IRAQ AND VIETNAM COMPARISONS BACK

With George W. Bush visiting Vietnam, the media is loving comparing the war in Iraq to the Vietnam War. But the mainstream media seems to have left their history books at home...because once again, the Vietnam War has nothing in common with the war in Iraq. Let's break down their reasoning.

The Vietnam War lasted for decades...with its beginnings going all the way back to the 1940's and the 1950's. We've been in Iraq just under 4 years. The enemy in Vietnam was being supplied by a superpower...the Soviet Union. The enemy in Iraq is being supplied by Iran and Syria and assorted Islamic thugs from various terrorist organizations.

It's just not the same. Comparing Iraq to Vietnam would be like comparing World War II to the invasion of Panama. There is no comparison. But don't tell that to the media and the Democrats. They know Vietnam is considered our greatest military failure of the 20th century. And just like with the Vietnam War, Democrats want to cut off the funding for Iraq too.

Oh..and it goes without saying: we lost the Vietnam War, but we won in Iraq. The only problem in Iraq right now is getting things to the point where they are stable enough that we can leave. However, such is the mainstream media's hatred of George Bush and the United States Military...they can't help but live out their Vietnam fantasy as much as possible. The fact that Bush is in Vietnam itself this week only serves to feed the flames.

WHY DO TERRORISTS PREFER DEMOCRATS?

We haven’t had enough of your blood yet,” taunted terror chieftain Abu Hamza al-Muhajir.

. . .

Al-Muhajir praised the American people for handing victory to the Democrats, saying: “They voted for something reasonable in the last elections.”
. . .

Democrats appear to be “reasonable” to terrorists. What does this bode for improving national security?

“We call on the lame duck not to hurry his escape the way the defense secretary did,” al-Muhajir said in reference to Rumsfeld’s resignation as Pentagon chief on Wednesday.

. . .

“Remain steadfast on the battlefield, you coward,” said al-Muhajir, who took over leadership of al-Qaida in Iraq after Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was killed in a U.S. airstrike in June.

“We will not rest from our jihad (holy war) until we are under the olive trees of Rumieh and we have blown up the filthiest house — which is called the White House,” al-Muhajir said.

In other news, Nancy Pelosi supports Jack “Accuse Marines of Killing Civilians” Murtha as House Majority Leader.

The rewards of treason.

It’s a new direction…

HEY.....Y'ALL MEXICANS!

OLLY OLLY OXEN FREE!

We learn today that now that the Democrats are in control of the Congress they may just decide not to build that 700-mile fence along portions of the U.S. Border with Mexico. Word is that the law that mandates the fence, the law that was signed with much ceremony just a few weeks ago at the White House, will be reviewed by the new, more-powerful Democrats, and may be scrapped.

Please .. I hope you're not surprised. Democrats look at every single Mexican who comes across that border as a potential future vote. With the new showing of Democrat strength you can expect to see efforts to allow non-citizens to vote in local elections intensified in heavily Latino population centers. First will be school board elections. After all, we have to educate their children, don't we? So why shouldn't they vote in school board elections? Next will be elections for city councils, county commissions ... and onward.

The Democrats have an advantage here. The president is on their side. Right now we're hearing much more talk in Washington about amnesty than we are about controlling our borders. Amnesty for 12 million illegals next year .. then how many more do you think will stream into this country by the time we're voting in the 2008 presidential election?

Oh ... Some Vatican hot-shot is chiming in here too. Cardinal Renato Martino, a senior Vatican cardinal, is saying that the fence is part of an "inhuman program." He makes a connection to the Berlin Wall. Hint to anyone who wants to do that. The Berlin Wall was built to keep people from leaving, not arriving. Huge difference there.

How long before Spanish becomes the default language in Texas, Arizona, New Mexico and California?

Bill N. sends us this timely piece with the suggested caption "Shall I carve?"

HILLARY'S THREAT

Hillary can smell the Oval Office. With the Democrat control of the congress, and a president who seems well-suited to the role of a lame duck, Hillary is feeling her oats. She thinks the Democrat nomination is hers ... and its off to the races.

Yesterday The Liar made an interesting statement to reporters in Washington yesterday. She said that "health care is coming back" and "it may be a bad dream for some."

Now just what does she mean by that? Bad dream? What kind of bad dream?

Does Hillary mean that after our government takes control of the delivery of medical services in this country that Americans will have to wait for months, even years, for elective surgery as people do in Canada and other countries with socialized medicine? Well .. .if that's the case, Hillary is right. That would be a bad dream.

Maybe Hillary is talking about what awaits any American who tries to use his or her own money to hire a doctor outside of the government medical scheme. Well, under the Hillarycare proposal she concocted in 1993, if a private individual used private funds to hire a doctor to perform a medical service outside of Hillarycare, then both the doctor and the patient could be arrested and jailed. Being jailed because you dared to hire your own doctor? Again, Hillary is right. That indeed would be a bad dream; not just for some, but for many.

