Posted Dec 10, 2007 by 
mlh in Politics | 169 comments | 778 views
So, if I was for being against anything after I had decided to be against it before considering to be for and against a topic, does that give me any kind of credibility to the sound of mind? And, if I had changed my mind about a topic and didn't tell anyone until I got exposed for being a perpetrator of Double Standards for political expediency, does that lend me any credibility?
Or, would being against something I was once for before I took a stand against something that I knew I should be for but political aspirations clouded my self-dignity, does that grant me the right to be credible?
I wonder if SoH Nancy Pelosi is asking herself those same questions. How disingenuous does one need to be before they are shown to be the charlatans we all knew they were from the very beginning? Where is the cut-off for disingenuousness (is that a word)? Are their certain levels that are acceptable before they become unacceptable? For that matter, what ever happened to personal integrity, honor and dignity? What ever happened to the Respect and Honor of The Office?
Would it not be much better if Honesty was indeed the Policy? Why hide behind the skirts of lies, deceit and despair? Surely, the old adage, "Beware your sins will find you out" is well known to these cretins in the United States CONgress...yes...no? Some would ask me. "What are you blathering about?". Thanks for asking.
Waterboarding and other sundry methods of interrogation. Frankly, I could care less. The current enemy is not signatories to the Geneva Conventions. Some would argue otherwise. That is their problem. I have seen the signatories to the Geneva Convention(s) and al Qaida ain't on there. Neither is Iraq...they refused to sign and their signature to the Geneva Convention was one of the Cease Fire Agreements in 1991...how soon the politicians ignore that fact...or, do they and did they?
Thusly, Al Qaida is not an internationally recognized Uniformed Force. They fire their rockets and missiles from school grounds, mosques and civilian housing areas. They are the first to whine about the Geneva Conventions, however, as they behead those they consider to be the enemy on video but, that is OK...they are doing the deal...sounds like our very own American anti-Americanists to me. I often wonder which group listens to which group and when. As our own "anti-war" thugs drag and burn American Troops in effigy , so did Al Qaida...the difference was the bodies were real.
The Washington Post has a piece out and it has the Elite of the DNC squirming, waffling and backpedaling like they have just met face to face their worst nightmare come true...The Truth. Blackfive has an observation worth repeating:
It will never cease to amaze me that the Leftinistra, the armies of the socialist liberals of the United States (not to upset anyone from Canada or anywhere else), will stoop to deeper and lower levels of disdain, lies and deceit to remain in power. This is yet one more example of the Smoking gun exposing them for what they are...enablers of derision and division all in the name of Political Power.
I have often vocalized the following, as Glenn Reynolds has as well:
This whole waterboarding issue is another White Tiger non-issue issue. The practice ended nearly 4 years ago and operated under Congressional oversight and only one objected then...Nancy wasn't one of them...neither was Hillary. To use this non-issue as an issue for the upcoming elections, knowing that the practice is no longer utilized, reveals how utterly afraid the Leftocrats in the United States are about the upcoming elections.
Spin that.
I have a hint of the future for them: We win...you lose
Vote it up at Digital Journal
Or, would being against something I was once for before I took a stand against something that I knew I should be for but political aspirations clouded my self-dignity, does that grant me the right to be credible?
I wonder if SoH Nancy Pelosi is asking herself those same questions. How disingenuous does one need to be before they are shown to be the charlatans we all knew they were from the very beginning? Where is the cut-off for disingenuousness (is that a word)? Are their certain levels that are acceptable before they become unacceptable? For that matter, what ever happened to personal integrity, honor and dignity? What ever happened to the Respect and Honor of The Office?
Would it not be much better if Honesty was indeed the Policy? Why hide behind the skirts of lies, deceit and despair? Surely, the old adage, "Beware your sins will find you out" is well known to these cretins in the United States CONgress...yes...no? Some would ask me. "What are you blathering about?". Thanks for asking.
Waterboarding and other sundry methods of interrogation. Frankly, I could care less. The current enemy is not signatories to the Geneva Conventions. Some would argue otherwise. That is their problem. I have seen the signatories to the Geneva Convention(s) and al Qaida ain't on there. Neither is Iraq...they refused to sign and their signature to the Geneva Convention was one of the Cease Fire Agreements in 1991...how soon the politicians ignore that fact...or, do they and did they?
Thusly, Al Qaida is not an internationally recognized Uniformed Force. They fire their rockets and missiles from school grounds, mosques and civilian housing areas. They are the first to whine about the Geneva Conventions, however, as they behead those they consider to be the enemy on video but, that is OK...they are doing the deal...sounds like our very own American anti-Americanists to me. I often wonder which group listens to which group and when. As our own "anti-war" thugs drag and burn American Troops in effigy , so did Al Qaida...the difference was the bodies were real.
The Washington Post has a piece out and it has the Elite of the DNC squirming, waffling and backpedaling like they have just met face to face their worst nightmare come true...The Truth. Blackfive has an observation worth repeating:
[...] This is exactly what happens when you try to be on both sides of the issue. When you whore yourself out to the extreme left to hold on to power by lying to them about what you really think. The part of this that is "classic" is that this issue is headed the way of Hillary and her parsing her Iraq War vote and John Kerry and his "for it before I was against it" B.S. [...]Exactly so, Roger That and Copy. I would also like to add, checkmate. Right Wing News has a checkmate set in stone:
This story from the Washington Post clearly proves how today's objections to waterboarding, particularly from Congressional Democrats, is purely political grandstanding. When briefed on the interrogation techniques used against captured terrorists, the reaction from those in the room "was not just approval, but encouragement." Even current House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was there and "did not raise objections at the time." [...]Like Kagro X says over at the Daily KOS: "Well?" And, yes, that is a direct challenge to Kadro X.
It will never cease to amaze me that the Leftinistra, the armies of the socialist liberals of the United States (not to upset anyone from Canada or anywhere else), will stoop to deeper and lower levels of disdain, lies and deceit to remain in power. This is yet one more example of the Smoking gun exposing them for what they are...enablers of derision and division all in the name of Political Power.
I have often vocalized the following, as Glenn Reynolds has as well:
[...] Lots of people who were talking tough back then subsequently changed their tunes -- out of either a sudden flowering of scruples or an unprincipled desire to go after the Bush Administration with any weapon that came to hand. But, you know, if you're going to say "it was different back then," it really has to be more than just an al--purpose excuse for politicians. It's also a reason not to hang people out to dry for doing what politicians, and the public, wanted back then, when things were so "different." Your call, but Jules Crittenden notes: "Next thing you know, someone's going to say the Clinton co-presidency thought Saddam had a nuclear program and backed regime change." [...]Oh. Wait! They did! Check the video at Instapundit or, follow the video links I have made available at Let Freedom Ring. Many of us are asking the Elitist Holier Than Thou folks: If waterboarding was such a grand idea way back when the world was a dangerous place, why is it an abhorrent activity now, seeing that the world is still a dangerous place? If it was acceptable then, why not now? Has the world gotten any more safer all of a sudden?
This whole waterboarding issue is another White Tiger non-issue issue. The practice ended nearly 4 years ago and operated under Congressional oversight and only one objected then...Nancy wasn't one of them...neither was Hillary. To use this non-issue as an issue for the upcoming elections, knowing that the practice is no longer utilized, reveals how utterly afraid the Leftocrats in the United States are about the upcoming elections.
Spin that.
I have a hint of the future for them: We win...you lose
Vote it up at Digital Journal
|