To Iraq, Democrats More Dangerous Than Terrorists

Crazed Islamic terrorists, well funded extremists engulfed in hatred for democracy and religious pluralism, may not be the worst impediment facing Iraq's emerging representative government. As millions of Iraqis formed long lines to exercise a freedom long denied, and faced the very real possibility of being shot down or blown up by desperate homicide bombers for the effort, a few politicians back here in the comfort of our established republic found reason for criticism.

Blindly driven by a hatred for George Bush and obsessed with a desire for revenge every bit as vitriolic as the terrorists, Senators Kennedy and Kerry did not even wait for the last ballot to be cast before branding this historic event in human history as insignificant and over-hyped. To recognize the success of the Iraq election would require some due credit to the President, and among the leftists this is tantamount to heresy. The sacraments of the Democratic Church require the sacrifice of truth at the altar of attaining power and liberalism above all else.

Under normal conditions, meaning a time when the United States was not fighting for its very survival against dedicated enemies, these two men of very questionable character and integrity might be dismissed as mere distractions, or laughed off as ridiculous fools. But we do not live in ordinary times. Great events are transpiring all around us, and the currents of history are deep and strong where we stand today. The free and open elections in Iraq and Afghanistan, lands freed from dictators by the United States and our allies, are simply two of these events. While neutered by recent elections in this country, Kennedy and Kerry represent a cross-current of history, dedicated to the ultimate destruction of Bush, even at the cost of freedom around the world. This particular brand of madness has consequences. In human lives.

It is hard to believe, but many from that party share this goal. Some, like the Senators from Massachutsetts, have mastered the art of syntactic subterfuge so as not to appear hysterical. Some, like Dean, do not even take the trouble to camouflage their words, admitting hatred for Bush, the Republicans, and "all that they stand for".

To the average Iraqi on the street, now breathing free air as men and women of greater purpose, Kennedy and Kerry are a world away. They might believe that a more imminent threat comes from the terrorists, hiding in small enclaves of Sunni support in Mosul and Kirkuk and Fallujah. Or the Iranian mullahs who will stop at nothing to destroy Iraq as a free entity, in order to build it up with their dream of feudalistic Sharia law. But terrorists use ideas against people first, and weapons second, and right now in Iraq, millions of free citizen have rejected the terrorists in the streets for a different dream. And the terrorists have got to know that. What Kennedy and Kerry do is fill that vacuum of hate and destruction with words meant to punish a president, but endanger a nation. And a people.

The words of an American senator, especially to many in the world who resent American influence and global dominance, hold much power. Those who yearn to hear criticism will use any ammunition that can be found, and the left in this country provide them with especially powerful ordnance. If these words are taken to heart, Iraqi resolve will be weakened, and neither that country, the newest democracy, or the world can well afford that to happen.

No roadside bomb or automatic weapon or kidnapping will derail Iraq's steady march towards liberty and autonomy. But reckless words from powerful men in Washington, DC just might.

Denial in Davos

Between martinis and filet mignon on the taxpayers dime, the globalization gurus at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland found time to bemoan the plight of the poor, especially in Africa. And true to form, America is again the culprit, and those greedy, resource hogging Americans the villains.

One self-hating American in particular, Bill Gates, had the unmitigated audacity to accuse America of not being willing to commit the "billions" necessary to cure the world's diseases and fight the crushing poverty that infects much of the globe. Never mind that George Bush has doubled the amount of world-wide economic aid disbursements in just four years and that the United States contributes nearly 20% of all monies to the International Monetary Fund, and gets nothing in return. You have to feel sorry for him, though. Watching Gates, the richest (read greedy) man in the world, on stage before an audience packed with UN activists and one-world adherents was like watching the school nerd desperately trying to gain the favor of the popular football captain, moments before he gets stuffed in a garbage can. In fact, minutes later, another speaker railed against the super-rich, charging that the three wealthiest men in the world are worth more than the combined GDP of the 40 poorest nations. The implication is that money equals selfishness. And no country does selfishness like the United States.

While the cameras in the auditorium did not cut to Gates, you can be sure he was squirming. You can also be sure he will be coughing up several billions of dollars before the conference is over, most of which will likely end up in the Swiss bank account of a corrupt African dictator or in the pockets of high level UN officials or their families. But who cares? He has too much money anyway, and no one deserves to be that flush while the world wallows in disease and degradation.

Then there was the spectacle of Bill Clinton, professional pontificator, explaining for the rest of us dunderheads why the election of 2004 turned out the way it did. Certainly not because Americans found George Bush's positive, upbeat message of American potential and greatness superior to John Kerry's doom-and-gloom approach. Certainly not because Americans perceive Democrats as totally unsuited to protect America, or solve domestic issues without proposing some tax increase, or that they fail to understand that freedom in the Moslem world means more security for us. No. According to Clinton, those four million extra voters that put George Bush in the White House for another four years actually wanted to vote for John Kerry! They were just so frightened by Karl Rove's message of fear that, against their better judgment, they voted for the other guy. Of course, this twisted assessment, yet another example of Democratic disintegration, allows those like Clinton to resist confronting the actual reasons for the Bush victory, i.e. they are dangerous and have nothing to offer. Later, in what can only be described as a monumental testament to the power of delusional thinking, Clinton claimed his administration had aggressively fought terrorism, single-handedly shaped a robust economy, and fostered good-will throughout the world. I guess he spent so much time making nice with the French that he has forgotten World Trade Center attack #1, Khobar Towers, and the USS Cole, to name a few. However, all of this supposedly juxtaposed nicely against the current administration, those evil conservatives who have bumbled, stumbled and driven the world away. King Clinton, Ruler for Life, benevolent scholar and sage. And the American-hating audience loved it.

Not surprising, though. He is one of them.

In a perfect world, not festering in irrational jealousy and resentment towards America, and not afraid to view the world without utopian fantasy, speakers at the World Economic Forum would have been more realistic about Africa's (and the world's) problems, and more truthful about a few solutions. More money will never solve the world's troubles. More freedom and liberty will. These are commodities that cannot be purchased, no matter how much of Bill Gates' guilt money is thrown around.

Until the citizens of those nations suffering under the repression of socialism, communism, and Islamism muster the courage to rise up and destroy their tormentors, and replace the despotism with free-markets and free-thinkers, Africa and the Middle East and Asia will continue to wallow in their own excrement. Towards alleviating that suffering, the United States is spending money where it needs to be spent: on guns and bombs. And, we are rightfully gearing up to confront more of that kind on madness around the globe.

There isn't enough money in the world to bring to fruition the vision of every country free, and safe, and healthy.

That, unfortunately, takes courage.

Obsessive-Compulsive Politics

If only Senator Bill Frist, Senate Majority Leader, was a psychiatrist instead of a thoracic surgeon. He could certainly make a lucrative practice with just the minority Democrats, judging from this week's tantrum over the Condoleezza Rice confirmation. Along with the typical liberal behavior traits of meanness, pettiness, and spite, a new neurosis has acutely infected this group of disintegrating, pathetic losers. The Democrats, with a few exceptions, seem to be suffering from obsessive-compulsive disorder about George Bush's two Presidential victories, and the war Iraq.

It is pathetic really, and if these people were not so dangerous, it might even be funny. Here is this once powerful (albeit terminally wrong) party, comprised of once powerful men and women (albeit radical leftists), reduced to obstruction because of weakness. They cannot do anything except delay, stall and complain. When you see Teddy Kennedy or Barbara Boxer or John Kerry or Joe Biden on the floor of the Senate prolonging the inevitable confirmation of Dr. Rice with slanderous accusations in the name of "open debate", what you are really seeing is a world-class, drop-in-the aisles, foot stomping, breath holding tantrum. There is no force on this Earth that will prevent Rice's confirmation, and they know it. But it certainly gives them an opportunity to wrap themselves in the fantasy that anyone gives a damn about what they have to say, about anything. And it gives them an opportunity to obsess about the war in Iraq, and the president, and Halliburton, and God knows what else. Since they do not seem to recognize their own madness, the voters have begun an intervention.

The American people are quickly removing Democrats from positions of power at every election, and for good reason. Democrats cannot be trusted with our national security, our taxes, our health care, or just about anything of major importance. And how could they be? They are ill. Crazy. Sick. Americans are simply doing what any rational person would do when confronted with someone who is not rational. Take away all the sharp objects in the room so that they are not a danger to themselves or others. And who has done this to them, these self-professed higher thinkers and social activists? That dunce from Texas. That's like sticking the knife in and twisting.

Apparently, this nutty bunch of conspiracy-theorists and crack-pots is going to use every opportunity they can find to vent bile and slander at the President, because it is the only thing they have left. Legislatively, they are through. Electorally, they are finished. And morally, they are completely corrupt.

It is time Bill Frist and the other rational men in the Senate have these crazies committed. I hear Halliburton makes a swell rubber room. . .

The Bush Doctrine

George W. Bush took the oath of office today, amid the splendor of military might and American Republicanism, and the stifling threat of terrorist attack. His words, eloquent and sincere, appeared to mark a new beginning for American foreign policy. America will no longer simply be content to protect her own freedom, but will vigorously pursue the freedom of others. President Bush does not come to this point without historical background.

Once upon a time, Ronald Reagan called into clear focus a great "City On the Hill", an allegorical reference from Biblical text that was well suited for America, proclaiming God's blessings and protection on a righteous nation. That day seems like a lifetime ago, and our country has been tested since then with events that Reagan could not have predicted. Certainly, Reagan sensed the growing terrorist threat when he declared on July 8, 1985 that Iran, North Korea, Cuba, and Libya were "members of a confederation of terrorist states". The murder of over 200 Marines in Lebanon by an Islamic fundamentalist car bomb was an eerie prelude to what America would face in less than 20 years. But little changed, other than a single bombing attack on the military headquarters and barracks of Mohammar Gadafy in Tripoli. Gadafy's child was killed in that raid, and the formerly bellicose Islamic strongman faded into the background, a missed lesson on how to deal with terrorists. There were no responses to the Marine barracks bombing, another missed lesson.

