CrispAds Blog Ads

Sunday, October 30, 2005


Dems left deflated, again...

Demoralized and depressed are democrats, once again, as they were desperately hoping for charges against Karl Rove and Vice President Cheney, both of whom are not going to be charged with anything in this two year–waste of time–investigation initiated by the Wislon/Plame duo of fabricating story tellers, that has led to unprovable charges against Scooter Libby for purjury and obstruction of justice. Two of the same charges ex-president Clinton faced during his impeachment, getting off scot-free by asking what the definition of 'is' is, using his famous pouty-lip-bite irresistible to liberals everywhere.

So the liberals were sitting on the edge of their chairs with fingers crossed, in hopes of hearing evidence from Mr. Fitzgerald that the reasons for going to war were falsified, but were instead left deflated by Fitzgerald telling them that nothing about his investigation was ever about the war.

Democrat's had made it all up in their heads, and fed it to their manic MoveOn machine that spews out republican conspiracy theories all day long to keep liberal heads filled with anger and hate.

Question: Mr. Fitzgerald, this began as a leak investigation but no one is charged with any leaking. Is your investigation finished? Is this another leak investigation that doesn't lead to a charge of leaking?

Fitzgerald: "OK, is the investigation finished? It's not over, but I'll tell you this: Very rarely do you bring a charge in a case that's going to be tried and would you ever end a grand jury investigation.I can tell you, the substantial bulk of the work in this investigation is concluded."

In response to another question later on:

Question: A lot of Americans, people who are opposed to the war, critics of the administration, have looked to your investigation with hope in some ways and might see this indictment as a vindication of their argument that the administration took the country to war on false premises.

Does this indictment do that?

Fitzgerald: "This indictment is not about the war. This indictment's not about the propriety of the war. And people who believe fervently in the war effort, people who oppose it, people who have mixed feelings about it should not look to this indictment for any resolution of how they feel or any vindication of how they feel.

This is simply an indictment that says, in a national security investigation about the compromise of a CIA officer's identity that may have taken place in the context of a very heated debate over the war, whether some person -- a person, Mr. Libby -- lied or not.

The indictment will not seek to prove that the war was justified or unjustified. This is stripped of that debate, and this is focused on a narrow transaction.

And I think anyone's who's concerned about the war and has feelings for or against shouldn't look to this criminal process for any answers or resolution of that."

You could almost hear the hot air being let out of Howard Dean and the liberal pundits, who still said all day in every news break on Friday that charges against Libby were connected to reasons for going to war in Iraq. But that wasn't true as Fitzgerald explained.

The liberal media is lying again in order to deceive the public about two things that are clearly NOT connected. It's amazing how Democrats never connected the dots before 9/11, and are now doing it in vengeful haste, only the picture they've come up looks like a sitting donkey.

So then, where are the charges against the liberal media liars???

The bottom line here is that democrat's failed miserably in their goal–going after Bush, and have been left with basically zilch for their hungry misfits to munch on.

This is just another chapter of democrat obstruction run amok that is giving the American people a real headache. Come this time next year, the public will be taking massive doses of pain reliever when they oust more democrats at the voting booth.


The following is more important than our internal politics, so we all need to be American's, Now!

While we're playing politics, our enemies are moving quickly ahead with their evil plans against us and our allies. Are we or our government taking notice?

The media has not shown us the full text or pictures of the Iranian president's speech. If you follow the "news" you likely have seen only this picture, of Iran's President Ahmadinejad speaking at the "World Without Zionism" conference where he spoke of wiping "Israel off the map."

But in this photo you can only see a portion of the graphic because it was cropped. The rest of the graphic speaks a thousand words.

For the full MUST READ article that every American should see, click this link...
Why Haven't We Seen This?

© Copyright 2005-2008 The Creative Conservative, All Rights Reserved.


Thursday, October 27, 2005


No Miers' and Dems Weak Cases

The rug was finally pulled out from under giddy democrats who thought they had someone they could easily manipulate on the U.S. Supreme court with Harriet Miers' confirmation.

Miers called the president in his private residence at 8:30 p.m. EDT Wednesday to tell him of her decision. Twelve hours later, she walked into the Oval Office to hand him her letter of withdrawal.

But suddenly the democrats have exposed themselves in complaining about Republican's for derailing the nomination.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., one of 14 women in the Senate, had challenged Miers' nomination yet couldn't resist criticizing Republicans in a sexist way. "I don't believe they would have attacked a man the way she was attacked."

Democrats now left defensless, are begging for some weak moderate in the mold of O'Connor, whom they had great success manipulating through the years to keep abortion, gay rights, and other wrongs in place.

This is the fight the country has been waiting for that will further expose the democrats for who they really are, and what their socialist agenda for America truly is. Democrats are not likely to win this battle either, to go with the long list of defeats they've had in recent years as America abandon's the leftist ideology.

The far left is not happy at all about Miers' decision to step away from consideration because they believed Bush was making a mistake in their favor. Or was it a set-up? "The radical right wing of the Republican Party killed the Harriet Miers nomination," said Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada, who had recommended Miers to the president. "They want a nominee with a proven record of supporting their skewed goals."

Is killing babies for ones convenience skewed Mr. Reid? Who are democrats to say what's right for America when they've consistently backed criminals, rapists', abortionist's, murderers, and terrorists'? Let's call it Demoscrewed. They have the ACLU (All Communist Liberals Union) as their evil god, who argues for removal of anything religious in government because of a few atheists' who can't grasp the concept of faith, or some foreigner's (George Soros) who want to have Judeo-Christian values taken out of America in order to bring the country down.

The president is a strategerist who understands politics. He toughened up his base for the fight to come with his nomination of Miers, whom he knew would not be confirmed. When the time was right, Miers would "step down" from the nomination, making her the good girl who took one for the team, which will be rewarded with something else.

To the democrat's great dismay, neither Karl Rove nor Vice President Cheney will be charged if indictments are handed down on Friday. The weak case will instead focus on Cheney's aide, Mr. I. Lewis Libby Jr., for charges of making false statements to a grand jury. The problem for dems is proving he knowingly knew his statements were false, which is very difficult if not impossible to prove. After all, ex-president Clinton got away with lying under oath to a grand jury when he was impeached by asking what the meaning of 'is', is.

