Election Reflection Part IV - Terrorism's Best Friend

While the Dems’ double-standard hypocrisy is troubling, it is downright frightening that our enemies, who are hell-bent on annihilating us, cheered their victory. Al Qaeda’s uber-terrorist in Iraq, Abu Hamza al-Muhajir, mocked President Bush as a “coward” daring him to “remain steadfast on the battlefield [and] not to hurry his escape the way the defense secretary did.” Challenging the President to keep our troops in Iraq to face more bloodshed, the cave-dweller boasted, “We haven’t had enough of your blood yet,” and claimed that al Qaeda in Iraq is moving toward victory faster than expected because of Bush’s mistakes. And just for kicks, he gratuitously added that Bush was “the most stupid president” in U.S. history. And our dear friends on the angry left think they’re holy patriots for having relentlessly skewered the President at every opportunity. Silly me, I always thought politics was supposed to end at the water’s edge. I for one will sleep much better knowing that the trusty libs, who apparently have never met an Islamowacko they didn’t like, will now hold the purse strings of our military. And now that we’ve turned Congress over to the Dems, al Qaeda’s preferred party, everything’s hunky-dory in the world again, isn’t it? The chief beheader even doled out a warm-fuzzy praising the American people saying, “They voted for something reasonable in the last elections.” Who says the Islamonuts can’t be reasoned with?

Well, lest anyone believes the illusion that putting the libs in power will placate the cave-dwelling flamethrowers thereby making us safer, the terror tormentor eliminated any such fantasy by following through on his campaign victory promise to “not rest from our jihad until we are under the olive trees of Rumieh [referring to Jerusalem] and we have blown up the filthiest house - which is called the White House.” And as a show of good faith, he claimed to have twelve-thousand fighters under his command who “have vowed to die for Allah’s sake.” The following day we learned that four other Islamoanimal organizations are threatening more even destruction in addition to al Qaeda’s post-election threats.

Presidential Press Secretary Tony Snow had no response, but National Security Advisor Steven Hadley indicated some of those “fighters” were believed to already be in the United States. He noted however, that since having been compelled to terminate the Terrorist Surveillance (wiretap) Program, its unknown how they were able to gain entry. Hadley stated that according to multiple intelligence sources, they will be virtually impossible to track since the Democrats have provided with fraudulent voter registration cards and employed many of them as grassroots campaigners. It’s a good thing too because most Americans won’t do those jobs. Hadley then assured Americans that there was little, if any, risk of danger from these “freedom-fighters” because statistically, illegal aliens rarely commit any crimes - except for the one they commit to get here. Besides, Pelosi and Georgie (her new presidential powder-puff) will soon be granting them amnesty. Okay, I made up all the Hadley stuff.

Don’t look now (and I’m sure the libs and their media minions won’t) but the violence in Iraq has escalated through the roof since the election. Maybe it’s my imagination, but it would certainly appear that the “cut-and-run” Dem success has emboldened our enemy. I’ll bet that, along with their virulent condemnation of the terrorist surveillance program, will do wonders for our national security. You can’t really fault them though. After all, they are committed to opposing the President’s radical agenda to deny foreign-born jihadists Constitutional protections.

Folks, do you comprehend the gravity of what we have just done? We have just placed a party in control of Congress that has demonstrated an extraordinary lack of seriousness about the Iraq war and, more problematically, Islamoterror. It troubles me that political and media armchair quarterbacks, both Dems and Reps, opine that we are incompetently prosecuting the war in Iraq based on the limited and skewed knowledge they obtain from the biased media. Of course, it doesn’t help that the elitist liberal media establishment refuses to acknowledge any positive measures that occur. The same day Abu Hamama was spewing verbal diarrhea, al-Reuters quietly reported that Iraq’s army announced it had captured the Egyptian leader of an al-Qaeda cell in Anbar province, an insurgent stronghold.

