Steve MacDonald

Steve is a long-time New Hampshire resident, an award-winning blogger, and a member of the Board of Directors of The 603 Alliance and the National Heritage Center for Constitutional Studies. He is the owner of Grok Media LLC and the Managing Editor, Executive Editor, assistant editor, Editor, content curator, and more (yes, there's more) at GraniteGrok.com. Steve is also a former board member of the Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire, the Republican Volunteer Coalition, and has worked for or with many state and local campaigns and grassroots groups, and is a past contributor to the Franklin Center for Public Policy.

It’s about parental rights, not abortion.

In the Sunday Union Leader, Tom Fahey, writing in the "Under the Dome" column reports that the bill to repeal NH’s parental notification law will come up for reconsideration.

The parental notification issue isn’t going away soon. Just one day after the House passed a repeal of the law requiring a parent to be notified before a child has an abortion, Rep. Edmond Gionet asked for the bill to be reconsidered. That means more debate in the House, more roll call votes and more spotlight on everyone.

"They’re gonna feel the heat," said Rep. Fran Wendelboe.

As I’ve said before, this is not about abortion– it’s about a medical surgical procedure on a minor child. Several months back, I dropped my son at the dentist to get a cavity filled without going in. As he is only 15, when I got back to my nearby office, I got a call indicating I needed to go back in to the dentist’s or fax a note giving them permission to fill a cavity. If it were my daughter murdering my unborn grandchild… no problem. No permission needed.

Oh, and in case you’re inclined, as I first was, to blame this on the new Democratic rule, think again. Consider the record of the votes right here in Belknap County, where I live. Here’s the roll call:

Read more

Romney wows ’em at CPAC

With the ’08 presidential nominating season seemingly in full swing, the wannabees from both parties are deep in the hunt. As I’ve noted several times in prior postings, Mitt Romney is not really my cup of tea. This is mostly based on my review of his past actions, statements, and his governorship of that infamous liberal state south of NH’s border. I have a real hard time with his denial of Ronald Reagan during his now famous 1994 debate with Ted Kennedy.
.
Despite all of this, Mitt continues to charge forward, unabashedly claiming to be THE conservative that can win the race. As I noted in this prior posting, he certainly talks the talk. The question is whether the talk is real or just politically expedient. I will give Mitt credit– unlike George W. Bush, who spoke in couched codes and hints about being conservative ("compassionate conservatism"), and then revealed himself as not very conservative at all in many areas– Romney speaks very plainly and openly about his chosen positions.
.
This past week at the CPAC event in DC, Mitt gave a speech that played well with conservatives. It contained many points that certainly got my attention. He talked about presidential actions and positions that I have long waited for in a Republican President. Friend Rich Killion, who works for Romney, was kind enough to forward the full text of the CPAC speech to share with GraniteGrok readers. I have highlighted my favoriite points…

GOVERNOR MITT ROMNEY’S REMARKS AT CPAC

March 2, 2007
As Prepared For Delivery
.
It’s good to be with so many conservatives. In fact, I invited all the conservatives in Massachusetts to come hear me today and I’m glad to report that they are both here.
.
I’m happy to learn that after I speak you’re going to hear from Ann Coulter. That’s a good thing. I think it’s important to get the views of moderates.
.
The mainstream media is surprised that we’re here. They wrote our obituary last fall. Course, they’ve written our obituary before: after Watergate, after the 82 midterm elections, after Iran-contra, and after Bill Clinton’s election. The truth is that their wishful thinking reports of our demise have been greatly exaggerated. In fact, I predict that we’ll be around a lot longer than . . . say, newspapers.
.
No conservatism is alive and well. And it is needed more than ever. America faces a new generation of challenges, critical challenges. Today is similar in many respects to what we faced as a nation 30 years ago, looking at the menacing face of communism. 

Read more

This is just too delicious…

Every once and a while, a story comes along that just makes you go, "Yes!" You know- the one that that will be immediately understood for what it is… and what it says, by anybody that reads it. Consider this from the Tennessee Center for Policy Research: Al Gore’s Personal Energy Use Is His Own … Read more

Didn’t he get the memo?

