Friday, July 23, 2004
 DO WORLD LEADERS WANT BUSH TO LOSE?
Well ... that's what John Edwards seems to be suggesting. Apparently in between chasing ambulances, presumptive Democratic vice-presidential nominee John Edwards found time yesterday to bring up how foreign leaders want Bush out. The Poodle's campaign has long-abandoned the tradition of bipartisan support for the nation's foreign policy, and is once again evoking the concern of these supposed "foreign leaders."
Speaking on Larry King, Edwards said "I was, just a few weeks ago, in Brussels at a NATO meeting with a whole group of NATO ambassadors and hearing their perspective on this." Oh boy...the Senator from North Carolina has gone to Brussels! We're all impressed. And now we learn that ambassadors are to be categorized as "foreign leaders."
Think about this for a moment. Let's assume that there are some foreign leaders out there who would like to see John Kerry win in November. Surely there are some. Jacques Chirac comes to mind, and whoever is running the show in Belgium. Then we have the new socialist al-Qaeda installed leader of Spain. And what about Iran? You must know that the Mullahs would like to see Bush move back to Crawford. Sure ... any Democrat can easily head overseas and find some foreign leaders who want Bush to lose. But why? What are their motivations? In the case of Iran, the motivation is simple. They would much rather have someone running the show in the U.S. who would be less likely to use military force to interfere with their plans to develop nuclear weapons. Pretty simple. Despots always prefer appeasers. France? The French view is the weaker the United States, the stronger the European Union; and a stronger EU brings a stronger France. France is a second rate (at best) world economic and political power. The French just cannot believe that the crass, crude, uncultured, uneducated Americans wield so much power and influence in the world. They not only want a weakened America, they would celebrate it. It is no wonder Kerry is their candidate. The problem here is that there are so many ... too many Americans who share the goals of the French. They are uncomfortable with America's power and will vote for the candidate they trust to surrender American sovereignty to a far superior Europe. Who do you want in the Oval Office? Somebody who is worried about appeasing the Axis of Weasels or somebody that is dedicated to our national security, and will kill terrorists to achieve that goal? When it comes down to it, who they really hate is the United States. And no amount of groveling by the left is gonna change that. NOT ONLY POSSIBLE ... BUT PROBABLE I hope you caught this statement from the chairman of the 9/11 Commission yesterday. He said that not only is another terrorist attack on the United States possible, it is probable. That's strong language. It's the difference between someone telling you that you "might" be involved in a traffic accident today, or that you "probably" will be in a wreck. The threat is there, but Americans don't seem to understand it. Thoughts of American voters have turned back to matters of plunder and security. By plunder, I mean that voters are more worried about how much the government can seize from other citizens and hand over to them then they are how government can protect them from the threat of terrorism. In the meantime, John Kerry leads George Bush in most polls. OK, it's only by a few percentage points ... but it's a lead, and that just shouldn't be happening at a time when American is fighting a war against Islamic terrorism. We're in trouble. The threat is high. I'm just having a difficult time figuring out who presents a greater threat to our country, Islamic terrorists or American voters? 'SHALL WE FINISH IT OFF?'
Those were the words of one of the 9/11 Muslim hijackers flying the plane that crashed into a field in Pennsylvania. The 9/11 Commission report released yesterday reveals the passenger revolt began at 9:57am on September 11, 2001, 30 minutes after the Al-Qaeda terrorists hijacked the plane. The report says they intended to fly the plane into the White House or the U.S. Capitol, but were thwarted by the passengers of United Flight 93. As the passengers attempted to ram down the cockpit door, the Islamic jihadist pilot pitched the nose of the plane up and down to try and disrupt the assault. Eventually, when that didn't work the hijackers crashed the plane into the ground shouting "Allah is the greatest! Allah is the greatest!" That's right...Islam..the religion of peace was at work right there.
So here we are, three years later, and what has been done to stop these bloodthirsty Islamic bastards from doing this again? Zippo. All we've heard for months is how President Bush has gone too far in protecting the country and of course, all the endless reports about the supposed "abuse" at Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad. Al-Qaeda was in Afghanistan, they were in Iraq....these are the people that orchestrated the largest single terrorist attack on American soil in our history. Do we have the will to fight? Not according to the media, The Poodle and assorted other worthless liberals. They say we should turn our security over to the UN, Russia, France and Germany.
So now we have this useless 575-page 9/11 Commission report. The partisan document essentially condemns the war in Iraq by saying a failed Iraq in the wake of the U.S. invasion could become "breeding grounds for attacks against Americans at home." Apparently these idiots on this Commission believe we lost the war in Iraq. They also don't realize that Iraq was already a breeding ground for several attacks against Americans at home. Saddam was harboring terrorists...this is a fact that cannot be denied.
The chairman of the Commission, Tom Kean, says we were unprepared. Why were we unprepared? Because Bill Clinton's administration did nothing to fight terrorism, that's why. There's real blame to go around here and they aren't assigning it where it belongs. The commission concluded that across the government there were "failures of imagination."
