Sunnis and Democrats Share Common Anger
Anti-democratic losers can never quite cope with defeat. They are inherently unable to accept the possibility that what they believe, or feel , or stridently support may in fact be the minority opinion. Today those losers, now questioning the very foundations of a free and democratic election, are the Sunni Muslims in Iraq marching against the recent election outcome. A few years ago, those losers were the Democratic Party of the United States, who blamed Supreme Court decisions, and later voting machine irregularities and underhanded politics for the victories of George W. Bush. The difference between these entities is, unfortunately, only measured in degrees, and only tenuously separated in craziness.
The Sunni Muslims in Iraq, especially those members of the Baathist party, enjoyed decades of privilege under Saddam, and although a distinct minority, controlled the wealth and political systems of that country. Year after year, in a craven pursuit of political ambition, they slowly destroyed their nation with progressively exclusionary legislation. Massive taxes were raised to support every grandiose political plan that emerged from the Baathist legislature, and ultimately this party of privilege held power long enough to destroy a once sold middle class. They created laws and regulations and statutes that benefited a narrow political view, and protected personal interests instead of the national good. Other beliefs were outlawed or criticized, and dissent was met with drastic repercussions, and those who might dare to voice opposition were marginalized, or personally destroyed. Or worse. Now, they stand on the losing end of another election, where the great majority of the people of Iraq have rejected such a party, and have specifically rejected leadership from those who would treat their own country as a personal bank account, or treat their own citizens as pawns of the state.
The Democrats in this country are not much different. For nearly fifty years, the Congress was controlled by liberals who spent American dollars as if they had earned them. They created one government agency after another, spent billions on useless and exclusionary social programs, and raised American's taxes to the breaking point. They created new Constitutional rights where none existed, and dismantled rights that were evidently clear. Flush with the confidence of a party without end, Democrats began to believe that they ruled by fiat, or mandate, or divine intervention and intent, and set about protecting every selfish interest imaginable.
When the Republicans took back the Congress in 1994, Democrats were stunned. After years of Republican control, Democrats became desperate. And since a Republican president was elected in 2000 and again in 2004, Democrats have become like the Sunni Muslims: stubbornly defiant of public decisions, unwilling to admit crushing defeat, and openly hostile to those who made those decisions, namely the voters.
The only thing that separates American Democrats from Iraqi Sunni Muslims is the propensity to kill those who disagree with them. But the rabid and hateful hyperbole of Harry Reid and Patrick Leahy, and the personal and visceral vindictiveness they apparently feel towards President Bush and other conservatives might lead some to believe that such action is not beyond the realm of possibility.
There really is not much difference between a typical Sunni, angrily relegated to minority status after years of privilege, and a typical Democrat, yearning for the days of one-party control.
Take away the AK-47, religious fervor, and head rag, and what stands before you is Reid and Leahy.
The Sunni Muslims in Iraq, especially those members of the Baathist party, enjoyed decades of privilege under Saddam, and although a distinct minority, controlled the wealth and political systems of that country. Year after year, in a craven pursuit of political ambition, they slowly destroyed their nation with progressively exclusionary legislation. Massive taxes were raised to support every grandiose political plan that emerged from the Baathist legislature, and ultimately this party of privilege held power long enough to destroy a once sold middle class. They created laws and regulations and statutes that benefited a narrow political view, and protected personal interests instead of the national good. Other beliefs were outlawed or criticized, and dissent was met with drastic repercussions, and those who might dare to voice opposition were marginalized, or personally destroyed. Or worse. Now, they stand on the losing end of another election, where the great majority of the people of Iraq have rejected such a party, and have specifically rejected leadership from those who would treat their own country as a personal bank account, or treat their own citizens as pawns of the state.
The Democrats in this country are not much different. For nearly fifty years, the Congress was controlled by liberals who spent American dollars as if they had earned them. They created one government agency after another, spent billions on useless and exclusionary social programs, and raised American's taxes to the breaking point. They created new Constitutional rights where none existed, and dismantled rights that were evidently clear. Flush with the confidence of a party without end, Democrats began to believe that they ruled by fiat, or mandate, or divine intervention and intent, and set about protecting every selfish interest imaginable.
When the Republicans took back the Congress in 1994, Democrats were stunned. After years of Republican control, Democrats became desperate. And since a Republican president was elected in 2000 and again in 2004, Democrats have become like the Sunni Muslims: stubbornly defiant of public decisions, unwilling to admit crushing defeat, and openly hostile to those who made those decisions, namely the voters.
The only thing that separates American Democrats from Iraqi Sunni Muslims is the propensity to kill those who disagree with them. But the rabid and hateful hyperbole of Harry Reid and Patrick Leahy, and the personal and visceral vindictiveness they apparently feel towards President Bush and other conservatives might lead some to believe that such action is not beyond the realm of possibility.
There really is not much difference between a typical Sunni, angrily relegated to minority status after years of privilege, and a typical Democrat, yearning for the days of one-party control.
Take away the AK-47, religious fervor, and head rag, and what stands before you is Reid and Leahy.
posted by Mark Outland at 1:18 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home