I’m sure this guy will be out of a job before too long… Expert disputes storms’ link to global warming By Zane WilsonThe Sun News COLUMBIA – As population continues to grow on the coast and people build more structures, losses from hurricanes will go up drastically but it isn’t because of global warming, one … Read more

The World Needs Great Men Like Dick Cheney

 
One of my favorite moments in politics from recent times was when Vice President Dick Cheney dropped the "f-bomb" on Sen. Pat Leahey (D-VT) after the Senator slammed him with the "Halliburton as beneficiary of government" meme for the umpteenth time. CNN.com reported on the aftermath, following Cheney’s appearance on Neal Cavuto’s Fox News Channel program after the incident:
When asked if he had cursed at Leahy, Cheney answered, "Probably." "Do you have any regrets?," Neil Cavuto asked. "No. I said it," the vice president responded.
He further remarked, that, of those Senators who heard the exchange, some
"felt that what I’d said badly needed to be said, that it was long overdue."
He explained it this way:
"Part of the problem here is that instead of having a substantive debate over important substantive policy issues, he had challenged my integrity, and I didn’t like that. But most of all I didn’t like the fact that after he’d done so, then he wanted to act like everything was peaches and cream."
There you go. Like him or not, Dick Cheney calls ’em as he sees ’em. That was back in June of 2004. It’s now 2007, and Dick Cheney is still Dick Cheney. I, for one, am glad of that. This week has been a busy one for the Vice President, who demonstrated again why he continues to earn my respect and enthusiastic support…
.

Read more

Meet the New Press airs today…

Live in Central NH: It’s Meet the New Press on NewsTalk 1490 WEMJ at 2:00PM- 4:00PM EST and later on the podcast page. . Today: Question– Now that the NH Senate has passed a bill banning smoking in all bars and restaurants, Do you agree? Disagree? Does it go far enough? Guest Robert Shibley of … Read more

GraniteGrok was there…

Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich, long-shot Democratic presidential wannabee, paid a visit to Laconia, NH on Sunday, and the GraniteGrok team covered the event. While Skip and I are conservative Republicans, we decided that when ANY candidate of stature comes to our neck of the woods, we should go see him/her, regardless of the party. And, since the local county Dems were gracious … Read more

Can Sununu cut it in the new New Hampshire?

So I’m reading my NH Sunday News, (as I’ve done since 1985) pondering how much the Granite State has changed since then. When I moved here, it was the most Republican of states, and I was the envy of all the conservative friends I left behind in RI (well, I say "conservative", but heck, we … Read more

Education funding problem? No. Dysfunctional governement? Yes.

Attorney Ed Mosca submits the following commentary about the latest nonsense being bandied about as a "solution" to the ongoing education funding mess here in NH:

NO SHAME AND NO SENSE 

In an Op-Ed in the February 2nd Union Leader, ersatz Republican Mark Carter called for a grand compromise on education funding:  a constitutional amendment that allows “targeted aid,” but that also “allows for legal action should the state ever abuse its obligation to our communities.”  Now I’m just as opposed to obligation abuse as the next person, but think for a minute about what this lovely euphemism means.  It means that whenever anyone doesn’t like the result produced by democracy, he can run into court and sue to get his way. 
.
Ersatz Republican Carter claims that this “preserves the checks and balances power of the judicial branch.”  What poppycock.  The way that our system of government is supposed to work is that in matters of policy, and that includes education funding, we are supposed to attempt to persuade each other, and then decide the issue by voting.  We are not supposed to sue each other.   
.
Carter’s amendment would also write into the State Constitution the canard that the quality of public education is determined by the amount we spend on public education as it requires the State to provide financial assistance whenever a school district lacks the “fiscal capacity” to provide the “opportunity for an adequate education.”  This myopic approach ignores that a variety of factors affect education performance besides spending.  These include the competence of administrators, the quality of teachers, the talent and motivation of students and the involvement of parents.  Because of these variables, the cost of an “adequate education” varies not just by school district, but by student.  This means that in order to reliably calculate the cost of an “adequate education” the calculation must be done on a student-by-student basis and the calculation must account for the particular effect of non-financial variables on each student’s performance. 
.
For this and other reasons, defining an “adequate education” and determining its cost is the proverbial fool’s errand.  Yet Carter would make this fool’s errand a permanent part of the State Constitution.  What Carter and his ilk apparently don’t understand is that the State does not have an education funding problem it has dysfunctional government. 
.