It troubles me that many people rejoiced in the scapegoating of Defense Secretary Rumsfeld as if it will miraculously solve everything. It scares me that Americans don’t have the stomach for a protracted war. For some inexplicable reason, we expected the Iraq effort to proceed flawlessly and in warp speed or else it’s a quagmire and can’t be won. From the very beginning, Cape Cod orca Ted Kennedy stood on the Senate floor and proclaimed to the world, “This is George Bush’s Viet Nam. The fact is that it is a difficult war and we will sustain casualties. Even though our military is unmatched, no war can be fight without casualties. Even more so against a ruthless, psychopathic guerrilla enemy for whom there is zero fear of the MAD (mutually assured destruction) principle. Simply put, we will never be immune from homicide bombings for virgins and must therefore never relent in attempting to “do” them before they “do” us. And please, spare me the nonsense that we’re creating more terrorists. First of all, we’re not. Those nutjobs have a rich history of terror promoted by that so-called “religion of peace” which long predates the birth of the West. Second, even if we have exacerbated the problem, is the answer to just cower away licking our wounds? Don’t you appeasers get it by now? Don’t you realize that if we weren’t fighting them in Iraq, we’d be fighting in places like Iran, Syria, Libya, Somalia, Indonesia and other third-world countries? The problem is not that we won’t go away. The problem is that they won’t go away.

Ultimately, the angry left’s victory may be cathartic. Since the 2000 election, they have been in the same unhealthy emotional state that the Reps were since Clinton’s impeachment. Having to then suffer a bunch of election losses drove them into a frenzy resulting in their obsession that they were stolen. After all, the elections had to be stolen because in their elitist arrogant view, anyone with half a brain would have obviously voted for them. In other words, we’re stupid. But in 2006, Americans suddenly became smart. Miraculously, there were no claims of Republicans suppressing blacks from voting. You know that if George Allen, Conrad Burns or J.D. Hayworth had won by the same slim margin they lost by, there would have been no graceful concessions. There would certainly have been swift litigation, fabricated stories of challenging or intimidating properly registered voters by racist Republicans, voting machines breaking down in Hispanic neighborhoods, and forcing long poll lines in black neighborhoods so voters are discouraged from waiting.

Certainly, the Dems’ sweep cannot all be blamed on all on the lefty-biased media (although their slanted reporting undoubtedly contributed to it) or Republican complacency. Obviously, corruption was a huge issue and, like it or not, the Republicans were in control and fell under the microscope. Moreover, the Dems clearly ran better candidates than in previous elections. But the lefty media is definitely part of the problem, especially when it comes to the threats posed by Islamofacist terrorists. Sure, drooling over Pelosi becoming the first female speaker was somewhat nauseating, particularly when they gave very little attention to Rice becoming the first African-American female Secretary of State. And Rice, of course, wasn’t the first African-American to hold that post because Bush the racist had previously appointed Colin Powell to that position. Since 1994, the media and pundits have repeatedly asked the question, “What do the Dems have to do to get their power back?” Since the election, they’ve been asking, “What do the Dems have to do to retain it?” But they’re fair, balanced and objective.

What we know about the Dems is that aside from their gloating arrogance, which rivals an athlete engaging in a childish display after winning his last game of a winless season by gyrating and thrusting his pointer finger in the air, they’re disingenuous, morally bankrupt and ethically challenged. And, in addition to their tax-and-spend policies and open-borders immigration policy, they have a cut-and-run policy on Iraq. Well they don’t call it that. They claim it’s a “new direction,” They use labels like “redeployment” and “timetable for withdrawal” to explain it. If the old direction was forward, albeit slowly, what exactly is the “new direction?” Reverse? Hey Dumbos: when they say that they will not rest from their jihad until they have blown up the White House, they don’t give a damn who occupies it - Bush or Clinton, Republican or Democrat, conservative or Liberal!

Sure, they won. But they’ve accomplished nothing. For our sake and the sake of our country, I hope they do.