That said, there are very few, if any, people I know who are ‘infatuated’ with Fidel or Che or Ho Chi Minh.

But I do know a great many people who believed none of those guys or their pokey little countries posed any threat to the US. And most people have come around to the idea that Saddam Hussein didn’t either.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

A lefty when ‘revolution’ was sexy. A conservative when the tide turned.

Actually, Arthur, what turned him into a conservative was seeing the aftermath of the Vietnam conflict with millions of Vietnamese and Cambodians murdered, displaced, and put into re-education camps….and the so-called “peace” movement remaining silent and unmoved by the suffering.

Why don’t you ever condemn al Qaeda and Islamic terrorists, Arthur? Do you ever lodge a protest comment on jihadi websites, denouncing their violence? Why doesn’t the anti-war movement, if they want to end wars, protest against the Taliban, al Qaeda, and Ahmadinejad? Why is “your side” so infatuated with dictators like Fidel Castro and “revolutionaries” like Che Guevara? What makes them heroes and the U.S. villains in the eyes of so many anti-American leftists?

A filthy colonial war in the early 20th century.

Another in the 21st.

Well, that would be the Noam Chomsky, Howard Zinn, Ward Churchill point of view. *snicker*

Here’s another one for you to munch on, Arthur:

In the late 1950s most Cubans needed a change, and they were right. So when a young leader came along, every Cuban was at least receptive.

When the young leader spoke eloquently and passionately and denounced the system, the press fell in love with him. They never questioned who his friends were or what he really believed in. When he said he would help the farmers and the poor and bring free medical care and education to all, everyone followed. When he said he would bring justice and equality to all, everyone said “Praise the Lord.” And when the young leader said, “I will be for change and I will bring you change,“ everyone yelled, “Viva Fidel.”

But nobody asked about the change, so by the time the executioner’s guns went silent, the people’s guns had been taken away. By the time everyone was equal, they were equally poor, hungry and oppressed. By the time everyone received their free education it was worth nothing. By the time the press noticed, it was too late, because they were now working for him. By the time change was finally implemented Cuba had been knocked down … to third world status. By the time change was over more than a million people had taken to boats, rafts and inner tubes. … And now I’m back to the beginning of my story.

Luckily, we would never fall in America for a young leader who promised change without asking, “What Change? How will you carry it out? What will it cost America?”

Would we? ~ Manuel Alvarez, Jr.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Excellent analysis by Micheal Medved.

Just kidding.

A lefty when ‘revolution’ was sexy. A conservative when the tide turned. But always an opportunist with a shrewd sense of what is best for his career.

As for his ‘analysis’:

A filthy colonial war in the early 20th century.

Another in the 21st.

I guess we never learn.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Here’s another piece (by Michael Medved) in the same spirit as the one posted:

The handsome young Democratic nominee is the most spellbinding orator of his generation, promising dramatic change to correct economic injustice and bring an end to a bloody, unpopular war. Republicans deride him as a showboating demagogue with scant governmental experience and place their faith in a gruff, battle-tested veteran who asks for public patience to fight the war till victory. Meanwhile, halfway around the world, anti-American insurgents have recently lost thousands of fighters to desertion and improved U.S. tactics, but they believe they can exploit their enemy’s war weariness. The guerrilla fighters, therefore, intensify their gruesome attacks as part of a conscious effort to influence the November election on behalf of the Democratic “peace” candidate.

Though contemporary Americans will assume the above description applies to Iraq and the 2008 campaign, it’s also an accurate summary of the situation leading up to the fateful election of 1900 and the darkest days of our four-year war against insurrectionists in the Philippines. This nearly forgotten conflict deserves renewed attention today since the parallels with our present predicament count as both eerie and illuminating.

Read the rest

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Yes, atadOFF, I know, but the post is so good because of the similarities.

I was proud of my country when Aznar decided to support Bush in such great and difficult challenge, as Mike’s says.

Can anyone imagine the shame and humiliation that many Spaniards felt when Zapatero, our Obama, decided to retire the troops, betraying our allies? He even asked the rest of the countries helping Irak to do the same thing and retire their troops.

The Spanish soldiers in Irak came back home crying in humiliation and anger.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

atadoff: Actually it was the Revolutionary War but does it matter?

The point is that in every great and difficult challenge this nation has ever faced there has been a group of people who insist we cannot succeed and shouldn’t even try.

We call them Democrats!

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Scriptament, the post was referring to the American civil war, not the war in Iraq. It was simply drawing parallels to illustrate a point.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

“But in the end, only one European nation helped us.”

My American friends:
Please, don’t forget that Aznar, the Spanish president at that time, also supported Bush, facing a strong opposition from the Spanish left. He was a strong president; he knew what he had to do.

Then, after the Madrid bombings, three days before the election, Zapatero won unexpectedly, and he cowardly surrendered and retired the troops from Irak: Spain cowardly surrendered (shame on us).

It is really sad to think that in the future Irak will be able to thank USA and UK for what they did, and Spain will not be there… when it was at the beginning.

We already have our Obama, unfortunately.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Received this in an email yesterday…
Only too true…
Thanks to the MSM… and the idiots that follow them…

Nobama is a moron who hasn’t a clue what is best for our country….
He only does what his handlers tell him to do….

As many times as I have disagreed wtih GW… I can agree he wants what is best for our country except for immigration.
Regardless of public opinion…. I can respect that he has the strength of his convictions..

Like or Dislike: 0  0

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23520981-details/Barack+Obama%27s+broken+promise+to+African+village/article.do

The link is to:
Good article that shows what it means to trust someone who can’t be trusted, even by his ‘Islamic’ family. Hussein O’s only interest is himself and his inflated ego. He hold the record for ‘here’ votes in the U.S. which is only to avoid making a decision He swore to serve the people of Il for 6 years and has served only 143 days in the Senate since he was elected. Once a liar and failure always a liar and failure. Now you want a known liar who won’t follow his sworn word to be POTUS. What a bunch of nuts BDS has produced in the democrat party.

Like or Dislike: 0  0