Religions > Atheism > NC Firm To Lay Off 750. Thank You Bush (Mission Accomplished! No Halliburton Cronies Left Behind!)
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Yang, AthD h.c" |
| Date: |
17 Aug 2004 01:39:05 AM |
| Object: |
NC Firm To Lay Off 750. Thank You Bush (Mission Accomplished! No Halliburton Cronies Left Behind!) |
http://www.newsday.com/business/ny-bzul043917034aug04,0,1961249.story?coll=ny-business-headlines
Remember how Bush's "stimulus" policy was supposed to lead to massive
jobs growth right about... now?
-----
Yang
a.a. #28
AthD (h.c.) conferred by the regents of the LCL
a.a. pastor #-273.15, the most frigid church of Celcius nee Kelvin
EAC Econometric Forecast and Sorcery Division
Proudly plonked by Lani Girl and Crazyalec
The Bush 'balanced' budget: 1.2 trillion and worsening
The Bush 'economic' policy: -3 million jobs and counting
The Bush Iraq lie: -942 GIs, one friend's co-worker's son and mounting
Having Bush ***** up my country: Worthless
.
|
|
| User: "Michael Marxist Moore" |
|
| Title: )Kerry Stabs America In The Back! LIBERALS HATE AMERICA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
17 Aug 2004 11:13:39 AM |
|
|
Kerry Stabs America In The Back! LIBERALS HATE
AMERICA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=12157
Stab in the Back
By David Horowitz
FrontPageMagazine.com | February 12, 2004
The fact that the President is now on the defensive over the war in
Iraq is both puzzling and ominous. The Democratic attack on the
credibility of the Commander-in-Chief has gone on relentlessly for
more than ten months, ever since the liberation of Baghdad in April
of last year. This ferocious attack would be understandable if the war
had gone badly or been unjust; if Saddam Hussein had unleashed
chemical weapons on the coalition armies, or had ignited an
environmental disaster, or if the war had resulted in tens
of thousands of coalition casualties, or become an endless quagmire,
or instigated a wave of terror across the Muslim world ? as its
opponents predicted before it began.
But it did not. This was a good war and relatively costless as modern
conflicts go. Its result was the liberation of 25 million Iraqis from
a monster regime. Its cost was a third of the economic losses
resulting from the 9/11 attack. Its relatively painless victory was a
tremendous setback for the forces of chaos. The war destroyed a
principal base of regional aggression and terror. It induced a
terrorist and nuclear power, Libya, to give up its weapons of mass
destruction. It induced Iran to allow inspections of its nuclear
sites; it caused North Korea to consider negotiation and restraint. It
induced Pakistan to give up its nuclear secrets dealer. It made the
terrorist regime in Syria more reasonable and pliant. It sent a
message across a dangerous world that defiance of UN resolutions and
international law, when backed by the word of the United States, can
mean certain destruction for outlaw regimes. In all these ways,
whatever else one may say about it, George Bush?s war has struck a
mighty blow for global peace.
The Democrats? attack on the President?s war, then, is an effort ?
whether Democrats intend it so or not ? to reverse these gains. If the
President is defeated in the coming election on the issue of war and
peace, as Democrats intend, his defeat will send exactly the reverse
message to the world of nations. It will tell them that a new American
government is prepared to go back to the delusions of pre-9/11, that
it will end the war on terror and return to treating terrorists as
criminals instead of enemy soldiers. Candidate John Kerry has said
this in so many words. It will tell them that the United States will
no longer hold governments responsible for the actions of terrorists
who operate from their soil, as did Ansar al-Islam, Abu Nidal, and Abu
Abbas from their bases in Iraq. Or for supporting terror, as Saddam
Hussein did when he financed suicide bombers in Israel. It will send a
signal that tyrants like Saddam Hussein who defy UN ultimatums are
likely to be appeased ? the way they were under the Clinton
Administration which had the vision to stop Saddam and the Taliban but
not the will to stop them with force. It will announce to the world
that the
American government is now reluctant to risk even a few American lives
to defend international law or stand up for the freedom of those who
are oppressed like the people of Iraq.
The Democrats? personal attack on the President over the war is not
only imprudent; it is also unprecedented. Never in our history has a
commander-in-chief been attacked on a partisan basis for a war that
went well, let alone so well. Never in human history has a leader been
attacked on a partisan basis for liberating a people or inducing
tyrants to give up their weapons of mass destruction. The Democrats?
attack on the President is an unprecedented partisan campaign over
national security in a time of war. It is a campaign that apparently
knows no limits, adopting tactics that are as unscrupulous as they are
reckless. The commander-in-chief has been called a ?deceiver,? a
?deserter,? a ?breaker of promises,? a ?fraud?
who ?concocted? the war for personal material gain, a leader who
risked innocent American lives for a ?lie.? And all these accusations
are made while the war continues! All these charges are made while
terrorists plot to kill thousands of Americans with biological and
chemical and possibly nuclear weapons! The Democrats? campaign is a
stab in the back not only of the President but of the nation he serves
and which he is sworn to protect.
No one knows what the future will bring. But no one can fail to have
noticed that while the commander-in-chief has carried on an aggressive
war against terror in Afghanistan and Iraq, there have been no
terrorist
attacks on American soil. For two-and- a-half years while the
commander-in-chief has waged this war that the Democrats have chosen
to attack, the American people have been safe.
If the American people were now to elect a candidate who has conducted
his campaign as an attack on the very war the President has fought to
defend us, no one can doubt that our enemies will be encouraged and
our lives will be in greater danger than before. Perhaps there have
been elections with higher stakes than the one we are facing this
year. But this observer can?t remember one. David Horowitz is the
author of numerous books including an autobiography, Radical Son,
which has been described as ?the first great autobiography of his
generation,? and which chronicles his odyssey from radical activism to
the current positions he holds. Among his other books are The Politics
of Bad Faith and The Art of Political War. The Art of Political War
was described by White House political strategist Karl Rove as ?the
perfect guide to winning on the political battlefield.? Horowitz?s
latest book, Uncivil Wars, was published in January this year, and
chronicles his crusade against intolerance and racial McCarthyism on
college campuses last
spring. Click here to read more about David
Borders, Language, & Culture is what matters
all the way.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "torresB" |
|
| Title: Money war tops voters concerns in Pennsylvania!! LIBERALS HATE AMERICA!!!!!!!!!! |
17 Aug 2004 01:04:29 PM |
|
|
Money war tops voters concerns in Pennsylvania!! LIBERALS HATE
AMERICA!!!!!!!!!!
Pittsburgh Tribune-Review July 18, 2004 Debra Erdley
Democrats hold a 445,000-voter registration edge in Pennsylvania,
which boasts about 7.6 million voters. But Keystone state voters have
a long tradition of crossing party lines. Although they gave Al Gore a
200,000-vote edge in 2000, they've picked the winner in 11 of the last
13 presidential elections since 1952, electing a slate of Republicans
that included Eisenhower, Nixon, Reagan and Bush the elder.
Several polls, including the Quinnipiac Poll, gave Kerry a slight edge
in Pennsylvania last week, but many attributed that to the bounce his
campaign received from the addition of U.S. Sen. John Edwards to the
Democratic ticket. They insisted the race and Pennsylvania's
winner-take-all 21 electoral votes are still in play. Those electoral
college votes -- 8 percent of the 270 needed to claim victory - are
especially critical in what many predict will be a close popular vote.
For now, Madonna (Terry Madonna, director of the Keystone Poll at
Franklin and Marshall College in Lancaster) said, that vote is Bush's
to lose.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
