Vietnam again attacked the South.

Even milquetoast, pro-abortion, detente-loving Gerald R. Ford knew America had to defend South Vietnam or America’s word would be worth nothing, moreover, we would pay for it in the future. As Ford said, "American unwillingness to provide adequate assistance to allies fighting for their lives could seriously affect our credibility throughout the world as an ally.” He pleaded repeatedly with the Democrat Congress simply to authorize aid to South Vietnam — no troops, just arms and food.

But the Democrats turned their backs on South Vietnam, betrayed an ally, and trashed America’s word. Within a month of Ford’s last appeal to Congress to help South Vietnam, Saigon fell, and has now been renamed Ho Chi Minh City in honor of the Democrat hero.

The entire world watched as American personnel desperately scrambled into helicopters from embassy rooftops in Saigon while beating back our own allies, to whom we could offer no means of escape. Southeast Asia was promptly consumed in a maelstrom of violence that seems to occur whenever the liberal Democrats come to power. Communist totalitarians swept through Laos, Cambodia and all of Vietnam. They staged gruesome massacres so vast, that one of their own, (Peacenik Sen. George McGovern) called for military intervention to stop a "clear case of genocide" in Cambodia.

Five years after that, Islamic lunatics in Iran felt no compunction about storming the embassy of what was once the greatest superpower on Earth and taking American citizens hostage for 14 months. To this day, al-Qaida boosts flagging the morale of its jihadist by reminding them of America’s humiliating retreat from Vietnam, moreover, we did nothing; as we did nothing about any of the following attacks by Islam on the U.S. including the first attack on the Twin Towers, Islam was now on a roll, so they simply finished the job on 911.

But Islam made a big mistake they attacked during a Republican controlled Congress and a Republican President. With the support of the American people, and after licking our wounds, the Democrats looked on in terror as they reluctantly gave their support which they later squirmed out of, while President Bush readied the military. One would have thought Bush was going to Nuke the Middle East, looking back on it now, he should have. The Democrats on the other hand were hoping the U.N. would make the Arabs apologize or something, and politely ask Osama, so as to not make him angry, to not to do that again, please.

THE BOTTOM LINE: When Israel destroys Iran’s ability to build an atomic bomb, which they will; the Democrats will condemn Israel for protecting them selves from annihilation. I think the democrats would run from protecting themselves from their own annihilation, oh no, that would be too good to be true.

de andrea



No comments: