Clevelanders know - if you've ever seen this guy's picture, it simply SCREAMS the word
"Gomer". While make-overs are easy, his insufferable fellation to the Dim Son and his Vietraq debacle, however, may be beyond hope . . .
"Our boys have gone to war for a lie and under false pretenses," prattled a protestor, whose name does not deserve mention in a column about heroes. There's nothing new about such statements. They're the standard anti-war talking points. We've heard them and read them so often now that many people barely think of them as having meaning. They're just part of the same old tired political script - background noise.
But think for a moment about what those statements really mean: The president is the enemy and our military men and women are fighting so that evil
will triumph.
Then there's the phrase you hear from people who want it both ways: "I support the troops, but I don't support the war." That's not an option and here's why.
This war, like every war, comes down to resolve. The side that loses its resolve first loses the war. We cannot afford to embolden terrorists of every stripe by losing this war. Far from producing peace, such an outcome would merely hasten the next war.
And every time some empty-headed actor displays his contempt for the country that has made him rich, every time some opportunistic politician pronounces his scorn for the effort in Iraq, every time some confused protestor scrawls his ignorance on a sign and holds it up for the eager cameras of the controversy-obsessed media, the real enemy's resolve is strengthened. Ooooooooo KAY.
Well, he did get two things right - the "President" IS the enemy AND evil, and as long as Lancelot Link and the PNAC Extravaganza are in office, you can definitely count on a hastened "NEXT WAR". Moron.
I actually had to type this because the link isn't up yet. But you get the point.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