Democrat's simply cannot resist their vengence in trying to bring down the Bush presidency anyway they can. This will have an absolutely massive backfire effect on democratic party as everyone remembers their defense of Clinton’s impeachment.

Bush can be expected to nominate someone who will set off an immediate firestorm from liberals, and their special interest groups to provoke a major battle on the hill that will put democrats on the defensive on Friday, thus taking the steam out of their lame indictment of Libby based on a lie told by Joseph Wilson and his wife Valerie Plame, who cooked this up when they decided to take a trip to Niger to NOT find uranium, then came back claiming there wasn't any, and the reason for going to war was false. The final result of this will be indictments against Wilson and Plame who will surely go to jail for many, many years for conspiring against the White House.

Rep. Tom DeLay, under indictment on campaign finance violations, railed against Democrats in a letter Thursday, accusing them of engaging in "the politics of personal destruction."

The letter, sent to constituents and contributors, connected his case with investigations into possible misconduct by White House adviser Karl Rove and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist.

"What we're fighting is so much larger than a single court case or a single district attorney in Travis County," the Texas Republican wrote. "We are witnessing the criminalization of conservative politics."

DeLay is right to be angry at democrats who've stacked the courts with liberal justices in order to push their socialist agenda against America and its long held traditions and values. They make up the rules for everyone else as they go while believing themselves above the laws they've created through judicial fiat.

Liberals are desperate to get rid of most religions in America they deem as fanatical, which includes Christianity and the religious principles America was founded on.

Unable to win in the arena of positive ideas for America, democrat's must resort to tearing down and railing against the U.S., to strip it of what has made it the greatest country in the world. They are told by their puppet masters of special interest groups to go out and complain about whatever is good, and make it bad by using the media to twist reality and rational thinking on its head with spins of bias that fit their agenda.

Liberals have been told to attack conservative blogs such as this one and argue with false propaganda refuting the facts, no matter how juvenile it looks. The proof is all over the internet in chat rooms and advertisments.

The response of the media is to go along with whatever desperate plan the democrats come up with, then unleash their attack dogs on the far left–salivating for scraps of hatred and anger they can use to demonize the right.

The amazing thing is that they have no idea of the real impression liberals are giving to the majority of American's, as they believe themselves to be winning by the polls they take on a near constant basis. Mostly they just end up agreeing with themselves, and project bias results as being correct in order to keep a dwindling minority base happy while ignoring reality.

© Copyright 2005-2008 The Creative Conservative, All Rights Reserved.


Saturday, October 22, 2005


Bush's Next Rebound

For all of the president's supposed woes being announced on a near continuous basis by the leftist media with some moderate help from the right, the stage is being set for the remarkable rebound of George W. Bush.

The president thrives on challenges. He did in his drive to become Governor of Texas, and followed up with his two campaign's for president.

His response to the terror attacks on 9/11 pushed Bush to stratospheric levels of popular leadership when his approval rating shot near the mid 90's.

Since then his approval ratings could only go one way, and they have indeed reached a low point of his presidency in the high 30's or low 40's, whichever "poll" numbers you want to believe on any given day. Much of this was due to things the president has little to no control over, such as high oil prices set by OPEC, and the hurricane disasters in the Gulf where democrat-run state and local government were responsible for the massive failures that took place, as evidenced by the complaints received from the public. The media on the other hand tried to put all the blame on the federal government who were hampered by state and local regulations from responding as quickly as they could have.

The left has gone wild with conspiracy theories about Tom DeLay, Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, and Bill Frist which are really just distractions from the impending case against the 9/11 commission's and Bill Clinton's cover-up of Able Danger, that will surely come back to wipe all this nonsense about Republican's off the front page and refocus the nation on the damage democrats have done to America with their corruption and ineptness.

As things stand now, this is where the president wants to be as he gets things done on the world stage while domestically things are still moving ahead at a good pace. All Bush needs to do is go into campaign mode where he has consistently come out on top.

The Miers nomination for the supreme court seems to be a mistake by the president. Will he leave her to fail? Could he be using her to soften up the democrats for another nominee? Or does he really want her on the court? My instincts tell me Bush using this nomination to toughen up his base to fight for the next true nominee while weakening his opponents, eg; liberal democrats, foreign governments and terrorist regimes.

While some Republican's complain about Bush's pick of Harriet Miers for the supreme court, it is not Republican's who are in denial here, but the democrats who constantly point fingers while ignoring their own ineptness and division in losing to the GOP. Democrats can't win on the issues because they have nothing to offer except retro-politics, and can't even admit to their true agenda, which as most know by now is to implement a socialist form of government using the Marx blueprint that has failed so miserably in other countries throughout history.

Goals and Reality

The gist of all this is that liberal democrats are hoping for the failure of Iraq and America so they can come in and pick up the pieces, in both Iraq and here. The MAJORITY of the public is fully aware of the desperate straights democrats are in, and that each false accusation only makes them look worse.

Unfortunately for lib dems, the constitutional process is working for the Iraqi people who voted for it overwhemingly at 78%, have the wherewithal to see it through despite the Sunni's and terrorists' desire to turn Iraq backward, because they want freedom and a better life for their people.

Remember that before the war, Democrats were saying "we'dlose tens of thousands of soldiers" and it would surely be another vietnam. Talk about hysteria, democrats have become the epitome of the word! Even today the democrats want to abandon the mission the same way we did in Vietnam, which turned out to be the worst decision for America's place in the world, making us look weak to our enemies. Hanoi Jane Fonda and John Kerry lead the accusations for the communists' that the media swallowed whole and reguritated to the world.

The terrorist enemy we're fighting in Iraq and elsewhere, cannot be reasoned with or appeased. These fanatics want to destroy America and Israel in order to force their brand of Islam onto all people. Anyone who doesn't follow it, they would simply kill outright, just as Saddam Hussein did with hundreds of thousands. Democrats are in such a mess that they're willing to lose the war on terror just to spite Bush and Republican's because they can't get over the fact that Clinton was an impeached disaster who consistently appeased terrorism throughout the '90's leading up to 9/11.

