Submit your comments on this article | ||
Home Front: Politix | ||
Ex-Clinton Aide Charges Republicans 'Want to Kill Us' | ||
2005-07-15 | ||
OK, it's official, they're totally insane.![]() A panel discussion entitled "Winning the War of Ideas" centered on the book of the same name by Thomas Frank and detailed the challenges that Democrats face in persuading voters in the American heartland and elsewhere to embrace their agenda and support their candidates. Begala's presence on the panel created a stir when he declared that Republicans had "done a p***-poor job of defending" the U.S. Republicans, he said, "want to kill us. "I was driving past the Pentagon when that plane hit" on Sept. 11, 2001. "I had friends on that plane; this is deadly serious to me," Begala said. "They want to kill me and my children if they can. But if they just kill me and not my children, they want my children to be comforted -- that while they didn't protect me because they cut my taxes, my children won't have to pay any money on the money they inherit," Begala said. "That is bulls*** national defense, and we should say that." The Clinton administration's national security efforts involved the right blend of "experience" and "strength," Begala said, an assertion with which the 9/11 Commission apparently disagreed. In its report, the bipartisan commission stated that "each president considered or authorized covert actions, a process that consumed considerable time -- especially in the Clinton administration -- and achieved little success beyond the collection of intelligence." Begala also included Republican domestic policies in his sweeping criticism. The GOP, he said, "ain't had a new idea since they opposed Social Security, and guess what, they still do. ... They are beginning to figure out that there is no Soviet Union, but they still want Star Wars to stop it," Begala said.
Frank insisted that Republicans are not quite as tough on national security as many Americans think. "Franklin Roosevelt got us in World War II. They dragged the Republicans kicking and screaming. They didn't want to get in that war. They didn't have any problem with Hitler. I won't go so far as to say they thought Hitler rocked. But there were people in America who did, and they didn't want us to get in that war. Democrats have always been just as tough as Republicans once they're in office," Frank said. Frank did not mention one of the most vocal opponents of U.S. intervention in World War II: Democrat Joseph P. Kennedy, who was one of Roosevelt's top fundraisers, the U.S. ambassador to Great Britain and father of John F. Kennedy, who would later become America's 35th president.
Frank defended his point, however, claiming that Republicans didn't see Hitler as a threat to America until Pearl Harbor. He repeated the Democratic criticism of America's invasion of Iraq. Saddam Hussein "was a horrible (sic), a dictator, a butcher, a tyrant, a mass murderer -- as evil as they come," Frank said, but he added: "I don't think he was a threat to the U.S. at the time." Former Clinton administration Chief of Staff John Podesta told the students that "you can fight hard for what you believe without breaking the law, without cheating and certainly without checking your morals at the door." | ||
Posted by:Steve |
#18 As for the Demoleft, I have no probs if there Party goes into history, as I sincerely doubt their incessant and perennial Wafflings, Dialecticisims, and professional Policratisms, etc. is what Jefferson, Jackson, or even the early laissez faire Socialists-Utopians had in mind! I can see OLD HICKORY now going ballistic on learning that the Demoleft want America to obey a UNO and world community whose Mandates are NOT to be obeyed except via Media-based propaganda, or not to be obeyed if the POTUS is a Democrat. |
Posted by: JosephMendiola 2005-07-15 22:27 |
#17 Hitler, liked most Socialists of the period whether Left-wing or Right-wing, believed in Continetalism and or Mackinder's World Island - read Russia and Asia. His WW1-minded Generals and Admirals were the ones who cared most about attacking and invading England, and targeting Brit cities as opposed to Scapa Flow and destroying the Royal Navy in "decisive battle". Truth be told, iff Adolf's Generals and Admirals had followed his choices in the proper manner, the possib exists that England might had surrendered or sought armistice very early in the war, even before Pearl Harbor, ala VICHY PARIS + VICHY LONDON. Compared to Stalin or Mao, HItler however defective or medic ill was by far the superior war strategist-planner to both. |
Posted by: JosephMendiola 2005-07-15 22:20 |
#16 The phrase "shit for brains" was invented with this moron in mind. |
Posted by: .com 2005-07-15 19:24 |
#15 "I was driving past the Pentagon when that plane hit" on Sept. 11, 2001. "I had friends on that plane; this is deadly serious to me," Begala said. "They want to kill me and my children if they can. But if they just kill me and not my children, they want my children to be comforted -- that while they didn't protect me because they cut my taxes, my children won't have to pay any money on the money they inherit," Begala said. "That is bulls*** national defense, and we should say that." ....and then a giant spring came out of his head and he started running in circles. |
Posted by: Secret Master 2005-07-15 19:22 |
