When John Kerry slandered an entire generation of men who fought in Vietnam he branded them as “war criminals.” Today, much of the same thing is being said about our young men and women in Iraq.

Now, a lawsuit filed in Philadelphia’s Court of Common Pleas will test the very foundation of Kerry’s anti-war persona for the first time. It isn’t dubious medals or Kerry’s disputed service record in Vietnam that is being called into question. This time Kerry may finally be forced to answer for the events that launched his public career, one that made him an anti-war hero for many American liberals and a turncoat for millions of Vietnam veterans.

The lawsuit (Vietnam Veterans Legacy Foundation, et al. v. Kenneth Campbell, et al.) challenges the basis, the factual accuracy of then Lt. (j.g.) Kerry’s acrimonious testimony before the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 1971. It was there Kerry’s public career was catapulted with his now ubiquitous portrayal of American soldiers as murderers, rapists and torturers “who ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam . . . [and] razed villages in a fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan.”

For the anti-war, anti-American protesters, the American soldiers are the “terrorists,” and the enemies are the victims of a barbaric U.S. military which tortures and murders defenseless civilians.

That false premise, one of the most vicious and enduring smears spawned by Kerry 35 years ago, will also be put to the test once Kerry’s true “Band of Brothers” are put under oath in a Philadelphia courtroom.

The background to this lawsuit is long and complex, but even a condensed version is rich in irony and poetic justice.

It had it roots in 2004 with the documentary Stolen Honor: Wounds that Never Heal. Many may recall the film, although it is probably best known for not being seen, suppressed after Sinclair Broadcasting Company courageously announced it was going to air the documentary in its entirety. Thanks to Kerry and his liberal colleagues in the Senate and their enablers in the mainstream media, Sinclair was browbeaten into withdrawing the film, its broadcast license threatened by a Kerry campaign manager in 2004. The film’s producer, Carlton Sherwood, a Pulitzer Prize and Peabody Award-winning investigative reporter, interviewed former POWs for the documentary.

I was among those whom Sherwood, a decorated Marine combat veteran himself, asked to participate in Stolen Honor. I was a POW for nearly six years, held in North Vietnam prison camps, including the notorious Hanoi Hilton, a place of unimaginable horrors — torture, beatings, starvation and mind-numbing isolation. When Kerry branded us “war criminals,” he handed our captors all the justification they needed to carry out their threats to execute us. Thanks to Kerry, Jane Fonda and their comrades in the anti-war movement, our captivity was prolonged by years. The communists in Hanoi and Moscow couldn’t have had a better press agent to spread their anti-American propaganda.

To guarantee Stolen Honor would never be seen by anyone — not even theatre-goers — the producer was slapped with a libel and defamation lawsuit.

The POWs and the wives of POWs who participated in Stolen Honor refused to abandon the facts conveyed in the film. For some of us, it was the first time since our release by the Communists in 1973 that we were able to have our voices publicly heard, to tell our stories about the consequences of Kerry’s treachery. In 2005, we formed a nonprofit organization, the Vietnam Veterans Legacy Foundation (VVLF), to gather records, documents and other materials to form a fact-based, educational repository for students and scholars of Vietnam history and to tell the true story of the American soldiers in Vietnam. The VVLF’s mission is “to set the record straight, factually, about Vietnam and those who fought there.”

For our efforts, we were promptly sued by Campbell and another long-time anti-war Kerry follower and VVAW member, Dr. Jon Bjornson. It was clear that Kerry not only wanted to punish us for Stolen Honor; he intended to use surrogates to sue us into permanent silence and financial ruin.

Forced to spend huge sums to defend ourselves from these frivolous lawsuits, we have filed a countersuit against these Kerry surrogates and intend to reveal the truth about the lawsuits and their sponsors. We believe that we can prove that the purpose of nearly two years of litigation was to cover up for Kerry’s treachery, to drain us financially and spiritually, and to prevent us from setting the record straight.