Many on the left see nothing wrong with terrorism, feeling that America deserves it because we're the world's only super power. They feel these people are only terrorists' because they've been oppressed. But the point they consistently miss is that we're not oppressing them, on the contrary we are giving them their freedom, which terrorists' don't want people to have–anywhere. Democrats actually want president Bush impeached for doing his job in protecting the nation. A job Clinton failed miserably at, and left Bush to deal with. Seems democrats want terrorism in America rather than in Iraq or Afghanistan as a form of population control to go with their support of killing babies with abortions.

The arrogant liberals have hamstrung democrats with irresponsible–paranoid conspiracy theories, anti-war protests, wild innuendo and trumped-up indictments as their only recourse to stop progress in America and Iraq by Republican's, thus proving the fallacies and backwardness of their entire political agenda.

So while the media is having a feeding frenzy over Tom DeLay, Dick Cheney, Bill Frist and Harriet Miers pandering to liberal fantasies that Bush is in some kind of free-fall, the reality is that they're not prepared for some big surprises coming that will deflate their current bubble of GOP destruction just like when their dot com era crashed in 2000.

Getting DeLay mad is really stupid, and going after Cheney with reliance on a biased Mr. Wilson's word alone is even stupider! To top it all off, democrats have hired a prosecutor who had to convene three different juries for an indictment against Mr. DeLay on charges not backed up by legal statutes.

I'll stick my neck out here and say that the GOP's (temporary) losing streak is a set-up for a good rebound, and that there will be a tremendous backfire on democrats in the mid-term elections because of their constant degradation of American values spewed with utter nonsense and hatred for the president, and anyone who does not conform to their extreme leftist ideology.

So much negativity has its price. One day soon, democrats are going to wish their liberal base of misfits had kept quiet, as they are beginning to diss the whiners on the left, realizing they are going nowhere because of them.

This creates a perfect time for president Bush to grab the bull by the horns, refocus on his agenda and regain the thrust of his convictions to make America a better and more prosperous nation where individual's are given the freedom to fulfill their destiny without government hinderance.

The Creative Conservative

© Copyright 2005-2008 The Creative Conservative, All Rights Reserved.


Thursday, October 13, 2005


Had Al Gore Been President...

Al Gore has confirmed that America would be a much different country today had he been elected president.

Gore said In Sweden: "If I Were President 'We Would Not Be Routinely Torturing People... We Would Be A Different Country'..."

We certainly would be. Al would've had Osama bin Laden over at the White House for a tea following the terror attacks on 9/11 in yet another round of appeasing the enemy that both he and Clinton enabled without any real response during the 1990's decade of terror attacks on America and our interests abroad.

It has become clear if not obvious to most, that Clinton and Gore approved of terrorism to keep the focus off Bill's precious (but false) economy, by not drawing attention to terrorist acts by fighting against them as they should have.

Al confirms this in his continuation: "We would not have invaded a country that didn't attack us," he said, referring to Iraq.

The fact is that Saddam did have many connections to the terrorists', that have not been reported in the liberal media, which he wants full control of, even while again stating the opposite. Saddam was also paying Palestinians to commit suicide bombings against innocent Israeli men, women and children.

1After the Khobar Towers attack, Clinton said upon learning of the bombing,: "The cowards who committed this murderous act, must not go unpunished. Let me say again: We will pursue this. America takes care of our own." Clinton made his semi-apology to Iran before officially requesting its cooperation in the Khobar case, which he did only in October 1999 and never backed up with international pressure.

FBI director Louis Freeh, and those around him, began to suspect that the administration didn't care that much about finding the perpetrators because if connections with Iran were established it would be forced to take, or at least consider, action against Iran. This meant that getting to the bottom of the case would present what the Clinton administration hated most: a difficulty, a risk.

Referring to the economy, Gore said: "We would not have taken money from the working families and given it to the most wealthy families."

The truth and reality is that nobody took money from 'working families,' and especially did not give it to the wealthy. Gore constantly refuses to accept that the money was never the governments in the first place. The wealthy do not take money from the government, they send it to the government in disproportionate taxation. Is it any wonder why Al Gore lost so badly on playing the class warfare card in the 2000 election? This is further proven by Kerry's dismissal of the gambit in his 2004 run. Gore is living in some past decade when most people didn't have stocks, bonds and 401k's, being somewhat more naive about having their money taken away by government taxation.

Money was given back to the working families in tax relief – two words not in Gore's vocabulary. Individuals and families showed their gratitude by reelecting president Bush with the most votes for any president in history, over war veteran-traitor and communist pig, John Kerry.

In fact our tax system is set up just opposite of what Gore states, where the wealthy pay far more in taxes than those who make less. (read taxes below)

So Gore would've raised taxes even higher after the recession that he and Bill created with the false bubble and corporate corruption during the last 4 years of their control, which would've had the worst effect on the economy, driving us into a deep depression similar to the 1930's.

That is ultimately very much the goal of democrat's for America's future, to bring back the era of big government controlling people by driving out individual ambition, thus replacing it with reliance on government welfare like the days of the Great Society when being a democrat was the "in thing." Thank goodness America has grown-up since then.

Al Gore is a deceiver who has no clue about reality, and feels the American people are stupid enough to listen to his b.s.. Just listen to his words.

"We would not be trying to control and intimidate the news media." Gore said.

This is why he created his own TV station,... to spread liberal-socialist propaganda to those dumb enough to suck it up. Gore feels that as long as the media is bowing down to his and the wishes of the DNC, that they should be able to lie to the people as Dan Rather, Tom Brokaw and Peter Jennings did for 40 years before the internet came and exposed them for the manipulating liars they were.

Democrats do it all the time, but are now losing the battle. One only has to read the New York Times to see their blatant bias, that they are now attempting to charge money for on line. Paul Krugman is the best example of erroneous liberal editorialism there is. Only the rich elites can afford to pay for that kind of crap, which again proves Al Gore's class warfare is as bogus as ever.

But Clinton and liberal democrats DO control the media even today, and did so during the '90's as well giving Clinton a pass on most everything he did wrong, but were forced to cover some of it as they couldn't cover-up his deviant behaviour for long.

"We would not be routinely torturing people," Gore said.

"To accuse Americans of participating in 'routine torture' is absurd and reveals that while Al Gore may no longer be a leader in his party, he still embodies the maniacal anger that guides Democrat leaders in Washington today," Schmitt wrote in an e-mail to The Associated Press.