Read more

Campaign ’08– GraniteGrok Analysis- A View from Central NH. Part 1: Republicans

Given the crop of presidential wannabees all jumping into the fray in the past two weeks, I’m beginning to think that perhaps it’s time for me to throw my hat in the ring as well. The way things are going, if I don’t hurry, I may be the last guy in America that ISN’T running for President in ’08. (Vote for Doug– he’ll cut taxes and kick some butt over in Iraq and Iran, solving the problem once and for all. Doug’s plan calls for winning the hearts and minds of any survivors. Oh, and he’ll build a wall as high and deep as necessary along the entire length of the southern border.) Unfortunately, I am otherwise occupied and hereby announce that I will NOT run for the Presidency in ’08. Because of this, I am desperately seeking a candidate I can support to do the job in my stead. Let’s review…
.
I’ll consider the Republicans first. Being a conservative, I’m fairly certain that whoever I end up supporting, he or she will most likely be of the GOP. I will review the Dems in a second posting to follow from the viewpoint of which one scares me the least. Partisan? Definitely– Not in a Repub/Dem way but in a conservative/liberal vein. The list is in alphabetical order, NOT in some kind of preference order. It includes declared and speculative candidates. I am using the list as presented on Ron Gunzburger’s Politics1.com site, which is an excellent starting point for candidate investigations for anyone who is so inclined.
  • Senator Sam Brownback:– He’s very conservative on the issues– he and I are in agreement on many. His name recognition at this point is mostly derived from recent Sunday morning appearances on the talking-heads shows– where he generally seems articulate and knowledgable– until this past Sunday. When pressed by Chris Wallace to substantiate his claim of being different than the other conservatives in the race, his inabilty to answer made him sound like he "shoulda stayed in a Holiday Inn last night." Certainly he’s a longshot, at best. Oh, and he’s pro-amnesty.
  • Jim  Gilmore: Former Virginia Gov. who’s great on the borders, the tax issue, and small government beliefs. He announced an exploratory committee on January 9th and has no web presence, other than a draft Gilmore site run by others. A grasp of the new media is an important criteria for me as I assess candidates. He looks particularly strong, however, in homeland security issues. After all, his state was one of the ones attacked on 9/11 (Pentagon is in VA) This previous post features a report from Ed Naile of the CNHT who had a chance to meet in a small group with Gilmore. Perhaps Jim will take off? He’s got a long ways to go, for sure.
  • Newt Gingrich: 5 main issues: 1. Securing America and her Allies By Defeating our Enemies; 2. Defending God in the Public Square; 3. Protecting American Civilization; 4. Competing and Winning in a Global Economy; 5. Promoting Active, Healthy Aging. Almost sounds like some sort of "contract," doesn’t it? Newt is this campaign’s wildcard. He is the one guy that, whenever he appears on TV, I tend to bump into people the next day who ask me if I saw Newt. He is extremely active in all media, has multiple websites, and needs neither spokesmen or cue cards to articulate a coherent, plain argument that is easily understood by ordinary folks. He is one of but a handful of people in the world that is recognized by first name (i.e. Hillary, Diana, Condi, Rush) alone. While he’s not yet declared his intentions, he still has a leg up on all but a couple of the wannabees in many aspects of a run. He’s my kind of politician who leads by actions on the issues. DO SOMETHING and, if it’s good, people will follow. For what it’s worth (hopefully  a lot), Newt came in first in RWN’s right of center bloggers’ poll. And then there’s his recent joint editorial effort with the next guy on the list…

Read more

Memo to Ahmadinejad

Here is this week’s "Exercising the First" column, which appears every Thursday in the Laconia Daily Sun (NH). It is based on information and thoughts I originally used in this post here on GraniteGrok a couple weeks back. Even though several points are reruns, there is new information that I think readers might find noteworthy…

Exercising the First

War? No thanks.

by Doug Lambert
.
Recently, the Iran Policy Committee (IPC), a think-tank of military people and other respected experts in that area of the world, released a white paper offering a series of steps and suggestions to supplement President Bush’s latest plans for a new strategy in Iraq. Entitled “How to Make the Surge Work: A Complementary Political-Military Plan for Iraq”, it outlines a political complement to the proposed American military troop surge in Iraq. Additionally, it reveals information about the nature of the enemy and who they really are that most Americans probably didn’t know.
.
Discussing the paper in a January 12th news conference, General Paul E. Vallely, USA (Ret.), co-chair, IPC Military Committee, and co-author of  “Endgame: The Blueprint for Victory in the War on Terror” said, “Sending an additional 20,000 U.S. troops to Iraq under current military strategies and rules of engagement will unlikely make much difference.” The reason is that there is another reality on the ground in Iraq that more often than not goes unstated, due to the obvious implications. Says Vallely: “Based on the intelligence that is now available, it is very clear that Iran is the number one enemy in Iraq. But our enemy, Iran, is not fighting a conventional war against us; it is engaged in an unconventional war.” He further noted that ample evidence exists showing that the Iranians have stepped up their efforts in the past few months. “The Qods Force of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps secretly trains, finances, and arms an extensive terrorist network in Iraq.”
.
Issuing the gist of the warning his group wishes to impart to President Bush and his war planners, Vallely stated, “To prevail, the United States has to transition from a conventional to an unconventional war footing to adjust to Iran’s tactics and make the enemy pay a heavy price for its despicable tactics.”
.
“But Doug, he talked about an enemy—like we’re really at war or something! And what does he mean about Iranians in Iraq? Fighting us? Why would they? Don’t they understand? We don’t want to fight —we just have to talk to them.” 