Bush Sr. and Bill Clinton allowed many attacks on our nation to go unanswered. Even the homicide bombing of an America naval vessel was not enough to pull Clinton into the fray.

Reagan's "City on the Hill" allegory was fitting, and accurate and comfortable. But it was also hollow without the will to pursue all threats to that state.

Enter George W. Bush.

President Bush has made it clear today that Islamic and Communistic dictatorships, which may subjugate women, deny religious expression and creative freedom, stifle regional democratic reform, murder out-of-the-box thinkers, and threaten the security of America, will not be tolerated. He has sent the clear message to dissidents within those countries that America will stand behind you should you muster the courage to free yourself. Let us hope that the men of Iraq posses that strength. . and those in Iran, North Korea, Cuba, and yes, Saudi Arabia.
America cannot exist as a single island of freedom, surrounded by a world of threats and attacks. Our freedom is strong, but not that strong. Every armed man could not repel the world. So the world must be transformed. And not just economically, but politically. President Bush sees a world like us: Free to protest during an inauguration, free to post our thoughts on uncontrolled opinion sites, free to shout our beliefs in the public forum without fear. Is that so much to ask?

How else can we, as a nation, an ideal, survive?

Thank God John Kerry is not facing this challenge. I'm afraid the old boy just wouldn't be up to it.

What Are the Atheists So Afraid Of?

Regardless of their bluster and apparent confidence, secularists and atheists (like Michael Newdow) continue to be hysterically threatened by anyone who points out the fact that our nation was founded by Christians, and continues to be overwhelmingly Christian in composition. While some Founding Fathers were tepid Christians (Madison), and some were philosophical Christians (Jefferson), and some were out-right hostile to Christianity (Tom Paine), most would be considered devout Christians, even by today's standards. In fact, the Second Great Awakening was taking place around the time the Constitution was being written, and there was much debate as to how religious to make out new nation. In the end, the First Amendment recognized man's inherent right to worship as he pleases, unencumbered by a state religion, i.e. the Church of England. However, this was different than banning religious expression in the public domain. In fact, Jefferson, who was excessively sensitive to claims that he was a "pagan" and a "Satanist", and who wrote often about his disdain for intolerant religions, also recognized that the Federal Constitution only prohibited the Federal Government from establishing a religion, and did not prohibit each sovereign state from setting its own religious laws and requirements, as they had always done. This was certainly the understanding among those who voted to include that phrase in the First Amendment. Paul Johnson, author of "A History of the American People", says that the Founding Fathers would be insulted indeed to find out that their words have come to supposedly prohibit individual states from establishing prayer in schools, placing religious symbols on state-owned property, or banning state textbooks that give equal weight to both evolution and Creationism. These religious pursuits would not have been considered "unconstitutional" by Jefferson, Madison, or Adams, as the First Amendment referred to Federal action only. Constitutional purist, meaning those who reject the very notion that it is a "living, breathing document" open to unintended interpretation, need to speak loudly regarding this issue. It may be too late, but it is certainly enjoyable to watch the hysterics from the left as a result.

Democratic Public Suicide

Senator Barbara Boxer continues to slide down the grassy-knoll of irrelevancy, Senator Joe Biden retains the title of biggest Congressional blow-hard, and Senator John Kerry is the worst poor loser since Woody Hayes. Watching these three Democrats (all wholly owned subsidiaries of the Michael Moore wacko camp) cajole and criticize Condoleeza Rice during her confirmation hearings today was maddening at best, and sickening at worst. Of course, Rice handled herself as one would expect, making the contrast between whining, spoiled children and mature, serious grown-up even clearer. There is no doubt that she will be confirmed as our nation's next Secretary of State, so this political sideshow is simply another attempt by the Left to throw a wrench in the gears of the Bush administration. Even Senator Diane Feinstien, not by any stretch a conservative, or even marginal Bush supporter (except for a few issues), looked pained and embarrassed by her colleagues. And well she should. What she, and the country were watching today is the continued public suicide of the Democratic Party. As the liberals lose their base (black and Hispanic support, conservative union workers, women, and young people) the scent of desperation is strong as they frantically attempt to hold on to at least a couple groups: anti-war radicals and election conspiracy nuts. With no hope of derailing this incredibly qualified candidate, Boxer, Biden, and Kerry exhausted their questioning time for the benefit of these bases, not the American people. The Democratic constituencies are dwindling. . . Keep this up, Democrats, and then there will be none.

New Host, Same Blog

American Minuteman started a couple of years ago, before the big boom of blogging had arrived. In its original incarnation, The Minuteman, I began to explore the possibilities of making my thoughts and opinions known to those outside my family, for whatever they were worth. However, Geocities, the original host, was cumbersome and hard to use, so my postings were sporadic. Now, with the availability of a streamlined site such as Blogspot, and with the experience a few years can bring, this move will be a new chapter. I hope to make quick, relevant postings that are both topical and brief, able to be digested in a minute or less--hence the double entendre of the blog title. I look forward to joining the Blogosphere with a more professional looking site, and getting feed-back from those who visit.