At stake is ultimately nothing less than the integrity of the American military in Vietnam, the honor of the men who served their country, the nobility of those who gave their lives, and the truth of America’s history in Vietnam. Until or unless we do correct the existing record, the American military may never be free of the myths and smears of Vietnam, its honor and integrity cleansed as it fights to defend freedom at home and around the world.

Our mission is hardly over. We hope you will join us in fighting this battle . . . for our soldiers, then and now. For more information about Vietnam, the foregoing litigation, or to make a donation, please access the VVLF website now.

Col. George E. “Bud” Day
Director and President,
Vietnam Veterans Legacy Foundation

Col. George E. “Bud” Day, USAF (Ret.,) was a POW in North Vietnam for five years, seven months and 13 days. He served in three wars (WWII, Korea, and Vietnam) and earned the Medal of Honor. He is the Air Force’s most decorated living veteran. He is the Director and President of the Vietnam Veterans Legacy Foundation, Inc., an organization created to better educate and inform the public about the Vietnam War, its events, its history, and the men and women who sacrificed to serve their country. Please go here to read Col. Day’s statement in its entirety.

Madame Traitor: An Arab-American’s Perspective on Pelosi in Damascus

Madame Traitor:

An Arab-American’s Perspective on Pelosi in Damascus


Madame Traitor: An Arab-American’s Perspective on Pelosi in Damascus

By Emilio Karim Dabul

Nancy Pelosi is to world diplomacy what Michael Jordan was to baseball: completely forgettable and unnecessary. But unlike Michael’s slightly amusing foray into the Babe’s world, there’s nothing funny about Pelosi in
The terrorists and their supporters, who are always looking for weak links and signs that the
US does not have the will or backbone to win the war we’re fighting with them, just found a great ally in Madame Speaker. Among the older members of my extended Syrian family, there was a general attitude that kindness equaled weakness. It wasn’t that they didn’t believe in charity, but that it must be parceled out carefully, because those of ill intent can be quick to take advantage of those they perceive to be gullible and soft. This is what Nancy Pelosi either doesn’t understand, or doesn’t care about: she’s being used by the very people who want to destroy us in another round of window dressing, subterfuge, and deceit. I suspect that Pelosi knows this, but is more intent on trying to undermine the President than in looking at how she could best support national security. Let’s look at the record.
Syria has admitted that it has financially supported Hezbollah and Hamas, but says that it doesn’t supply them with arms. What’s the difference? What do you think these groups buy with the money? How many Israeli and Lebanese men, women and children have been slaughtered because of Syrian backing of these groups? And who do you think Syria supports across the border in
Iraq: our troops or the terrorists some blithely refer to as “insurgents”? Without the direct involvement of Syria and Iran, the current terrorism movement in
Iraq would have considerably less groundswell. Pelosi might respond that she’s aware of all that, but that she’s simply taking James Baker’s advice to talk with your enemies. Well, here’s the problem: Baker’s wrong. Talking to the Syrians has never accomplished anything. They correctly read the signs a long time ago that there would be no real consequences for continuing to support Arab and Islamic terrorist groups. And Pelosi has proven them right again: bend us and we will break. This needs to stop. Syria and Iran need to know in a very real way that if they continue to support terrorism, they will experience the full wrath of the
United States. And there cannot be any negotiating when it comes to this. Moammar Gadhafi -remember that boogeyman?-backed off when we bombed his palace in
Gadhafi’s two-year-old adopted daughter died in that raid, which was a terrible tragedy, particularly since he was the one with blood on his hands, not her. Still, Gadhafi crawled back into his hole, and retreated even further when we invaded Iraq, making a public show of acquiescence to the
US. He may be crazy, but he’s not stupid. Syria and Iran need to be given fair warning to cease and desist all support of terrorist activities, prove they’re doing so, and if they don’t, be held to account. Damascus and Tehran will continue to taunt and undermine us, and the
UK, until they know they can’t.
Assad would be a lot less likely to cut checks for terrorists if he knew it could cost him his job or his life. And the same is true of the little guy in the leisure suit over in
Iran. This is what they both understand and respect: force, not treaties and tea. And Pelosi would probably be adverse to hang out with these guys if she knew F-18s might be approaching. Charging her with treason in the meantime would be appropriate. If the Speaker of the House during the Vietnam War had broken bread with Cambodian leaders, the public would have demanded his resignation and the most severe punishment possible for such a crime. And yet when Nancy Pelosi sits down with our enemies’ collaborators, she’s given a pass, even praised by those who cheer on any action that goes against the President. Al Jazerra is probably her biggest fan right now, next to the New York Times. The problem is she’s not just hurting the President, she’s betraying our troops, and everyone around the world at risk to terrorist attacks, which is most of us. We should not let her get away with it. We need to hold Pelosi responsible for her actions, as well as Syria and
Iran. The three of them have more than proven their status as enemies of the
United States. *** Emilio Dabul is a Contributing Editor for American Congress for Truth.com. He is a Syrian-American of Muslim heritage and a
Middle East commentator.