Read more

Friday Humor: Church Squirrels

There were Five country churches in a small TEXAS town: .The Presbyterian Church, the Baptist Church, the Methodist Church and the Catholic Church and the Jewish Synagogue Each church was overrun with pesky squirrels..One day, the Presbyterian Church called a meeting to decide what to do about the squirrels. After much prayer and consideration they … Read more

The DNC unloads on Mitt

This is exactly what I fear about the future if Mitt Romney gets the GOP nomination. Remember how John Kerry never shook the "flip-flop" label? From the DNC:

Under Fire for Gun Flips, Fined for Campaign Violations, and Accused of ‘Abandoning’ Massachusetts – All in One Weekend!

    WASHINGTON, Jan. 16 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — The following is a statement by the Democratic National Committee: By any measure, Smooth Talking Mitt Romney had a rough weekend. An Alaska newspaper revealed that the Republican Governors Association was fined for breaking state elections laws under Romney’s leadership, the Boston Herald accused him of abandoning Massachusetts voters, and the Boston Globe highlighted his recent flip-flopping on gun control issues.
.
"Smooth talking Mitt Romney’s effort to run from his record has hit a  rough patch," said Democratic National Committee spokesman Damien LaVera. "From his dismal tax raising record, to his newfound support of President Bush’s failed Iraq strategy and his waffling on gun rights, Mitt Romney seems to think that he can talk his way out of his problems with primary voters and into the Republican nomination. What Romney doesn’t understand is that voters want real leaders with strong principles, not blatant panderers who will shift in whichever way the political winds take him."
Ouch! Keep in mind– the ones writing this are the opponents the GOP nominee will face in the general election. Keep reading…

Read more

Bush details four main goals of the so-called “surge”

In his radio address this week, President Bush provided more detail on the plans for Iraq he discussed in his prime-time speech this week.
THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. On Wednesday night, I addressed the Nation from the White House to lay out a new strategy that will help Iraq’s democratic government succeed.
.
America’s new strategy comes after a difficult year in Iraq. In 2006, the terrorists and insurgents fought to reverse the extraordinary democratic gains the Iraqis have made. In February, the extremists bombed a holy Shia mosque in a deliberate effort to provoke reprisals that would set off a sectarian conflict. They succeeded, and the ongoing sectarian violence, especially in Baghdad, is making all other progress difficult.
Not to mention the ongoing badmouthing of the President, the war, and the new plans for success in Iraq by the Democrats, antiwar moonbats, assorted Bush-haters, and moderate squishes. This makes progress difficult too.
.
The President continued, defining four main points in the strategy:
Only the Iraqis can end the sectarian violence and secure their people. Their leaders understand this, and they are stepping forward to do it. But they need our help, and it is in our interests to provide that help. The changes in our strategy will help the Iraqis in four main areas:
.
First, we will help the Iraqis execute their aggressive plan to secure their capital. Eighty percent of Iraq’s sectarian violence occurs within 30 miles of Baghdad. The new plan to secure Baghdad fixes the problems that prevented previous operations from succeeding. This time, there will be adequate Iraqi and U.S. forces to hold the areas that have been cleared, including more Iraqi forces and five additional brigades of American troops committed to Baghdad. This time, Iraqi and American forces will have a green light to enter neighborhoods that are home to those fueling sectarian violence. Prime Minister Maliki has pledged that political or sectarian interference with security operations will not be tolerated.
There can’t be any real peace with the Iraqi people unable to safely exist in their homes and neighborhoods. Michelle Malkin has an excellent photo series here, showing the current plight of some of the poorest of the poor in a Baghdad slum.
.
Bush went on to number two:

Read more

“Iran is the number one enemy in Iraq”

The following press release is an interesting analysis of the present situation in Iraq and the reality of Iranian involvement in that country. It discusses the nature of the political problems involved, and offers sound advice to President Bush that he ought to consider in the effort to win the day in Iraq. The blunt assessment that we are in fact fighting a war with Iran is rather frightening, but is something we must understand before it’s too late.
WASHINGTON, Jan. 12 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — The Iran Policy Committee held a press conference on Thursday, 11 January 2007, at the National Press Club in Washington, DC to review President Bush’s 10 January 2007 address to the nation on Iraq and release a White Paper titled, How to Make the Surge Work: A Complementary Political-Military Plan for Iraq, introducing a political complement to the proposed American military troop surge to Iraq.
.
Mr. Bruce McColm, Iran Policy Committee, Executive Committee member, set the stage for discussion. Mr. McColm drew attention to the U.S. military raid on the Iranian consulate in the mainly Kurdish city of Erbil in northern Iraq on the day after the President’s 10 January address. U.S. Forces detained at least five Iranian employees in the consulate and seized computers and documents that should be relevant for additional military action against Iranians in Iraq. McColm praised this event "as evidence that the United States may be more willing to counter Iranian subversion of Iraq." McColm also cited Gen. Michael V. Hayden, Director of the Central Intelligence Agency. Hayden testified before Congress that despite earlier skepticism of reports of Iranian operations in Iraq, he now had the "zeal of a convert" on such reports.
This is the sort of information that more Americans need to learn and truly think about. "Iranians in Iraq? Fighting us? Like we’re at war with them or something?"
General Paul E. Vallely, USA (Ret.), co-chair, IPC Military Committee, and co-author of Endgame: The Blueprint for Victory in the War on Terror, followed Mr. McColm by referring to Mr. Alireza Jafarzadeh, author of The Iran Threat: President Ahmadinejad and the Coming Nuclear Crisis. Vallely said, "Jafarzadeh had revealed intelligence that suggests a sharp increase in Iran’s sponsorship of terrorism and sectarian violence, especially in the past few months. The Qods Force of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps secretly trains, finances, and arms an extensive terrorist network in Iraq."
.
In referring to President Bush’s proposal to surge U.S. troops to Iraq, Vallely said,

"Based on the intelligence that is now available, it is very clear that Iran is the number one enemy in Iraq. But our enemy, Iran, is not fighting a conventional war against us; it is engaged in an unconventional war."

There he goes again with that "enemy" stuff. Doesn’t he know that we just voted to not participate in the war? "War? We don’t want no stinkin’ war! That’s why we voted for the Dems!"

Read more

George Bush looks forward to working with Dems. Likewise, I’m sure.

In this week’s radio address, the President welcomed the new Congress with its new majority led by Democrats. He laid out certain areas of agreement that he thinks he shares with many within the Congress that they can and should work together to achieve.
THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. Earlier this week, the newly elected members of the House and the Senate took their oaths of office and became part of the 110th Congress. I congratulate them all, and I look forward to working with them over the next two years.
.
Since the November elections, I’ve had a number of productive meetings with the new leaders in Congress, including Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, House Minority Leader John Boehner, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. I was encouraged by our discussions, and I’m confident that we can find common ground in our efforts to serve our fellow citizens and to move our country forward.
.
One area where we are already finding agreement is in our effort to spend the people’s money wisely. This week, I announced that I will submit a five-year budget proposal that will balance the federal budget by 2012, while making the tax relief we passed permanent. Some Democrats have indicated that balancing the budget is a top priority for them as well. By holding the line on spending and continuing our pro-growth policies, we can balance the budget and address the most urgent needs of our Nation, which are winning the war on terror and maintaining a strong national defense, keeping our economy growing, and creating jobs.
It’s too bad President Bush wasn’t this focused on spending restraint when the GOP was in charge. I believe the lack of fiscal discipline was one of the contributing factors to Republican losses. Bush continued…
 We also see bipartisan agreement emerging on reforming the earmark process in Congress. Earmarks are spending provisions that are often slipped into bills at the last minute — so they rarely get debated or discussed. Many earmarks divert precious funds away from vital priorities like national defense and education to wasteful pork-barrel projects. I appreciate Democratic leaders who have pledged to maintain our current levels of spending without additional earmarks this year. And I support the temporary moratorium on all new earmarks announced by the Democrats.
Ah yes, earmarks. This is another area the GOP took a beating for. The Dems are very smart to take this up as an issue. Whether their reforms last, or are even real remains to be seen. At the end of the day, earmarks are the "crack cocaine" of the so-called bacon brought back to congressional districts, and those in Congress, on both sides of the aisle, are hopelessly addicted. Bush adds his own idea to this problem, but as with many other new initiatives, seems a day late…

