.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}
Heavy-Handed Politics

"€œGod willing, with the force of God behind it, we shall soon experience a world
without the United States and Zionism."€ -- Iran President Ahmadi-Nejad

Tuesday, November 15, 2005

HAGEL IS A MORON

He doesn't get it. He never will. He has no chance for a 2008 presidential nomination.

posted by HeavyHanded at 9:19 PM

5 Comments:

  • How do I disagree with thee Senator Hagel, let me count the ways:

    1. To “question our policies in Iraq” and to say that Bush lied about WMD’s to get us into that war are two very different things

    2. The right to express an opinion is the same thing as the right to express disagreement with that opinion

    3. To deny an accusation is not to demonize the accuse

    4. It may be true that "You could probably argue it is worse in many ways in the Middle East because of consequences and ripple effects," but if you do so you have a patriotic reponsibility to provide specifics; especially if you are strutting around on your moral high-horse with no plan of your own

    Senator Hagel joins Senator’s Kerry, Biden, Kennedy et al as living proof of the American electorates wisdom in seldom electing a Senator to the Presidency

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 8:29 AM  

  • Cannot disagree with anything you said. This is the type of rhetoric that we have been getting from the left and it is assinine, to say the least, for those very reasons you pointed out.

    It is only that much more pathetic that we have to hear this from a "republican" senator. (note the small "r"). The good people of Nebraska would be doing themselves, us, and the Republican party a favor by voting the moron out the next time around.

    By Blogger HeavyHanded, at 9:38 AM  

  • Have you heard the lefts latest response to being confronted with their own words expressing there belief, nay certainty, that Saddam had WMD’s? On Hannity & Colmes last night after a replay of Bill Clinton doing just that, Alan Colmes sanctimoniously replied “but Bill Clinton did not go to war in Iraq”. I have heard others make the same case using the same Democrat talking point words.

    Let me see if I understand the point. Believing Saddam had WMD’s and posed an imminent threat to the U.S, it was nobler to have done nothing about it than to have responded if, it later transpires, you find no WMD’s. Let us list the errors in logic inherent in that bit of wisdom:

    1. Bill Clinton did lob cruise missiles into Iraq, (thereby ignobly diverting attention from his own tawdry domestic problems), so he did respond.

    2. To admit that Bill Clinton also believed Saddam had WMD’s is to admit that President Bush did not lie. (To say that Bush had information denied everybody else without producing it is just a replay of the embarrassingly specious Dan Rather, ‘phony but accurate” argument

    3. Having given Saddam a full year, (thanks to Senator Rockefeller), to hide his WMD’s and having evidence that he did just that, (thanks to Colin Powell), not finding any WMD’s is not to have determined Saddam never had them.

    With the above in mind, we can now more accurately reword the Democrats talking point.

    Bush did not lie about Saddam’s WMD’s because, based on the same evidence, many others also believed that Saddam had WMD’s, Bill Clinton included, but Bill Clinton abdicated his responsibilities as Commander-in-Chief to protect and defend the country by responding only ineffectually in a way that was never intended to address the threat he believed existed but instead to divert the countries attention away from his own moral failings and that makes Bill Clinton better than George Bush because by the time we got to Iraq the WMD’s were gone and all the rest of us who hate Bush are exonerated as well for believing Saddam had WMD’s because we adore Bill Clinton.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:14 AM  

  • This is right on anotmo. I should share this. I'm thinking of posting it so it's not hidden in the comments section.

    By Blogger HeavyHanded, at 5:35 PM  

  • Thanks, I would be honored

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 7:45 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home