Everyday, American Congress for Truth (ACT) is a 501c3 non profit organization on the front lines fighting for you in meeting with politicians, decision makers, speaking on college campuses and planning events to educate and inform the public about the threat of radical Muslim fundamentalists to world peace. We are committed to combating the global upsurge of hate and intolerance.
To continue and bolster our efforts, we need your continued solidarity, activism and financial support. We are only as strong as our supporters. We thank you for helping us carry on this important work.

Terrorists endorse Pelosi’s ‘good policy of dialogue’

Terrorists endorse Pelosi’s ‘good policy of dialogue’ Aaron Klein – Apr 04, 2007

JERUSALEM – House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit today to Syria – in which she called for dialogue with Damascus – was ‘brave’ and ‘very appreciated’ and could bring about ‘important changes’ to America’s foreign policy, including talks with ‘Middle East resistance groups,’ according to members of terror organizations here whose top leaders live in Syria.

One terror leader, Khaled Al-Batch, a militant and spokesman for Islamic Jihad, expressed hope Pelosi would continue winning elections, explaining the House speaker’s Damascus visit demonstrated she understands the Middle East.

Pelosi’s visit was opposed by President Bush, who called Syria a ‘state sponsor of terror.’

‘Nancy Pelosi understands the area (Middle East) well, more than Bush and Dr. (Condoleeza) Rice,’ said Al-Batch, speaking to WND from
‘If the Democrats want to make negotiations with
Syria, Hamas, and Hezbollah, this means the Democratic Party understands well what happens in this area and I think Pelosi will succeed. … I hope she wins the next elections.’

Islamic Jihad has carried out scores of shootings and rocket attacks, and, together with the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades terror group, has taken responsibility for every suicide bombing in
Israel the past two years.

Ramadan Shallah, overall chief of Islamic Jihad, lives in Syria, as does Hamas chieftain Khaled Meshaal. Israel has accused the Syrian-based Hamas and Islamic Jihad leadership of ordering militants in the West Bank and
Gaza Strip to carry out terror attacks.

Al-Batch expressed hope Pelosi and the Democratic Party will pressure Bush to create dialogue with Syria and Middle East ‘resistance movements’ and prompt an American withdrawal from Iraq.

‘Bush and Dr. Rice made so many mistakes in the
Middle East. Just look at Palestinian clashes and
Iraq. But I think some changes are happening for the Bush administration’s foreign policy because of the hand of Nancy Pelosi. I think the Democratic Party can do things the best. … Pelosi is going down a good road by this policy of dialogue,’ he said.

Abu Abdullah, a leader of Hamas’ military wing in the Gaza Strip, said the willingness by some lawmakers to talk with Syria ‘is proof of the importance of the resistance against the U.S.’

‘The Americans know and understand they are losing in Iraq and the Middle East and that their only chance to survive is to reduce hostilities with Arab countries and with Islam. Islam is the new giant of the world.’

‘Pelosi’s visit to
Syria was very brave. She is a brave woman,’ Jihad Jaara, a senior member of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades terror group and the infamous leader of the 2002 siege of Bethlehem’s Church of the Nativity, told WND.