Gore didn't learn from Sen. Dick Durbin's (D) comments that were rejected by the American people, outright. Durbin had to apologize for his Nazi remarks about our troops a few months ago that were grossely false and way out of line.

Al Gore would probably have caved-in-to Islamic radicals and converted the nation to Islam as a gesture of good will sold as political correctness. He'd of had our children learning the Koran and praying to Allah five times a day while also learning to hate the Jews in school, as taught by the Palestinians and Jihadists'.

Al would've dismantled our military, and side with the Arabs to have Israel destroyed by following Islamic Mullah decrees.

Al Gore is a danger to the planet, but thankfully most people with any brains realize he's a fool of epic proportions who puts his own interests ahead of everyone else's.

Truth on Taxes

I was asked to post this on my site from a response I gave to a question in the comment's section by the author of Let Our Voices Be Heard concerning how the war in Iraq, and hurricanes Katrina and Rita would be paid for "without at least freezing current tax cuts," (ie; raising taxes). This was originally directed at one person, but for this post, it is directed at all Liberal pawns of the rich democrats.

It is amazing that you deny solid evidence. The numbers and facts I've given you are simple enough to understand for most of us who have received proper education, but that was before the democrats ruined the system by hiring teachers who can't pass their own tests, which unfortunately you may have been a student of.

In any case, here is the answer to your question, which I'm quite sure you'll bash even if you do comphrehend it.

I'll try to answer your question as simply as I can so you can grasp the basics of how economics work. I won't even use any numbers to save you from thinking too much.

The first thing you need to know is that raising taxes will not help to pay for the war, and would actually have the opposite effect.

Here's why. As I said before and which the "Government Tax Receipts" link I previously provided clearly proves, the best way for the government to bring money in to help pay for the war is to let people keep more of their own money to spend as they see fit. At first glance it seems contradictory doesn't it? But if you take an honest look at it, you'll see that it makes perfect sense, provided you have some common sense to begin with.

You have to ask yourself this question: how has the deficit has gone down even with the war going on? ANSWER: Because people have had more of their own money to spend on things they need, which ARE TAXED! That is where most of the money comes from and how the economy can expand.

Raising taxes STIFLES spending just as raising interest rates STIFLES borrowing.

If you raise taxes, people won't have that money to spend on products they would otherwise be paying taxes on.

Are you starting to get it yet?

Think about it, I mean really think hard. Everything you buy is TAXED and the government gets a cut. Every item bought and sold, imported and exported has a TAX on it, everyday 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.

Then we also pay income TAXES on top of that with each paycheck!

Then we pay a another huge TAX once a year on a percentage of our hard earned money that was already TAXED before! Amazing isn't it?

So, OUR government TAXES every single product, every single pay check and then TAXES the income earned that they didn't TAX before. Then they TAX any interest earned too!

That's why people have a hard time saving anything.

If people are not buying things because they have to save that much more money to pay their INCOME TAXES by April 15th, they aren't going to be buying as much, which means less money will be going into the government coffers.

So how will the war get paid for? By the American people making the economy and free market work the way it was supposed to, which creates more jobs and hence revenue for the government, that already has more than enough to pay for it.

Unemployment before the hurricane was 4.9% which is extremely low and lower than when Clinton was in office. Oops, I used a number, sorry.

(D)on't fool yourself. The rich democrats know this stuff too, and they use it against YOU by pulling at your emotions to distract you from seeing what they are really doing in order to steal more of YOUR (not the governments) money.

When you go buy a car, do you let the salesman use emotional tactics on you to get the price UP? My guess is that YOU DO, because you place emotions ahead of common sense, which is exactly what democrat salesmen (I feel your pain) rely on too!

It's time for people to start THINKING!

I hope this makes sense to you because it's the truth. You need to take an honest look at the big picture here to understand these things.

If you can keep the emotions out of it as many ex-democrats have found out, then you'll be on your way to living in reality where the TRUE facts beat emotional propaganda (false conspiracy theories) everytime.

P.S., If you have anymore questions, or comments, I'll try to answer them as sincerely and honestly as I can.

One more thing. The U.S. economy is somewhere around 12.8 *** TRILLION *** dollars.

(Sorry I had to use a number here)

How much was Bush's tax cut? A drop in the proverbial ocean! A cup of coffee to Starbucks....

Like I said, start thinkin'... !


2 "The reality is that the wealthy pay almost all of the federal income tax, and there is clear and compelling evidence that our tax system -- especially its misguided redistributive elements -- imposes a heavy cost in terms of growth that is ultimately paid by the non-wealthy in the form of lower productivity and, hence, lower wages and incomes.

According to a new report from the U.S. Government Accountability Office, we pay a very heavy price for the heavy taxation of saving, investment, corporations and estates that [liberals] strongly favor. It found that the efficiency cost of the tax system -- the output that is lost over and above the tax itself -- is between 2 percent and 5 percent of the gross domestic product. In short, we lose between $240 billion and $600 billion every year just because of the way we raise taxes."

SOURCES: 1 NRO, 2 Realities of the Tax Burden

© Copyright 2005-2008 The Creative Conservative, All Rights Reserved.


Thursday, October 06, 2005


To ALL Liberal (anti-war) Democrats.... Bush Gets It, YOU don't!

The most recent speech given by president Bush at the National Endowment for Democracy in Washington on Thursday October 6, 2005 was absolutely outstanding! I urge all Democrats and Liberals to read every word of this speech, slowly and carefully. I listened to it on the radio, and I can tell you it was the greatest speech I've heard him give, and he didn't miss a beat, making me very proud of our Commander in Chief.

Bush understands exactly what this nation, and the entire world are up against in the War On Terror and why we must win it at all costs.

This is the speech I've been waiting to hear from the president, and he totally nailed it. If democrats and liberals believe that Bush is stupid, then it is no wonder why they lost and continue losing to him.

This speech shows clearly that Bush is a very, very intelligent man who knows all the aspects of how Islamic radicals think, what they desire and are willing to do and sacrifice to force their evil ideology upon the free world. He also knows what needs to be done about them, and he explains it all right here in this speech.

The following text is the transcript of President Bush's speech

President Bush: Thank you all. (Applause.) Thank you all. Please be seated. (Applause.) Thank you for the warm welcome. I'm honored once again to be with the supporters of the National Endowment for Democracy. Since the day President Ronald Reagan set out the vision for this Endowment, the world has seen the swiftest advance of democratic institutions in history. And Americans are proud to have played our role in this great story.