Read more

President Bush honors Gerry Ford in this week’s radio address

President Bush spoke of Gerald Ford in this week’s radio address…
THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. This week, as Americans prepare to welcome a new year, we do so with heavy hearts and fond memories of our 38th President, Gerald R. Ford. We mourn the passing of a courageous leader, a true gentleman, and a loving father and husband. On behalf of all Americans, Laura and I send our prayers and condolences to Mrs. Ford and the entire Ford family.
.
Gerald Ford was a great man who devoted the best years of his long life to public service. He fought for his country during World War II. After returning home, he won the first of 13 elections to the United States Congress. The people of Michigan admired his dedication and decency, and so did his fellow members of Congress. Gerald Ford rose to become a leader of his party, and he earned the respect and good will of all who had the privilege of knowing him.
.
Gerald Ford always believed in the importance of answering the call to duty, and he was there for the Nation when we needed him most. In December 1973, he accepted the responsibilities of the Vice Presidency; and the following August, he became President of the United States without ever seeking the office. Providence gave us Gerald Ford’s steady hand and calm leadership during a time of great division and turmoil. He guided America through a crisis of confidence, and helped our Nation mend its wounds by restoring faith in our system of government.
.
In his two-and-a-half years as President, Gerald Ford distinguished himself as a man of integrity and selfless dedication. He always put the needs of his country before his own, and did what he thought was right, even when those decisions were unpopular. Only years later would Americans come to fully appreciate the foresight and wisdom of this good man.
Exactly. I recall how mad people were at the time when he pardoned Richard Nixon. I happened to catch a rerun of an interview with Ford (from sometime during the ’90’s) in which he was explaining his reasoning for doing what he did. It made all the sense in the world for him to do it, yet he got lambasted for it, costing him re-election. No matter– he did what was best for the country, not himself. It is this action that sets him as a model for other politicians. President Bush went on, noting…

Read more

Another person weighs in on President Carter…

Insight of a Sergeant Major (The author, J.D. Pendry, is a retired Army Command Sergeant Major who writes for Random House.)
 
NO PUNCHES PULLED HERE
 
Jimmy Carter, you’re the father of the Islamic Nazi movement.  You threw the Shah under the bus, welcomed the Ayatollah home and then lacked the spine to confront the terrorists when they took our embassy and our people hostage.  You’re the Runner-in-Chief.
 
Bill Clinton, you played "ring around the Lewinsky" while the terrorists were at war with us.  You got us into a fight with them in Somalia, and then you ran from it.  Your weak-willed responses embolden the killers.  Each time you failed to respond adequately they grew bolder, until 9/11.
 
John Kerry, dishonesty is your most prominent attribute.  You lied about American Soldiers in Vietnam.  Your military service, like your life, is more fiction than fact.  You’ve accused our Soldiers of terrorizing women in Iraq. You called Iraq "the wrong war, wrong place, wrong time"… the same words you used to describe Vietnam. You’re a fake.  You want to run from Iraq and abandon the Iraqis to murderers just as you did the Vietnamese.  Iraq, like Vietnam, is another war that you were for, before you were against it.
 
John Murtha, you said our military was broken.  You said we can’t win militarily in Iraq.  You accused United States Marines of cold-blooded murder without proof.  And said we should re-deploy to Okinawa.  Okinawa, John?  And the Democrats call you their military expert.  Are you sure you didn’t suffer a traumatic brain injury while you were off building your war hero resume?  You’re a sad, pitiable, corrupt and washed up politician.  You’re not a Marine sir.  You wouldn’t amount to a pimple on a real Marine’s ass.  You’re a phony and a disgrace.  Run away John.

Dick Durbin, you accused our Soldiers at Guantanamo of being Nazis, tenders of Soviet style gulags and as bad as the regime of Pol Pot who murdered two million of his own people after your party abandoned South East Asia to the Communists….

Read more

Share to...
BufferCopyFlipboardHacker NewsLineLinkedInMastodonMessengerMixPinterestPrintRedditSMSTelegramTumblrVKWhatsAppXingYummly