‘I think it’s very nice and I think it’s much better when you sit face to face and talk to (Syrian President Bashar) Assad. It’s a very good idea. I think she is brave and hope all the people will support her. All the American people must make peace with Syria and
Iran and with Hamas. Why not?’ Jaara said.

Pelosi, the most senior U.S. official to visit Syria in two years, sat next to Assad earlier today in front of camera crews before starting their meeting at his hilltop palace overlooking
Damascus. The Syrian president then reportedly took Pelosi to lunch at a restaurant in a restored house in
Damascus’ historic district, according to witnesses.

At a press conference after the meeting, Pelosi said that during her talks with Assad she ‘determined that the road to
Damascus is the road to peace.’

‘We came in friendship, hope,’ she said.

The House speaker also said she conveyed an Israeli message to Assad that the Jewish state was ready to resume peace talks.

‘(Our) meeting with the president enabled us to communicate a message from Prime Minister (Ehud) Olmert that
Israel was ready to engage in peace talks as well,’ Pelosi told reporters.

Syria has demanded a complete Israeli withdrawal from the Golan Heights, strategic mountainous territory that looks down on Israeli and Syrian population centers twice used by Syria to mount invasions into

Syria, which signed a military alliance with
Iran, openly hosts Hamas and Islamic Jihad leaders. Israel says
Syria has been allowing large quantities of weapons to be transported from its borders to the Lebanese-based Hezbollah militia, which last summer engaged in a war with the Jewish state. Syria has been accused of supporting the insurgency against U.S. troops in Iraq; generating unrest in
Lebanon; and has been widely blamed for the 2005 assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.

Bush criticized visits by Pelosi and other lawmakers saying they sent ‘mixed messages’ to the region and undermined
U.S. policy.

‘Photo opportunities and/or meetings with President Assad lead the Assad government to believe they’re part of the mainstream of the international community,’ Bush told reporters in
Washington. ‘In fact, they’re a state sponsor of terror.’

Pelosi is not the only lawmaker to recently visit
Syria. A congressional delegation including three Republicans traveled to
Damascus Sunday stating they believe there is an opportunity for dialogue with the Syrian leadership.

Last month, Ellen Sauerbrey, the U.S. assistant secretary of state for population, refugees and migration, held talks in Damascus in a public gesture widely seen as an expression of Washington’s willingness to engage

This Is Mind Control To Major Tom: There Is No War On Terror

This Is Mind Control To Major Tom: There Is No War On Terror

2001 Large

First of all, the term liberal will no longer be used by me. Like “progressive”, it is simply part of the con that the American Fascist Left Party uses to disguise itself. And to put the finest point on it, being that the Fascist Leftists have absolutely no tolerance for anyone who is not a party member ( ie, black Americans who are Republicans are publicly called “House Niggers” ), they are in fact the most illiberal of Americans walking the planet. To call them Liberal is not merely a lie, or even a damn lie, it is the absolute 180 degree diametric opposite of the truth.

From hereon in I will only use the term Fascist Left or Left. And I don’t use “Fascist” as a loose pejorative or a gratuitous rhetorical slander. I use it strictly by it’s literal definition.: ” A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism. ” or “a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry and commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.” Belligerent cultism has replaced nationalism and racism. “Suppression of the opposition….censorship ( politcal correctness and drive by journalism fit the definition of censorship as well )…regimenting industry and commerce…belligerent cultism”…sound like the primary principles and practices of any group we know? No dictators on the Left, you say? Then why do they simply lie by saying America voted on and passed a referendum demanding a withdrawal from Iraq, and then enforce such a dictatorial policy simply because they desire to? Why does Nancy Pelosi roam the halls of Congress and the World Stage behaving like nothing less than the self-appointed leader of America? The left runs a disguised and somewhat collective dictatorship, but a dictatorship it clearly is. We don’t count. It’s why questioning Global Warming is a Thought Crime. I kid you not. The Left’s mantra is: It’s too late for debate. You are an enemy of the State if you exercise your right to analyze the facts, and form your own opinion. Take a breath and a good look, ladies and gentlemen: There is only one moment in time acceptable to the American Fascist Left Party: 1984.