Our nation stood guard on tense borders; we spoke for the rights of dissidents and the hopes of exile; we aided the rise of new democracies on the ruins of tyranny. And all the cost and sacrifice of that struggle has been worth it, because, from Latin America to Europe to Asia, we've gained the peace that freedom brings.

In this new century, freedom is once again assaulted by enemies determined to roll back generations of democratic progress. Once again, we're responding to a global campaign of fear with a global campaign of freedom. And once again, we will see freedom's victory. (Applause.)

Vin, I want to thank you for inviting me back. And thank you for the short introduction. (Laughter.) I appreciate Carl Gershman. I want to welcome former Congressman Dick Gephardt, who is a board member of the National Endowment for Democracy. It's good to see you, Dick. And I appreciate Chris Cox, who is the Chairman of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, and a board member for the National Endowment of Democracy, for being here, as well. I want to thank all the other board members.

I appreciate the Secretary of State, Condi Rice, who has joined us — alongside her, Secretary of Defense Don Rumsfeld. Thank you all for being here. I'm proud, as well, that the newly sworn-in Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, the first Marine ever to hold that position, is with us today — General Peter Pace. (Applause.) I thank the members of the Diplomatic Corps who are here, as well.

Recently our country observed the fourth anniversary of a great evil, and looked back on a great turning point in our history.We still remember a proud city covered in smoke and ashes, a fire across the Potomac, and passengers who spent their final moments on Earth fighting the enemy. We still remember the men who rejoiced in every death, and Americans in uniform rising to duty. And we remember the calling that came to us on that day, and continues to this hour: We will confront this mortal danger to all humanity. We will not tire, or rest, until the war on terror is won. (Applause.)

The images and experience of September the 11th are unique for Americans. Yet the evil of that morning has reappeared on other days, in other places — in Mombasa, and Casablanca, and Riyadh, and Jakarta, and Istanbul, and Madrid, and Beslan, and Taba, and Netanya, and Baghdad, and elsewhere. In the past few months, we've seen a new terror offensive with attacks on London, and Sharm el-Sheikh, and a deadly bombing in Bali once again. All these separate images of destruction and suffering that we see on the news can seem like random and isolated acts of madness; innocent men and women and children have died simply because they boarded the wrong train, or worked in the wrong building, or checked into the wrong hotel. Yet while the killers choose their victims indiscriminately, their attacks serve a clear and focused ideology, a set of beliefs and goals that are evil, but not insane.

Some call this evil Islamic radicalism; others, militant Jihadism; still others, Islamo-fascism. Whatever it's called, this ideology is very different from the religion of Islam. This form of radicalism exploits Islam to serve a violent, political vision: the establishment, by terrorism and subversion and insurgency, of a totalitarian empire that denies all political and religious freedom. These extremists distort the idea of jihad into a call for terrorist murder against Christians and Jews and Hindus — and also against Muslims from other traditions, who they regard as heretics.

Many militants are part of global, borderless terrorist organizations like al Qaeda, which spreads propaganda, and provides financing and technical assistance to local extremists, and conducts dramatic and brutal operations like September the 11th. Other militants are found in regional groups, often associated with al Qaeda — paramilitary insurgencies and separatist movements in places like Somalia, and the Philippines, and Pakistan, and Chechnya, and Kashmir, and Algeria. Still others spring up in local cells, inspired by Islamic radicalism, but not centrally directed. Islamic radicalism is more like a loose network with many branches than an army under a single command. Yet these operatives, fighting on scattered battlefields, share a similar ideology and vision for our world.

We know the vision of the radicals because they've openly stated it — in videos, and audiotapes, and letters, and declarations, and websites. First, these extremists want to end American and Western influence in the broader Middle East, because we stand for democracy and peace, and stand in the way of their ambitions. Al Qaeda's leader, Osama bin Laden, has called on Muslims to dedicate, quote, their "resources, sons and money to driving the infidels out of their lands." Their tactic to meet this goal has been consistent for a quarter-century: They hit us, and expect us to run. They want us to repeat the sad history of Beirut in 1983, and Mogadishu in 1993 — only this time on a larger scale, with greater consequences.

Second, the militant network wants to use the vacuum created by an American retreat to gain control of a country, a base from which to launch attacks and conduct their war against non-radical Muslim governments. Over the past few decades, radicals have specifically targeted Egypt, and Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan, and Jordan for potential takeover. They achieved their goal, for a time, in Afghanistan. Now they've set their sights on Iraq. Bin Laden has stated, "The whole world is watching this war and the two adversaries. It's either victory and glory, or misery and humiliation." The terrorists regard Iraq as the central front in their war against humanity. And we must recognize Iraq as the central front in our war on terror.

Third, the militants believe that controlling one country will rally the Muslim masses, enabling them to overthrow all moderate governments in the region, and establish a radical Islamic empire that spans from Spain to Indonesia. With greater economic and military and political power, the terrorists would be able to advance their stated agenda: to develop weapons of mass destruction, to destroy Israel, to intimidate Europe, to assault the American people, and to blackmail our government into isolation.

Some might be tempted to dismiss these goals as fanatical or extreme. Well, they are fanatical and extreme — and they should not be dismissed. Our enemy is utterly committed. As Zarqawi has vowed, "We will either achieve victory over the human race or we will pass to the eternal life." And the civilized world knows very well that other fanatics in history, from Hitler to Stalin to Pol Pot, consumed whole nations in war and genocide before leaving the stage of history. Evil men, obsessed with ambition and unburdened by conscience, must be taken very seriously — and we must stop them before their crimes can multiply.

Defeating the militant network is difficult, because it thrives, like a parasite, on the suffering and frustration of others. The radicals exploit local conflicts to build a culture of victimization, in which someone else is always to blame and violence is always the solution. They exploit resentful and disillusioned young men and women, recruiting them through radical mosques as the pawns of terror. And they exploit modern technology to multiply their destructive power. Instead of attending faraway training camps, recruits can now access online training libraries to learn how to build a roadside bomb, or fire a rocket-propelled grenade — and this further spreads the threat of violence, even within peaceful democratic societies.

