Let’s see — what’s up with the usual gaggle of wingnuts today? Nathan Tabor is writing non-sensical (and therefore mock-proof) columns, apparently giving the old college try at this thing called "humor".
Since we want no part of that, we turn our attention to Marie Jon Apostrophe, since she’s undoubtedly going to send her latest column to me by email anyway.
Marie’s target is — hold on to your hats — Democrats, in a piece entitled "Democrats are ‘speaking babel about Iraq’". You see, she’s making a biblical reference.
Genesis 11:1: "Now the whole world had one language and a common speech." Yes, God created people who spoke one language.
Damn stright. And that language, Marie will tell you, was English.
However, it was because of their disobedience that God confounded a people’s speech. [citation omitted].
The disobedient people wanted to communicate their thoughts to others and have them think as they did. God, in His wisdom, in order to hinder the spread of evil, confused them with different languages. There lie the geneses of the Babel.
"Genesis"? "Genius"? Your guess is as good as mine. Apparently, God confounded Marie Jon with a unique language all of her own.
This week the Democrats are debating in Congress plans to pull out of a fledgling country that still needs our armed forcers to protect them.
A "fledging country" that is, literally, the cradle of civilization.
If Iraq is not protected, innocent people will be murdered by the hand of wicked terrorists.
This, of course, is the natural response to 9/11 — protect people in a faraway country from the terrorists’ "hand" — terrorists that didn’t exist there before we invaded that country.
The Iraqi people continue to bulk up their own armed forces. The people and their newly formed government are taking on the responsibilities for their own country. To date, Iraq has more than 50,000 Interior Ministry forces.
And since the Iraqi people are doing so well taking on their own responsibilities, then the talk of U.S. withdrawel from Iraq is stupid. Um. Or something.
With all said and done, have you ever wondered what Democrats are truly saying concerning Iraq? How do they reach these bad conclusions? Their plans do not take in mind the safety of the vulnerable people who live in Iraq.
Or maybe Democrats take in mind that our presence there only makes the problem worse.
In some respects, it is unfortunate that we allow people to vote in this country who have discombobulated thought patterns.
Yeah. Democracy sucks.
Why does Marie Jon Apostrophe hate America?
It is really frightening when they are members of our legislature. Are you not amazed at their unwillingness to embrace the facts and statistics that are afforded them by the president? [Bush citation omitted]
Right on, Marie. Why can’t people just accept everything Bush says at face value? What’s wrong with them?
The Iraqi government has made it very clear that they do not want to be left alone until they are able to protect themselves from the outside insurgents who have been attacking them since the fall of the dictator Saddam Hussein.
From a 2004 poll: "But while they acknowledge benefits from dumping Saddam a year ago, Iraqis no longer see the presence of the American-led military as a plus. Asked whether they view the U.S.-led coalition as ‘liberators’ or ‘occupiers,’ 71% of all respondents say ‘occupiers.’"
It is unfortunate that we allow people to write nationally-syndicated columns in this country who have discombobulated thought patterns.
The al-Qaeda wants desperately to squelch the freedoms that Iraqis possess.
The freedom to go from place to place dodging car bombs, the freedom to have little electricity and water of questionable cleanliness….
The terrorists want Iraq to fail and come under the sway of radical extremism.
A radical extremism that didn’t exist before we went in there — you keep forgetting that, Marie.
President Bush communicates clearly with the opposition party…
Ah, Bush. The great communicator.
…yet they willfully twist and turn every which way, so that facts and truth appear to elude them. How can one seriously have a meaningful debate with double minded Democrats?
Marie, if it’s a debate you want, then say so. But you want is for Democrats to "embrace the facts and statistics that are afforded them by the president", which is not — by any stretch — a "debate".
Americans are beginning to understand the truth about the left.
Which is why almost 70% of them agree with "the left" about the folly of the Iraq War.