For the last few years, brainwashing and mind control have been used to startling effect by the Fascist Left’s media wing. The 24 hour cable news cycle, along with the interactive and communal natures of the internet (as well as it’s obsessive lure ), provide the ingredients necessary for the effective brainwashing of cultists. These ingredients are: an incessant ideological drumbeat, Big Brother Speak, a sense of belonging, and the certainty of absolute superiority provided by service to the One True Purpose. Given that with these electronic tools no Cult Leader or officers have to be within actual physical proximity of the inductees, a modern phenemenon of cult indoctrination and proliferation has developed: the process of self-indoctrination. No authority figure need imprison a victim and then expend all that time and energy. Members and potential members merely flip on a glowing box, and in a near-hypnotic-process, induct and indoctrinate themselves. When vapid propaganda machines such as Moveon.org finally, completely and purposefully emptied the Left of nearly all rational ideology and policy, replacing them instead with factually unsupported mythologies whose only criterion of merit was the rhetorical advancement of Party Power, the Democrats shifted from being a political party to being The Cult of The Left. The Democratic Party is Dead. The American Fascist Left Party, which is the political wing of the Cult of The Left, has been born.

Today the Big Brothers of the American Fascist Left executed a key move in their mind control agenda. They’ve abolished “the war on terror” as an allowable phrase, and therefor as an allowable concept. The War on Terror is a politically inconvenient truth for them, so now, officially, it simply does not exist. If there is a War on Terror, then everything the Democrats stand for, the very essence of their policies, is not only wrongheaded and useless, but lethally anti-American. So, now, by an official act of American Fascist Left Policy, the war is over.

So now they can force us all to fight Big Brother’s War on Global Warming. And don’t question the correctness of their science or policy. Or the Thought Police will shoot you in the head in front of your children.

UPDATE: Still think American Fascist Left commander Nancy Pelosi isn’t a dictator who employs Big Brother lies in order to consolidate political power? Well click here: Israel Denies Asking Pelosi To Deliver Peace Message To Syrian Terrorist Leader.

Posted by Pat Dollard 39 Comments

Edwards uses wife’s illness for campaign phishing

The American soldier’s code of conduct

British Schools Drop Holocaust and Crusades

British Schools Drop Holocaust and Crusades

A quote from the Daily Mail, 2 April 2007

Schools are dropping the Holocaust from history lessons to avoid offending Muslim pupils, a Governmentbacked study has revealed.

It found some teachers are reluctant to cover the atrocity for fear of upsetting students whose beliefs include Holocaust denial. There is also resistance to tackling the 11th century Crusades – where Christians fought Muslim armies for control of Jerusalem – because lessons often contradict what is taught in local mosques.

As nation faces a grave threat, Pelosi assumes presidential power

As nation faces a grave threat, Pelosi assumes

presidential power


April 5, 2007

Congressman Tom Lantos, who is a member of the delegation that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi led to Syria, put the mission clearly when he said: “We have an alternative, Democratic foreign policy.” Democrats can have any foreign policy they want – if and when they are elected to the White House.

Until Ms. Pelosi came along, it was understood by all that we had only one president at a time and – like him or not – he alone had the constitutional authority to speak for this country to foreign nations, especially in wartime.

All that Ms. Pelosi’s trip can accomplish is to advertise American disunity to a terrorist-sponsoring nation in the Middle East while we are in a war there. That in turn can only embolden the Syrians to exploit the lack of unified resolve in Washington by stepping up their efforts to destabilize Iraq and the Middle East in general.

Members of the opposition party, whichever party that might be at a given time, have known that their role was not to intervene abroad to undermine this country’s foreign policy, however much they might criticize it at home. During World War II, the defeated Republican presidential candidate, Wendell Willkie, even acted as President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s personal envoy to British Prime Minister Winston Churchill. He understood that we were all in this together, however we might disagree among ourselves about the best course to follow.

