How liberals think

For all the liberals who think that appeasing the terrorists and hiding under the bed will make them go away, I ask: did you vote for Carter as well?

Former President Jimmy Carter makes a great argument for closing down Gitmo-it would restore America's tarnished reputation before the court of world opinion; it would reaffirm America's commitment to due process and international law; it would reduce the number of terrorists by eliminating Gitmo as a major recruiting poster for Hamas and al-Qaeda crazies; and it would make Jimmy Carter feel good about himself and if the peanut farmer from Plaines feels good about himself the same is sure to be true of Casper Milktoast, Harry Tremblechin, Code Pink, John Conyers, Jerold Nadler, CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations), half the faculty at Swaledale Junior College, three-quarters of that at Dogpatch University, and just about everybody at Berkeley, Cambridge, Ann Arbor, Chapel Hill and points left of Nancy Pelosi.

But there are a few doubters. Not everyone has embraced the Carter panacea. For one thing, it's devoid of common sense, and to put it bluntly, it's cowardly. Even someone as weak-kneed as James Buchanan would have been leery of Carter's one-size-fits-all solution to the problem of the age. Remember Buchanan? He was President in the 1850s during the run-up to the American Civil War. He said the South couldn't secede from the Union because it wasn't legal but if they did there wasn't anything he could do about it, there was nothing in the Constitution to provide for such an eventuality; therefore, his hands were tied; sort of like Jimmy Carter's approach to Gitmo, Iran, North Korea, and attack rabbits.

And that's the problem. Jimmy Carter is not Andrew Jackson or Abe Lincoln; he's the exact opposite. Save for Buchanan, Carter was the weakest man ever to hold the Presidency. Even Woodrow Wilson, the super-intellectual who said there was such a thing as being to proud to fight, sent Doughboys to France to take the lead out of the Kaiser's lederhosen.

Would closing Gitmo result in any of the blessings suggested by Carter? Would millions of Muslims suddenly decide that, maybe, after all, the Americans aren't so bad? Would Hamas and al-Qaeda close their recruiting offices? Hardly.

A short history lesson is in order. Did membership in the Nazi Party decline after Hitler violated the Treaty of Versailles in 1936 by marching into the Rhineland? No, it did not; in fact, it skyrocketed. The march was perceived as a great German victory. The same sorry spectacle was repeated in 1938 with the Anschluss and later that same year with the march into the Sudetenland. Everybody wanted to be a Nazi. Victory made the swastika popular.

Jefferson Davis's last gasp recruiting drive in April of 1865 was a ghastly failure. The reason: Robert E. Lee and what was left of the Army of Northern Virginia was on its way to Appomattox Court House. The Butternuts were deserting the cause, not joining. How different from the balmy days immediately after Fort Sumter and Second Bull Run when even Rhett Butler was considering donning the Grey.

Whenever a fort was vacated on the Western Frontier Phil Sheridan and George Armstrong Custer would draw three days rations and thirty rounds of ammunition. They had good reason for that. Once the gates were closed and the last soldier was withdrawn many previously peaceful Indians would leave the reservations to join the hostiles on the warpath. Vacating a fort was taken as a sign of weakness.

Somewhere in the miasmatic haze that passes for Jimmy Carter's historical frame of reference lies the wreckage of this lesson. Maybe it was the helicopter crash in the desert. A pullout from Gitmo would be seen in the Muslim world as a defeat for America. Ward Churchill, Noam Chomsky, Code Pink, and the parasitic left would be elated. Jimmy Carter, John Conyers, Patrick Leahy and the Nadlers and the Boxers fail to grasp this simple fact. Unfortunately, the destruction of George W. Bush and the Bush administration is first on their list of priorities. The war on terrorism can take care of itself-after all, it a matter for the police, for Interpol, and a newer kindler, gentler generation of James Bonds. This is reprehensible.

So the man who went on bended knee and with hat in hand to North Korea to make the usual spineless obeisance to Kim the Ruthless; the man who repeatedly kissed Yasser Arafat on the cheek in the Middle East political cloakroom; the man who never met a left-wing dictator he couldn't compliment on something or other, says Gitmo has tarnished America's reputation. A man who is far better at pounding nails into 2X4s than in conducting American foreign policy says Gitmo should be abandoned. Obviously the terrorists will lay down their arms and go home.

And it's not only Carter. The Democratic Party has been drifting into anti-Americanism since the 1960s; since Vietnam; since Fonda, Hayden, and the Chicago Seven and the journey is now nearly complete. Cultural diversity has taught them to hate America and to love America's enemies. Castro, si, Imperialism, no! Anti-Semitism, once the preserve of the far right, is now entrenched in the parasitic left. Marxist college professors have indoctrinated a generation of college students into the joys of self-hatred-hate Whitey, hate Uncle Sam, hate Western Civ, hate John Wayne; they stand in the way of the socialist millennia. They have turned altogether too many minority students into racists, bigots, Nazis, and anti-Semites. The Democratic Party has done nothing to stop this descent into atavistic Bolshevism, indeed, they have knowingly helped it along; they are complicit in the destruction of the United States.

And now Carter and his parrots insist that closing Gitmo will strike a blow against terrorism by removing one of the reasons terrorists become terrorists. Would Charlie Brown intentionally walk Peppermint Patty with the bases loaded in the bottom of the ninth with the winning run on third base so she couldn't get an embarrassing game-winning hit? Maybe. Charlie was a little strange. Jimmy Carter is stranger.

Winners gain recruits, Jimmy, not losers. But then, Jimmy has always been a loser.

http://www.iconoclast.ca/MainPage.asp?p ... Page18.asp

I wasn't aware that they did

Well theres this little saying that goes practice what you preach. America wants to be the role model of the world, they want everyone to follow them, ey, they allow illegal places like Gitmo to go on. They go and fight countries, without declaring war, so that they can ship their prisoners to Gitmo without any interference from the Red Cross. It should be closed immediatley, not from a political stand point, but a human rights stand point. Anyone that believes what is going on there is acceptable is either retarded or has already been brain washed by the media.

Shouldn't this be in Jokes & Humour?

Hahahahahah...

How come every time somone posts this garbage they always say "This is how all Liberals feel about X issue." It really pisses me off, after the 99th time. Ya know, I'll bet that some Liberal/Left-Wingers disagree with this entirly, and I'll bet that some Republican/Right-Wingers believe this is entirly true. Say "This is how President Carter thinks." or somthing that like that.

Hmmmmmm....Maybe Random Insanity

Communism...hm. You seem like an extremely bright young man, but, live a little first and then see how pro Communist you remain. The system is an abject failure as is its watered down version, socialism. Sweden annd New Zealand being prime examples of the latter and China and Eastern Europe (Russia inclusive) of the former. Any system that relies solely on the altruistic nature of Man is foolhardy. WIIFM (What's In It For Me), is the prime motivational factor in human society