The influence of Islamic radicalism is also magnified by helpers and enablers. They have been sheltered by authoritarian regimes, allies of convenience like Syria and Iran, that share the goal of hurting America and moderate Muslim governments, and use terrorist propaganda to blame their own failures on the West and America, and on the Jews. These radicals depend on front operations, such as corrupted charities, which direct money to terrorist activity. They're strengthened by those who aggressively fund the spread of radical, intolerant versions of Islam in unstable parts of the world. The militants are aided, as well, by elements of the Arab news media that incite hatred and anti-Semitism, that feed conspiracy theories and speak of a so-called American "war on Islam" — with seldom a word about American action to protect Muslims in Afghanistan, and Bosnia, Somalia, Kosovo, Kuwait, and Iraq.

Some have also argued that extremism has been strengthened by the actions of our coalition in Iraq, claiming that our presence in that country has somehow caused or triggered the rage of radicals. I would remind them that we were not in Iraq on September the 11th, 2001 — and al Qaeda attacked us anyway. The hatred of the radicals existed before Iraq was an issue, and it will exist after Iraq is no longer an excuse. The government of Russia did not support Operation Iraqi Freedom, and yet the militants killed more than 180 Russian schoolchildren in Beslan.

Over the years these extremists have used a litany of excuses for violence — the Israeli presence on the West Bank, or the U.S. military presence in Saudi Arabia, or the defeat of the Taliban, or the Crusades of a thousand years ago. In fact, we're not facing a set of grievances that can be soothed and addressed. We're facing a radical ideology with inalterable objectives: to enslave whole nations and intimidate the world. No act of ours invited the rage of the killers — and no concession, bribe, or act of appeasement would change or limit their plans for murder.

On the contrary: They target nations whose behavior they believe they can change through violence. Against such an enemy, there is only one effective response: We will never back down, never give in, and never accept anything less than complete victory. (Applause.)

The murderous ideology of the Islamic radicals is the great challenge of our new century. Yet, in many ways, this fight resembles the struggle against communism in the last century. Like the ideology of communism, Islamic radicalism is elitist, led by a self-appointed vanguard that presumes to speak for the Muslim masses. Bin Laden says his own role is to tell Muslims, quote, "What is good for them and what is not." And what this man who grew up in wealth and privilege considers good for poor Muslims is that they become killers and suicide bombers. He assures them that his — that this is the road to paradise — though he never offers to go along for the ride.

Like the ideology of communism, our new enemy teaches that innocent individuals can be sacrificed to serve a political vision. And this explains their cold-blooded contempt for human life. We've seen it in the murders of Daniel Pearl, Nicholas Berg, and Margaret Hassan, and many others. In a courtroom in the Netherlands, the killer of Theo Van Gogh turned to the victim's grieving mother and said, "I do not feel your pain — because I believe you are an infidel." And in spite of this veneer of religious rhetoric, most of the victims claimed by the militants are fellow Muslims.

When 25 Iraqi children are killed in a bombing, or Iraqi teachers are executed at their school, or hospital workers are killed caring for the wounded, this is murder, pure and simple — the total rejection of justice and honor and morality and religion. These militants are not just the enemies of America, or the enemies of Iraq, they are the enemies of Islam and the enemies of humanity. (Applause.) We have seen this kind of shameless cruelty before, in the heartless zealotry that led to the gulags, and the Cultural Revolution, and the killing fields.

Like the ideology of communism, our new enemy pursues totalitarian aims. Its leaders pretend to be an aggrieved party, representing the powerless against imperial enemies. In truth they have endless ambitions of imperial domination, and they wish to make everyone powerless except themselves. Under their rule, they have banned books, and desecrated historical monuments, and brutalized women. They seek to end dissent in every form, and to control every aspect of life, and to rule the soul, itself. While promising a future of justice and holiness, the terrorists are preparing for a future of oppression and misery.

Like the ideology of communism, our new enemy is dismissive of free peoples, claiming that men and women who live in liberty are weak and decadent. Zarqawi has said that Americans are, quote, "the most cowardly of God's creatures." But let's be clear: It is cowardice that seeks to kill children and the elderly with car bombs, and cuts the throat of a bound captive, and targets worshipers leaving a mosque. It is courage that liberated more than 50 million people. It is courage that keeps an untiring vigil against the enemies of a rising democracy. And it is courage in the cause of freedom that once again will destroy the enemies of freedom. (Applause.)

And Islamic radicalism, like the ideology of communism, contains inherent contradictions that doom it to failure. By fearing freedom — by distrusting human creativity, and punishing change, and limiting the contributions of half the population — this ideology undermines the very qualities that make human progress possible, and human societies successful. The only thing modern about the militants' vision is the weapons they want to use against us. The rest of their grim vision is defined by a warped image of the past — a declaration of war on the idea of progress, itself. And whatever lies ahead in the war against this ideology, the outcome is not in doubt: Those who despise freedom and progress have condemned themselves to isolation, decline, and collapse. Because free peoples believe in the future, free peoples will own the future. (Applause.)

We didn't ask for this global struggle, but we're answering history's call with confidence, and a comprehensive strategy. Defeating a broad and adaptive network requires patience, constant pressure, and strong partners in Europe, the Middle East, North Africa, Asia and beyond. Working with these partners, we're disrupting militant conspiracies, destroying their ability to make war, and working to give millions in a troubled region of the world a hopeful alternative to resentment and violence.

First, we're determined to prevent the attacks of terrorist networks before they occur. We're reorganizing our government to give this nation a broad and coordinated homeland defense. We're reforming our intelligence agencies for the incredibly difficult task of tracking enemy activity, based on information that often comes in small fragments from widely scattered sources, here and abroad. We're acting, along with the governments from many countries, to destroy the terrorist networks and incapacitate their leaders. Together, we've killed or captured nearly all of those directly responsible for the September the 11th attacks; as well as some of bin Laden's most senior deputies; al Qaeda managers and operatives in more than 24 countries; the mastermind of the USS Cole bombing, who was chief of al Qaeda operations in the Persian Gulf; the mastermind of the Jakarta and the first Bali bombings; a senior Zarqawi terrorist planner, who was planning attacks in Turkey; and many of al Qaeda's senior leaders in Saudi Arabia.