Today, Ms. Pelosi and the congressional Democrats are stepping in to carry out their own foreign policy and even their own military policy on troop deployment – all the while denying that they are intruding on the president’s authority.

They are doing the same thing domestically by making a big media circus over the fact that the Bush administration fired eight U.S. attorneys. These attorneys are among the many officials who serve at the pleasure of the president – which means that they can be fired at any time, for any reason or for no reason.

That is why there was no big hullabaloo in the media when President Bill Clinton fired all the U.S. attorneys across the country – even though that got rid of the U.S. attorneys who were conducting an investigation into corruption in Mr. Clinton’s administration as governor of Arkansas.

So much hate has been hyped against George W. Bush that anything that is done against him is unlikely to be questioned in most of the media.

But whatever passing damage is being done to President Bush is a relatively minor concern compared with the lasting damage that is being done to the presidency that will still be here when Mr. Bush is gone.

Once it becomes accepted that it is all right to violate the laws and the traditions of this nation, and to undermine the ability of the United States to speak to other nations of the world with one voice, we will have taken another fateful step into the degeneration of this society.

Such a drastic and irresponsible step should remove any lingering doubt that the Democrats’ political strategy is to ensure that there is an American defeat in Iraq in order to ensure their political victory in 2008.

That these political games are being played while Iran keeps advancing relentlessly toward acquiring nuclear weapons is a fateful sign of the utter unreality of politicians preoccupied with scoring points and a media obsessed with celebrity bimbos, living and dead.

Once Iran has nuclear weapons, that will be an irreversible change that will mark a defining moment in the history of the United States and of Western civilization, which will forever after live at the mercy of hate-filled suicidal fanatics.

Yet among too many politicians in Washington, it is business as usual. Indeed, it is monkey business as usual, as congressional Democrats revel in the power of their new and narrow election victory last year to drag people before committee hearings and posture for the television cameras.

It has been said that the world ends not with a bang but with a whimper. But who would have thought that it could end with political clowning in the shadow of a mushroom cloud?

Power at Any Price

Power at Any Price

By Pamela Meister

mandate (n): a command or authorization to act in a particular way on a public issue given by the electorate to its representative

The Democrats claim that the November 2006 election gave them a mandate to end the war in Iraq. That isn’t what they were saying late last year. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) said the following on November 30, 2006:

“Now he’s the commander in chief, and we’re not going to anything to limit funding or cut off funds, even though there are some on the outside who suggest that.”

Now, on April 2, 2007, Reid said he supports a new bill that would set a March 31, 2008 deadline for withdrawing all troops and stopping most military spending in Iraq. To that end, both the House and Senate passed an Iraq spending bill that includes a troop pullout date by September of 2008.
Reid may want to consider contacting former trail lawyer John Edwards for some advice on scoring some money from the whiplash he is sure to be suffering from this complete 180.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) called the date “completely arbitrary. It was pulled out of thin air. And the terrorists have already marked it on their calendars.”
McConnell is correct in his presumption that the terrorists will have this date circled boldly in red on their calendars. But to call the pullout date “completely arbitrary” is either being naïve or too kind. September 2008? With a presidential election two months later? I believe “calculated” is a more appropriate term. And their calculation vaules Democrat control of the White House and  Capitol in Washington higher than the cost of retreat and defeat for America in Iraq.
While Reid was boldly defying Republicans at home, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) was busy giving President Bush a metaphorical middle finger from overseas as she met with Syrian president Bashar al-Assad, despite repeated requests from the White House not to do so. Syria was peing punished with a cut off of diplomatic relations due to Syria’s support of terror operations throughout much of the Middle East, including supporting Hezb’allah.
Yet Pelosi, who wore a scarf and black abaya robe on her visit to the Omayyad Mosque, obviously had no qualms about the message of submission her trip surely sent to those who eagerly anticipate America’s demise. That she would so brazenly advertise the political divide at home gave hope to our enemies that America will cease to be a threat in the near future. This is brazenly close to giving comfort of our opponents.
This 2005 letter  from Ayman al-Zawahiri’s letter to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi shows that indeed, our enemies have been taking notes:

“Things may develop faster than we imagine. The aftermath of the collapse of American power in Vietnam-and how they ran and left their agents-is noteworthy. Because of that, we must be ready starting now, before events overtake us, and before we are surprised by the conspiracies of the Americans and the United Nations and their plans to fill the void behind them.”

