Gay Patriot Header Image

Terror Plot Thwarted; Democrats Criticize Bush

Posted by GayPatriotWest at 9:04 pm - August 11, 2006.
Filed under: Bush-hatred,Civil Discourse,War On Terror

When, just before bed Wednesday night, I first read about the thwarting of the latest terror plot against Western civilians, I had hoped to do a quick post, but was so numbed by the news I wasn’t quite sure what to say. While I noted that the initial MSM reports failed to include the nationality or religion of the bombers, The Malcontent‘s Robbie alerted me to Ace’s post making that very point — in a quite clever way.

During the past two days, as I read more about the plot — and learned how British, Pakistani and American investigators uncovered it, I realized how significant a victory this was in the War on Terror. I became increasingly optimistic about our eventual success in this ongoing conflict as I became aware of the cooperation of the government of a Muslim nation, Pakistan, and when I found out that the “original information about the plan came from the Muslim community in Britain.”

Many Muslims are as committed to defeating Islamofascism as are those in the West. And we know that that term Islamofascism defines only a segment of the Muslim world.

While the bulk of the credit for the success in thwarting this diabolical plot goes to our friends across the pond, American officials played a key role in uncovering it. According to Time magazine, “U.S. intelligence provided London authorities with intercepts of the [terror] group’s communications.” This is thus yet another success for the Bush Administration in the War on Terror.

And it’s not just the assistance Americans provided the Brits as they unraveled this plot, it’s that the policies the Brits used to uncover it are similar to many the Administration has put into practice since 9/11.

Given the reaction of the president’s critics, including the Senate Democratic leader, you’d think the Administration has somehow suffered a tremendous setback. Just one day after this victory in the War on Terror, Senator Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) said, “Five years after 9-11, it is clear that our misguided policies are making America more hated in the world and making the war on terrorism harder to win.”

Instead of praising the Administration for its part in this success, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid lashed out against the war in Iraq, claiming it “diverted our focus and more than $300 billion in resources from the war on terrorism and has created a rallying cry for international terrorists.

If Harry Reid and his fellow Democrats, like Kennedy, were decent human beings, they would acknowledge this success and praise the president for his part in it. They would make clear that all Americans stand united in uncovering such plots and in defeating terrorism. Yet, for them, the primary issue does not seem to be promoting America’s security, rather it’s attacking President Bush. They seem bent on using everything, even his successes, against him.


Credit Where It’s Due–Clinton on Welfare Reform & NAFTA

Posted by GayPatriotWest at 5:15 pm - August 11, 2006.
Filed under: Civil Discourse,National Politics,War On Terror

In 1996, congressional Republicans helped ensure President Clinton’s reelection by compromising with him on welfare reform. Although that Democrat had intended to veto the initial GOP proposal, he sat down with congressional leaders and got them to modify their plan and come up with a package that Republicans could support and that this Democratic president could sign. The final plan did not mollify some of President Clinton’s critics in his party, but it did allow him to fulfill in 1992 campaign pledge to “end welfare as we know it.”

As a result, Clinton could point to a success while burnishing his moderate credentials in his reelection campaign that fall. And Bob Dole, the 1996 GOP nominee, had a hard time coming up with a domestic-issue agenda to rally support for his candidacy.

While helping Clinton fulfill this campaign promise hurt the GOP’s presidential prospects in that election year, many Republicans worked hard to pass the legislation as it was the right thing for the country. That bill helped bring down the deficit in the 1990s and helped keep our economy strong.

Three years before Congress passed this sweeping welfare reform, a majority of House Republicans (then the minority party) joined a minority of House Democrats in helping Clinton fulfill another campaign promise, passing NAFTA (the North American Free Trade Agreement).

While I’m no fan of Bill Clinton, I give him a lot of credit on these two issues, particularly NAFTA. Had George H.W. Bush won reelection in 1992, he would have faced a Democratic Congress and would not have been able to persuade enough Democratic members to buck the unions (opposed to NAFTA) and vote for the initiative. Clinton used his charm and political skills to rally his fellow Democrats to vote for an agreement about which many were skeptical. That free trade agreement helped strengthen the economic recovery which began in the last quarter of 1992.

Thanks to President Bill Clinton, a Democrat, these two bills, welfare reform and NAFTA, passed Congress and, with his signature, became law. While some Republicans won’t give him credit for these successes, few, at the time of their enactment, used the occasion of this accomplishment to lambaste him on other issues. That saw these bills as examples of bipartisan cooperation in the national interest.

In a subsequent post, I will relate this to President Bush and the War on Terror.

Jewish Groups Lean Left while GOP becomes Increasingly pro-Israel

Posted by GayPatriotWest at 1:05 pm - August 11, 2006.
Filed under: War On Terror

Up until the Reagan years, Democrats were more supportive of Israel than the GOP. But, recent polls have shown that Republicans are more pro-Israel than Democrats. You would hardly know this from talking to many Jewish community leaders who still claim loyalty to a party that is becoming increasingly ambivalent about supporting the Jewish State, even as terrorist threats mount against it.

Earlier this month, Gary Wexler, a former board members of Americans for Peace Now, went so far as to write a piece in LA’s Jewish Journal saying that Left-Leaning Jewish Groups Out-of-Touch Now. In response to that thoughtful piece, Leah, one of our readers sent a letter into the Journal. As that paper only published part of the letter — and I believe the whole letter bears reading, I post it here in its entirety:

Thank you Gary for a calm reasoned article about your disappointment with Jewish Left in their attitude towards Israel. The Left has lectured us for years that the height of a persons moral character was to be non judgmental. And the best way to do so was to be the first to criticize oneself. As a Jew that meant always finding fault in Jewish religion and of course being the first on the block to criticize Israel. Israel bought into this world view, and rejected it’s former adherence to Right wing ideology. Such as building settlements or admitting that its’ acceptance of Western values was morally superior to what Islam has to offer the world.

Now it seems that this hasn’t worked either, Israel pulled out of Lebanon and Gaza, and now finds herself at war again.

The Jewish Left feels no need to reexamine itself, or stop repeating it’s old canards.

So for all those like Gary, who are disappointed in the Jewish left, welcome. Not to a monolithic right wing group. But to the people of Israel, who though we differ on many issues, realize that when it comes to the State of Israel we are united in seeing the she can defend her borders and people. And that she continue to be the beacon of democracy and light in the Middle East.

48% of Blue State Democrats Support Bush “Love Child”

Posted by GayPatriotWest at 4:34 am - August 11, 2006.
Filed under: 2006 Elections,Liberals,National Politics

That headline, certainly inspired by Instapundit’s linking what he called the “Best. Lamont. Spin. Ever:” “the pro-Bush candidate just got 48% in a Democrat primary.

Rahm Emanuel, head of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, tried to spin Ned’s Lamont victory in the Nutmeg State’s Democratic primary for U.S. Senate as a defeat for the president, saying “this shows what blind loyalty to George Bush and being his love child means.”

Emmanuel, ever eager to bash Bush, seems to have forgotten that he was commenting on the Democratic primary in Connecticut, a state which has strict registration rules and lacks open primaries like other states. So, if, as Rahm spins it, Lieberman is a blind follower of this Republican president, he did pretty darn well, considering Republicans couldn’t vote in the Connecticut contest he so narrowly lost.