Overall, the United States and our partners have disrupted at least ten serious al Qaeda terrorist plots since September the 11th, including three al Qaeda plots to attack inside the United States. We've stopped at least five more al Qaeda efforts to case targets in the United States, or infiltrate operatives into our country. Because of this steady progress, the enemy is wounded — but the enemy is still capable of global operations. Our commitment is clear: We will not relent until the organized international terror networks are exposed and broken, and their leaders held to account for their acts of murder.

Second, we're determined to deny weapons of mass destruction to outlaw regimes, and to their terrorist allies who would use them without hesitation. The United States, working with Great Britain, Pakistan, and other nations, has exposed and disrupted a major black-market operation in nuclear technology led by A.Q. Khan. Libya has abandoned its chemical and nuclear weapons programs, as well as long-range ballistic missiles. And in the last year, America and our partners in the Proliferation Security Initiative have stopped more than a dozen shipments of suspected weapons technology, including equipment for Iran's ballistic missile program.

This progress has reduced the danger to free nations, but has not removed it. Evil men who want to use horrendous weapons against us are working in deadly earnest to gain them. And we're working urgently to keep weapons of mass destruction out of their hands.

Third, we're determined to deny radical groups the support and sanctuary of outlaw regimes. State sponsors like Syria and Iran have a long history of collaboration with terrorists, and they deserve no patience from the victims of terror. The United States makes no distinction between those who commit acts of terror and those who support and harbor them, because they're equally as guilty of murder. (Applause.) Any government that chooses to be an ally of terror has also chosen to be an enemy of civilization. And the civilized world must hold those regimes to account.

Fourth, we're determined to deny the militants control of any nation, which they would use as a home base and a launching pad for terror. For this reason, we're fighting beside our Afghan partners against remnants of the Taliban and their al Qaeda allies. For this reason, we're working with President Musharraf to oppose and isolate the militants in Pakistan. And for this reason, we're fighting the regime remnants and terrorists in Iraq. The terrorist goal is to overthrow a rising democracy, claim a strategic country as a haven for terror, destabilize the Middle East, and strike America and other free nations with ever-increasing violence. Our goal is to defeat the terrorists and their allies at the heart of their power — and so we will defeat the enemy in Iraq.

Our coalition, along with our Iraqi allies, is moving forward with a comprehensive, specific military plan. Area by area, city by city, we're conducting offensive operations to clear out enemy forces, and leaving behind Iraqi units to prevent the enemy from returning. Within these areas, we're working for tangible improvements in the lives of Iraqi citizens. And we're aiding the rise of an elected government that unites the Iraqi people against extremism and violence. This work involves great risk for Iraqis, and for Americans and coalition forces. Wars are not won without sacrifice — and this war will require more sacrifice, more time, and more resolve.

The terrorists are as brutal an enemy as we've ever faced. They're unconstrained by any notion of our common humanity, or by the rules of warfare. No one should underestimate the difficulties ahead, nor should they overlook the advantages we bring to this fight.

Some observers look at the job ahead and adopt a self-defeating pessimism. It is not justified. With every random bombing and with every funeral of a child, it becomes more clear that the extremists are not patriots, or resistance fighters — they are murderers at war with the Iraqi people, themselves.

In contrast, the elected leaders of Iraq are proving to be strong and steadfast. By any standard or precedent of history, Iraq has made incredible political progress — from tyranny, to liberation, to national elections, to the writing of a constitution, in the space of two-and-a-half years. With our help, the Iraqi military is gaining new capabilities and new confidence with every passing month. At the time of our Fallujah operations 11 months ago, there were only a few Iraqi army battalions in combat. Today there are more than 80 Iraqi army battalions fighting the insurgency alongside our forces. Progress isn't easy, but it is steady. And no fair-minded person should ignore, deny, or dismiss the achievements of the Iraqi people.

Some observers question the durability of democracy in Iraq. They underestimate the power and appeal of freedom. We've heard it suggested that Iraq's democracy must be on shaky ground because Iraqis are arguing with each other. But that's the essence of democracy: making your case, debating with those who you disagree — who disagree, building consensus by persuasion, and answering to the will of the people. We've heard it said that the Shia, Sunnis and Kurds of Iraq are too divided to form a lasting democracy. In fact, democratic federalism is the best hope for unifying a diverse population, because a federal constitutional system respects the rights and religious traditions of all citizens, while giving all minorities, including the Sunnis, a stake and a voice in the future of their country. It is true that the seeds of freedom have only recently been planted in Iraq — but democracy, when it grows, is not a fragile flower; it is a healthy, sturdy tree. (Applause.)

As Americans, we believe that people everywhere — everywhere — prefer freedom to slavery, and that liberty, once chosen, improves the lives of all. And so we're confident, as our coalition and the Iraqi people each do their part, Iraqi democracy will succeed.

Some observers also claim that America would be better off by cutting our losses and leaving Iraq now. This is a dangerous illusion, refuted with a simple question: Would the United States and other free nations be more safe, or less safe, with Zarqawi and bin Laden in control of Iraq, its people, and its resources? Having removed a dictator who hated free peoples, we will not stand by as a new set of killers, dedicated to the destruction of our own country, seizes control of Iraq by violence.

There's always a temptation, in the middle of a long struggle, to seek the quiet life, to escape the duties and problems of the world, and to hope the enemy grows weary of fanaticism and tired of murder. This would be a pleasant world, but it's not the world we live in. The enemy is never tired, never sated, never content with yesterday's brutality. This enemy considers every retreat of the civilized world as an invitation to greater violence. In Iraq, there is no peace without victory. We will keep our nerve and we will win that victory. (Applause.)

The fifth element of our strategy in the war on terror is to deny the militants future recruits by replacing hatred and resentment with democracy and hope across the broader Middle East. This is a difficult and long-term project, yet there's no alternative to it. Our future and the future of that region are linked. If the broader Middle East is left to grow in bitterness, if countries remain in misery, while radicals stir the resentments of millions, then that part of the world will be a source of endless conflict and mounting danger, and for our generation and the next. If the peoples of that region are permitted to choose their own destiny, and advance by their own energy and by their participation as free men and women, then the extremists will be marginalized, and the flow of violent radicalism to the rest of the world will slow, and eventually end. By standing for the hope and freedom of others, we make our own freedom more secure.