Pelosi also overstepped her bounds, as her role as House Speaker has nothing to do with foreign diplomacy. Diplomacy is not within the boundaries of Congress, but the Executive branch. The Executive branch can call upon its experts from the Pentagon, the State Department, and the intelligence community. The principle “expert” Pelosi had at her disposal in Damascus was first term Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN), the first Muslim elected to the House – who was born and bred in the United States, and converted to Islam while he was in college.
Is this the mandate that the American people gave Democrats in November? To either pull our troops out precipitously before Iraq is secure, or to pull the funding rug out from under them? Back in February, a poll of registered voters showed that a majority believed our troops should stay until Iraq becomes stable enough for its government to maintain control and security for its own people.
Americans today are less prepared than in the past to hunker down for the long haul in situations like the one we face in Iraq and elsewhere in the Middle East. Our instant-gratification society, egged on by the impatient media, has weakened us in this regard. Those who fought and supported the wars of our past (Vietnam excluded) would be right to shake their heads in confusion over our short attention span and our media alignment with defeat. Yet despite this flaw, most of us believe in finishing the task we started.
The Democrats cannot understand this. After many years of being the minority party, they are suddenly drunk on the heady intoxicant known as power. They finally have a chance to stick it to the man they believe stole the election in 2000. Talk of impeachment still comes up, which would be retribution for the impeachment of Bill Clinton. It seems that discrediting a man, whose main goal is to protect us from another 9/11 disaster, takes precedence over taking national security issues seriously.
United we stand, divided we fall.” The Democrats’ failure to understand this basic idea could be one of their biggest errors in the history of our nation… one that will be very costly to us all.
Pamela Meister writes about politics and world events at her blog, http://blogmeisterusa.mu.nu/. She also welcomes feedback.

De Facto Diplomacy

De Facto Diplomacy

Kyle-Anne Shiver
Nancy Pelosi went to Syria, not as a private citizen, but on our payroll in her official capacity as Speaker of the United States House of Representatives – in rather flagrant violation of not only the Constitution, but also in defiance of a specific request by our Commander in Chief — during wartime. Quite reasonably, the Syrians are milking this for the excellent propaganda opportunity that it is, and the entire enemy world of Islamo-fascism is indeed significantly “aided” and “comforted.” 
Can anyone with even a smidgen of common sense or knowledge of our Constitution regard this public act as anything other than villainous treason?  When the person who stands so precipitously close to the Presidency of the United States uses her high office to interfere in our relations with antagonnistic nations, there is quite a bit more at stake than when a grandmother interferes with how her children are raising her grandchildren.  And I wonder if this might be exactly how Ms. Pelosi regards what she has now done.

President Bush is in charge, but she does not agree with how he is handling our war against the Islamo-fascist axis — he has put Syria in a “time-out” — so, instead of respecting his right to this lawful authority, she takes Syria back to the playground and gives it lollipops — while at the same time, reminding them they have to play nicely and by the rules from now on. 
But who is the bigger idiot here?  The kindly grandmother who interferes — possibly single-handedly giving victory to our enemy and causing many more American deaths?  Or the American people who let her get away with it BECAUSE she is one of our kindly grandmothers and we don’t want to hurt  her feelings.  In my opinion, Ms. Pelosi has set the cause of any sort of feminism back at least 100 years with this stunt, and the only thing that remains to be seen is how long it is going to take the public to realize that grandmothers who cannot control their impulses should not be in powerful positions that gravely effect the rest of us.

This has proved a shameful excursion for all womankind.  And a deadly one for all Americans.