'Failures of imagination?' More like failure of the terrorist-appeasing liberal Democrats that ran this country's national security into the ground for eight years. SAY WHAT? Come on now, could this possibly be true? No ... I haven' t read the entire 9/11 Commission Report yet ... just excerpts, summaries and various articles penned by those that have a team of readers hard at work turning pages and making notes. I have been paying attention to the statements made by various members of the commission, and one by John Lehman really stands out. Lehman talks about profiling. More specifically ... TSA screeners actually crossing the bounds of political correctness and paying special attention to Middle Eastern men who travel by air. Lehman says that under current rules and regulations any airline that pulls aside more than two Middle Eastern-looking passengers for some extra screening at one time faces fines for discrimination. Oh come on now. Can this be true? Surely the choking atmosphere of political correctness hasn't brought us to this level of absurdity ... yet. Can't you just imagine a cell of Islamic terrorists lounging around with a few bottles of Camel Drool beer laughing their turbans off as they speak of this ridiculous rule? Questions: How in the world can the American people take their government's anti-terrorism efforts seriously when the people who are charged with protecting us have to abide by asinine rules such as this? Last Saturday I watched TSA agents at the Denver airport manhandle an old man with a cane as they groped, wanded, shoved, pushed, pulled and harassed him for almost ten minutes ... allowing him to fall at least three times. Now you tell me that these same agents can't pull more than two Middle Eastern men aside at any one time for fear of legal action? Government. Only government. MEDIA SHELTERING SANDY
Notice how Sandy Berger is nowhere to be found on the front page these days? Just like that, the story is off the front page. Now you see it, now you don't. A blatant example of media bias if there ever was one, but they're getting more and more blatant about it.
A quick check of CNN.com has no stories on the front page about Berger. ABC, CBS..nothing. Now, just for a minute...ask yourself this: what if Condoleezza Rice had been the one to do this? What if she had gone into that secured room at the National Archives, left with top-secret documents, and smuggled notes out in her whatever?
You would not hear the end of it....and it would still be front page news, right now. As it is now, the media is protecting one of their own...and that means pulling the plug on any coverage of the Sandy Berger affair.
Thankfully, the Justice Department isn't giving up so easily. You're probably going to see Berger arrested and brought up on charges.
SPEAKING OF AIRPORT SECURITY....
In case you hadn't heard, again making the point that we are not safer today than we were on 9/11, check out this story about what happened at Atlanta's Hartsfield-Jackson airport. 31-year-old Robert Buzzell opened an alarmed exit door and wearing only his pajama bottoms, proceeded to commandeer a luggage tractor and drive it down an active runway. He was arrested and is probably crazy.
What if that had been an Islamic terrorist with a bomb? What if he drove that tractor right onto a runway and into an airplane as it landed? Absolutely pathetic...of course all of the bureaucrats are scrambling to cover their behinds on this one. NEAL AT THE DNC Don't forget, starting Monday July 26, Neal will be broadcasting live from the Democratic National Convention. READING ASSIGNMENTS
More fallout from the Sandy Berger affair....The Poodle has removed his anti-terror plan from the campaign's website.
Flight crews and air marshalls say Middle Eastern men are staking out airports, probing security measures and conducting test runs aboard airplanes for a terrorist attack. Will they be profiled and arrested? Probably not.
A senior law enforcement official is saying that Sandy Berger did indeed stuff notes in his socks....and was reported by the guards.
More Iran ties to Al-Qaeda.....looks like we may have another mess to clean up.
The Sandy Berger DocuGate story should be a big problem for Democrats....but the press is AWOL on the whole issue. Hugh Hewitt wonders why. Of course, the anti-Bush media is why.....they want to elect The Poodle.
The media apologists are coming out of the woodwork in support of Sandy Berger, as the Media Research Center reports.
What about the situation in Iran? Unfortunately, the Bush administration has capitulated to the Axis of Weasels on this one, says Charles Krauthammer.
Are men unfairly paid more than women? Not according to Thomas Sowell, who continues with his series on this issue, today with Part II of 'The Grand Fallacy.' As always, good reading.
The Democratic National Convention is coming up in Boston, and how is the security? What security, asks Jeff Jacoby, who says it's all just an illusion.
Are we safer now that we were before 9/11? It's the wrong question, according to David Limbaugh. A better one is who would you rather trust with the national security of the United States?
Democrats like to talk about "the politics of personal destruction" practiced by Republicans, but as Mona Charen explains, it's the Democrats who fight dirty.
If you're thinking of robbing a bank, it's probably not a good idea to wait for the teller to call 911 first. Media Matters has at Neal. When Rover gets randy, keep a stuffed duckie handy. What web browser is Neal now using? Mozilla's Firefox. The down side? Our online broadcast won't work with it. Now, some listeners have reported that they are able to listen online with a Mozilla browser by going directly to Stream Audio's website, clicking to listen to WSB there. I haven't been able to get that to work, even with pop-up blocking turned off, but it may be the software build I'm using. It's worth a try. --ww Dogs used to smuggle surgically implanted cocaine. One of the Knight Rider K.I.T.T. cars is up for auction on ebay. You'll have to beat the Germans off with a stick. | 
Search Boortz.com
