(Note: This is the second part of a four-part series. Part I can be viewed here.)
The Dems’ victory wasn’t yet history when they peeled their “moderate” layer of skin faster that Nancy “stretch” Pelosi’s last facelift. And she’s not been the least bit pretentious about her hard left turn. For proof, we need look no further than the chairmanships she’s endorsing. Looney lefties like John Conyers, John Murtha, Henry Waxman, Charlie Rangel, Carl Levin and Alcee Hastings to name a few. With that lefty-studded lineup, does anyone really believe that the “moderate” Health Shulers of the House will dare buck Pelosi to whom they owe their jobs? Let’s face it. Pelosi’s wearing the pants in that House. The bottom line is that whether in the House or the Senate, none of the so-called moderates will have any clout. And in the House especially, they’ll immediately need to build a support system and networking organization to retain their seats in 2008. So whether it’s Pelosi in the House or Reid in the Senate, they’ll all shut their moderate mouths and when ordered to flank left, their only response will be, “how fast?”
The Pelosi-Reid mantra, “spirit of friendship, cooperation and bipartisanship” is as nonexistent as their morality. Pelosi’s first act demonstrated as much when she endorsed John Murtha to serve as her House lapdog. In a letter to Murtha mere days after duping the American people, she wrote, “Your strong voice for national security, the war on terror and Iraq provides genuine leadership for our party, and I count on you to continue to lead on these vital issues.” I’m a little fuzzy on Murtha’s “strong voice for national security” but perhaps she’s referring to his calling for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq by “redeploying” troops to Okinawa. Or maybe she was thinking of his brilliant military strategic analysis when he opined that the President’s “policy is causing terrorism” and that the war “can’t be won militarily.” Murtha, one of the House’s biggest (pun intended) moonbats who, like Cindy Sheehan, has become the poster child for the provocative loony left. This guy was being touted to become majority leader and that’s “friendship, cooperation and bipartisanship?” I’d hate to see their perception of lefty partisanship.
It gets better. Lefty John Conyers, who staged mock impeachment hearings last year and is on record vowing to commence such proceedings (except of course during the weeks prior to the election), will become chairman of the House Judiciary committee. Charles Rangel, who will become chairman of the extremely powerful House Ways and Means committee, has said that all of the President’s tax cuts will be on the chopping block but claims he only wants to “close loopholes” in the tax code. Folks, that’s a code word for eliminating any and all tax breaks that he hasn’t yet closed. Pardon my stupidity, but if they eliminate a tax “break” which relieves us from paying a tax that we’ll now have to pay, isn’t that a tax increase? But far be it for him to call a spade a spade. My guess is if he had, perhaps not as many people would’ve been so willing to vote for the Dems.
And in the Senate, presumptive Democrat presidential nominee Hillary Clinton vowed to operate the Senate on a more bipartisan basis than it had under Republican control. Although it would probably be news to her, she’s not in control of the Senate. Nevertheless, Hillary professed, “We are ready to roll up our sleeves and work with our Republican counterparts. Our country works best when we govern from the vital, dynamic center.” Never being one to shove her agenda down our throats, Clinton then insisted, “Health care is coming back . . . It may be a bad dream for some.” Now that’s bipartisanship for you.
Or maybe the bipartisanship they’re referring to is their reflexive refusal to permit John Bolton’s nomination as our ambassador to the Useless Nations to go to the Senate floor for an up or down vote. True, sore loser RINO Lincoln Chafing could bring it to the floor. But given his voting history, there’s no reason to think of him as anything other than a Dem. For Bolton though, what exactly did he do wrong while serving in that capacity this past year? He’s represented us extremely well and is the first ambassador since Jean Kirkpatrick who steadfastly refuses to kowtow to the rogue states dominating the “security” and “human rights” councils. I’m sorry, but rabidly anti-Semitic and anti-American Muslim-Arab states like Saudi Arabia, Syria and Libya sitting on those councils is worse than a botched John Kerry joke. It’s hardly arrogant to not give a rat’s behind what they or any other backwards third-world theocracy say about us, Israel or human rights. It’s about time America removes its collective proverbial guts from the glass jar on the shelf where the libs put it and tell the Useless Nations a thing or two. And Bolton’s precisely the one to do it. But the Dems won’t even let it come for a vote. Some “spirit of friendship, cooperation and bipartisanship.”