America is making this stand in practical ways. We're encouraging our friends in the Middle East, including Egypt and Saudi Arabia, to take the path of reform, to strengthen their own societies in the fight against terror by respecting the rights and choices of their own people. We're standing with dissidents and exiles against oppressive regimes, because we know that the dissidents of today will be the democratic leaders of tomorrow. We're making our case through public diplomacy, stating clearly and confidently our belief in self-determination, and the rule of law, and religious freedom, and equal rights for women, beliefs that are right and true in every land, and in every culture. (Applause.)

As we do our part to confront radicalism, we know that the most vital work will be done within the Islamic world, itself. And this work has begun. Many Muslim scholars have already publicly condemned terrorism, often citing Chapter 5, Verse 32 of the Koran, which states that killing an innocent human being is like killing all humanity, and saving the life of one person is like saving all of humanity. After the attacks in London on July the 7th, an imam in the United Arab Emirates declared, "Whoever does such a thing is not a Muslim, nor a religious person." The time has come for all responsible Islamic leaders to join in denouncing an ideology that exploits Islam for political ends, and defiles a noble faith.

Many people of the Muslim faith are proving their commitment at great personal risk. Everywhere we have engaged the fight against extremism, Muslim allies have stood up and joined the fight, becoming partners in a vital cause. Afghan troops are in combat against Taliban remnants. Iraqi soldiers are sacrificing to defeat al Qaeda in their own country. These brave citizens know the stakes — the survival of their own liberty, the future of their own region, the justice and humanity of their own tradition — and that United States of America is proud to stand beside them. (Applause.)

With the rise of a deadly enemy and the unfolding of a global ideological struggle, our time in history will be remembered for new challenges and unprecedented dangers. And yet the fight we have joined is also the current expression of an ancient struggle, between those who put their faith in dictators, and those who put their faith in the people. Throughout history, tyrants and would-be tyrants have always claimed that murder is justified to serve their grand vision — and they end up alienating decent people across the globe. Tyrants and would-be tyrants have always claimed that regimented societies are strong and pure — until those societies collapse in corruption and decay. Tyrants and would-be tyrants have always claimed that free men and women are weak and decadent — until the day that free men and women defeat them.

We don't know the course of our own struggle — the course our own struggle will take — or the sacrifices that might lie ahead. We do know, however, that the defense of freedom is worth our sacrifice. We do know the love of freedom is the mightiest force of history. And we do know the cause of freedom will once again prevail.

May God bless you.


Now contrast that to this...


Then you'll know why Clinton sucked so bad, and why Bush is so much better, that is if you're being honest.

© Copyright 2005-2008 The Creative Conservative, All Rights Reserved.


Tuesday, October 04, 2005


Bush offers gift for Democrats?

The new nominee for the supreme court is a 60 year-old woman who democrats like. White House counsel Harriet Miers has been chosen by president Bush to succeed Sandra Day O'Connor on the highest court in the land.

The other woman on the court is the radical liberal Ruth Bader Ginsberg who during her confirmation hearings said very little about how she would make her decisions concerning important issues, and never answered any questions about Roe vs. Wade, claiming falsely that she didn't know how she would rule until the actual case was brought before the court.

Image hosted by Photobucket.comBut democrats are expecting to hear answers from Miers as to how and where her decisions would come down on the issues. This blatant double-standard will not sit well with the American public if democrats decide to use the fillibuster against Miers or not confirm her because of her silence to congress following Ginsberg.

Who picked her?
Democrats who voted against New Chief Justice John Roberts, seem to love Bush's new pick. "I Like Harriet Miers. As White House counsel she has worked with me in a courteous and professional manner," stated Harry Reid, D-Nev., the Senate minority leader. "I am also impressed with the fact that [Miers] was a trailblazer for women as a managing partner of a major Dallas law firm and the first woman president of the Texas Bar Association."

Added Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.: "[W]hen I choose judges In New York, I look for practical experience. And so the fact that she hasn't been a judge before, to me is actually a positive, not a negative."

Some new facts about Schumer's double standards have come to light as two of his staffers illegally obtained and ran the social security number of raising black political star Michael Steele who is lieutenant governor of Maryland. For more information on Schumer's connections to this illegal activity, read Schumer's Plumbers.

So Bush has apparently caved to the democrats wishes with this rather weak nomination of a rather moderate woman who has no experience deciding cases, has given money to the democrats in November 1988, the nominee gave $1,000 to the DNC Services Corporation/Democratic National Committee. In February of that year, she donated $1,000 to then-Sen. Al Gore's presidential primary race. And in March 1987, Miers gave $1,000 to the primary campaign of Democrat Lloyd Bentsen, who went on to become Michael Dukakis' running mate in the 1988 presidential election.

If the democrats like her, then something seems awfully wrong with this decision, although Bush is smart enough to know if Harriet is right for the job after all these years of personal contact. In other words, we should give the president the benefit of the doubt on this nominee who may just turn out to be one of the best. See this article as to reasons why: Many Don't Grasp Strategy of Miers Nomination

However, according to TIME, An indication of her stance on gay rights comes from this questionaire from the Lesbian/Gay Political Coalition of Dallas Miers filled out while running for the Dallas City Council in 1989. In it, she supported full civil rights for gays and lesbians and backed AIDS education programs for the city of Dallas. (Source: Quorumreport.com)

Should Harriet Miers be confirmed and someday cast a vote for gays rights such as marriage, then Bush has certainly betrayed his base of conservatives and will go down as a backstabber in the Republican party. Let us hope that Harriet has come to her senses from that questionaire.

Democrats will likely start bashing her soon now that it's come out she is an Evangical Christian who has served the church well even in menial duties. She has run her own business and has been an advisor to the president for a long time, and Bush is not likely to be wrong with this choice either.

Time will tell us more about her if the democrats can get anything out of her, which is doubtful as she's one tough little lady who some claim, eats nails. Although she’s a small-framed woman, we all believed she came through the Marines and maybe ate nails for breakfast because she’s one tough cookie,” Horace Taylor, a former lottery employee who worked for Miers, told the Houston Chronicle.

Hopefully Bush has done something good for the nation and pro-lifers with this rather odd pick that may surprise many doubters.

We all need to pray for Harriet Miers while the process take its course.

© Copyright 2005-2008 The Creative Conservative, All Rights Reserved.


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?