There are many free market reforms that could be made to our health care system that would increase competition, expand availability and decrease costs ... but the problem is that they are free market reforms. Returning free market economics to our system of medical care doesn't enhance the power of politicians, and thus it is a non-starter. The political goal here is to make people dependent on the Imperial Federal Government for their medical care. Once that is accomplished you can almost write the Democrat campaign commercials for them. "Vote for Joe Republican and you're going to have to pay for your own medical care."

I've been saying that socialized medicine in the United States is inevitable. There are two basic reasons: One, politicians want the power. Two, individual Americans don't want the responsibility. The great American love of freedom is now pretty much limited to freedoms not coupled to responsibility. Americans have been taught by the political class to believe that a person's health care is the primary responsibility of either the government or that person's employer.

Hillary also had some comments about other subjects of interest, such as trimming the federal deficit. Whenever you hear a Democrat talk about cutting the deficit, they never mean cutting spending. They mean raising taxes to cover the "shortfall." This is where you find out that there's no difference between modern-day Democrats and Republicans. One taxes and spends, the other borrows and spends.

The Hildabeast also mentioned reducing dependence on foreign oil. When a Democrat tells you this, it does not mean actually drilling for more oil here at home. It means raising the gas tax so as to make buying as much prohibitively expensive and it means pouring government money into programs for electric cars and hydrogen fuel cells. Those may be good ideas, but it's for the free market to decide, not the government.

Then she mentioned improving the image of the United States abroad. This is an easy one...this means appeasing Islamic terrorists and Euro-wimps. After all, where is our image tarnished abroad? In third-world Islamic countries where hatred of the United States is preached daily out of the loudspeakers of mosques. If you want to improve our image with these people, appeasement is the key.

Hillary's on the way, folks. You don't think the Republiwimps can stop her, do you?

HOUSE MAJORITY LEADER JOHN MURTHA?!

By Michelle Malkin

(Photoshop: Kathy Y.)

They can't be serious, can they? Oh, yes they are.

The Hill newspaper reports. You deride:

Speaker-in-waiting Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) threw her support behind Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.) for majority leader Sunday, giving a significant boost to Murtha in his race against Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-Md.).

"Your strong voice for national security, the war on terror and Iraq provides genuine leadership for our party, and I count on you to continue to lead on these vital issues," Pelosi wrote Murtha Sunday in a letter obtained by The Hill. "For this and for all you have done for Democrats in the past and especially this last year, I am pleased to support your candidacy for majority leader for the 110th Congress."

As the House Democrats’ unchallenged leader, Pelosi has considerable sway over her colleagues. She and Murtha have long been close allies, but until now, she had not interfered in the majority leader race.

Her endorsement has the potential to turn the race,especially if she chooses to campaign on Murtha’s behalf. Pelosi’s decision to back Murtha is the most significant move she has made since Democrats scored a historic victory on Election Day.

And more from Roll Call, which notes that Hoyer's gonna put up a fight:

Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), in line to become Speaker in January, is throwing her support to Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.) in the race for Majority Leader, a move that will be an early test of her influence and will weigh heavily on Murtha's contest with Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) for the post.

Pelosi, in a letter distributed Sunday to newly elected House Democrats, wrote that Murtha's outspoken opposition to the war in Iraq helped change the electoral campaign for the House this fall. Murtha began calling for a U.S. pullout from Iraq a year ago, and his open opposition to the war made him a focus of intense criticism from Republicans and the White House...Hoyer released his own letter on Friday signed by 21 of the 41 incoming Democrats, and his backers claimed that at least another five new Members would support his candidacy for Majority Leader, giving Hoyer claim to a huge block of votes...

Allah: "What better way to assuage fears about Democrats being too dovish and anti-military than to back America’s foremost spokesman for cut and run..."

Flashback: Murtha's Okinawa strategery

Flashback: A veteran tells off Murtha/Moran; Another vet tells off Murtha/Moran

AL-QAIDA IN IRAQ CLAIMS IT'S WINNING WAR

Where would they get that crazy idea?

AP reports: Al-Qaida in Iraq claimed in a new audio tape Friday to be winning the war faster than expected in Iraq and said it had mobilized 12,000 fighters who had “vowed to die for God’s sake.”

On the audio tape made available on militant Web sites, the al-Qaida in Iraq leader also welcomed the Republican electoral defeat that led to the departure of Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld. He added that the group’s fighters would not rest until they had blown up the White House.
. . .

“We will not rest from our Jihad until we are under the olive trees of Rumieh and we have blown up the filthiest house — which is called the White House,” al-Muhajir said. It was not clear what Rumieh was referring to.
. . .

“The American people have put their feet on the right path by … realizing their president’s betrayal in supporting
Israel,” the terror leader said. “So they voted for something reasonable in the last elections.”

Describing President Bush as “the most stupid president” in U.S. history, al-Masri reached out to the Muslim world and said his group was winning the war in Iraq faster than expected due to U.S. policies.

DNC Chairman Howard Dean, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Michael Moore, all concurred with al-Muhajir sentiments, which echoes their own oft-repeated remarks about the President and the war.