The Democrats simply are disingenuous about the Iraqi people. The left have learned the ways of Babel, and they know how to speak it.
Yeah, but apparently our "Babel" has noun-verb agreement.
Their worldly followers (constituents) wanders after them only because "they wish to be deceived."
Yup. At least we got that noun-verb thing going for us.
No wonder columnist, author and speaker Ann Coulter calls liberals Godless and treasonous in her books. Politics are their religion, and they generally speak Babel.
We bought a tape from Berlitz.
A cut and run out of Iraq policy is what the Democrats offer as their answer to a very complicated and serious task that still lies ahead concerning the war on terror.
How often must a Republican president explain to the Democrats that we have to complete the job? Our exit strategy is when the mission is completed. The job is completed when Iraq is able to stand on her own two feet and protect herself. That day is coming.
Baby doll, that’s not a strategy. That’s a goal. A "strategy" entails how to reach that goal.
That’s like saying "My strategy to end world hunger is to make sure everyone has enough food to eat." Okay, fine. But HOW do you actually acheive that? THAT’S a stategy, Marie.
There’s no plan to win this "war". The only "plan" is simply trusting the very same administration that ran blindly into Iraq in the first place, not even thinking about the sectarian violence. Meanwhile, al Qaeda cells (if one is to believe today’s news) are springing up here . . . in Miami.
Staying in Iraq only demonstrates a support for the goal of a peaceful Iraq (a goal on which everybody can agree), but staying in Iraq doesn’t move the ball toward that actual goal. It’s one thing to ask U.S. men and women to risk their lives for some achievable ideal; it’s another to continue to ask them to do it for an admirable principle.
The president of these United States has put forth our policies cornering Iraq.
This continual needless debate undermines our troops fighting in Iraq.
So, now you don’t want a debate? Make up your mind.
It also emboldens the terrorist listening to an ornery party within this country, meddling were they have no business doing so.
We have h’s in our language of Babel.
That said, I’m not sure what Marie is suggesting. Are the terrorists "meddling were [sic] they have no business doing so"? Or is the Democratic ("ornery") party meddling where it has no business doing so? If it’s the latter, I have a news flash for Marie — Congress regulates the armed forces (it’s in the Constitution), and Democrats make up some of Congress.
Many American citizens will place the recent murders of the two U. S. Marines that took place in Iraq at the feet of those who are politicizing the war. [citation, which doesn’t support Marie’s statement, omitted]
Marie, you don’t look blonde, so don’t act that way. Name one war in the entire history of mankind, that didn’t have "politics" associated with it.
Mario Vasquez, was upset that the family had to learn so many gruesome details of his nephew’s death through the media." The media jumped ahead and did not allow the family the dignity of being told through proper military channels.
Except that Vasquez was (rightfully) angry at the military for being slow to inform them, not the media.
Two of America’s finest men serving in Iraq were unmercifully butchered to death by al-Qaeda, as an uncalled for and unwanted debate was underway.
And as everyone knows, if the Democrats would just support Bush and the Iraq War, those two men wouldn’t have been butchered to death at all. Is that what you’re saying?
It is time that Rep. John Murtha and Senators John Kerry and Russ Feingold silence their egregious mouths of Babel. They are doing this country and our troops a great disservice.
But according to you, the "mouths of Babel" is what God ordained. Are you suggesting they defy God?
There is no debate about Iraq in the halls of Baghdad.
Of course not. The elected representatives are afraid to get into their cars in order to meet within the halls.
They have their freedom and they have the will to keep it.
Which is why we have to disrepect Iraq as a sovereign nation. Or something.
UPDATE: Republican Donald Trump has apparently learned to speak the Babel of the Democrats:
“I think the war was a mistake,” said the star of NBC’s The Apprentice. “I would get out of Iraq as soon as possible consistent with the practicalities of a bad situation. … It’s being held together by sugar candy. No matter what happens, I believe Iraq will fall again.”