#14 "I was driving past the Pentagon when that plane hit" on Sept. 11, 2001. "I had friends on that plane; this is deadly serious to me," Begala said. "They want to kill me and my children if they can. But if they just kill me and not my children, they want my children to be comforted -- that while they didn't protect me because they cut my taxes, my children won't have to pay any money on the money they inherit," Begala said. "That is bulls*** national defense, and we should say that." ....and then a giant spring came out of his head and he started running in circles. |
Posted by: Secret Master 2005-07-15 19:22 |
#13 I am big. The conferences I get invited to got small... |
Posted by: Paul Begala 2005-07-15 16:24 |
#12 How many times did the boy cry wolf before everyone no longer paid attention? I think the Democrats are about there now. |
Posted by: rjschwarz 2005-07-15 15:39 |
#11 And before someone whines about Iraq not being involved, the first US invasions in WWII were mounted against French territories in Africa. France had not declared war on us, nor we on them, at the time... But it was good practice. Can we do it again???? |
Posted by: Cheaderhead 2005-07-15 13:51 |
#10 ![]() Someone find my Prozac perscription quick. I feel my mind going... |
Posted by: BigEd 2005-07-15 13:31 |
#9 never trust a guy whose head resemble a light bulb. They never get brighter |
Posted by: Frank G 2005-07-15 13:26 |
#8 "The Clinton administration's national security efforts involved the right blend of "experience" and "strength.." Begala went on to say...And Sandy Berger can prove it...oops...guess he's wearing the wrong pants tonight. |
Posted by: DepotGuy 2005-07-15 12:37 |
#7 For a really straightforward description of the inner philosophy of moonbats, I recommend a pre-Civil War book, "Cannibals All: Or, Slaves Without Masters", by George Fitzhugh. In it, Fitzhugh proposes that slavery is not just good, but *so* good, that 9 out of 10 people should be slaves. Of course, the book is written on the assumption that the author, and the reader, are of the "1 in 10" who deserve to be masters, not slaves. He goes on at length about how wonderful the life of a slave is, and how masters must be such fine people, to do all the "real" work to manage the happy slaves beneath them, who only have to do what their masters tell them. In other words, Fitzhugh and Hillary Clinton and company really are no different, intellectually; both in their belief in their own superiority, and their utter disdain and contempt for those they believe are beneath them. Available through Amazon.com |
Posted by: Anonymoose 2005-07-15 11:54 |
#6 The poor scum just wants to make a buck and continue to feel special and relevant. Personally, I'm sick of the historical blah blah demos did this and pubs did that BS. A partisan recalculating old scores between political parties from sixty years ago using new math adds nothing to anything. He and his ilk have got alot to do with the problems our nation now faces. That is fairly recent and relevant history. He's made it fairly clear that he has got nothing real to offer today. Time for him to piss off and smoke that one in the hookah for a year or two before stepping up to try and snatch some slimelight at the DC clowntime conference for progress. |
Posted by: MunkarKat 2005-07-15 11:39 |
#5 Franklin Roosevelt got us in World War II. They dragged the Republicans kicking and screaming. They didn't want to get in that war. As far as that goes, it's true. It leaves out the fact that once we were in the war, the Republicans supported the war effort. Unlike, for example, this war. More people died on 9/11 than at Pearl Harbor, and most of the 9/11 dead were civilians. Yet the Democrats treat this war as if it's optional. And before someone whines about Iraq not being involved, the first US invasions in WWII were mounted against French territories in Africa. France had not declared war on us, nor we on them, at the time... I won't get into the Democrats' shameful behavior before, during, and after the Civil War. |
Posted by: Robert Crawford 2005-07-15 10:33 |
#4 Civil wars are nasty. It might help to lower the level of the rhetoric to avoid one, but I only see the Dems, their leadership, and their cheerleading team at the DU and other Soros sponsored sites keep raising the volume. The zero factor is still in play. One shot and it can be 'Bloody Kansas' all over again on a national scale, but it can still be avoided. It appears the right finally is getting some backbone and is probably not going to back down, so it up to the left to pull the trigger to start the games. I suspect that when the dust settles a lot of migration will follow trail of thousands of crown loyalist to Canada and Europe after the War of Independence and thousands of confederates to Mexico and Brazil after the first Civil War. |
Posted by: Pheng Glolung9905 2005-07-15 09:50 |
#3 There are some I feel like killing sometimes - but not over tax cuts. Over disregarding the Constitution, over decimating the defense of the country (military and intelligence), over refusal to control our borders. Hmmmm, sounds like maybe the Clinton aides aren't the only ones who might feel worried. |
Posted by: I would prefer not to this time 2005-07-15 09:41 |
#2 Were these people ALWAYS this crazy? Or have eight years of defeats driven them nuts? Either way, he is right. Time to break out the Raid. Not because we want to "Preserve Tax Cuts for the Rich", but we have determined that their stupidity is a hazard to themselves and others. |
Posted by: mmurray821 2005-07-15 09:36 |
#1 A panel discussion entitled "Winning the War of Ideas" centered on the book of the same name by Thomas Frank It's just a freak'n book tour. Gather around, you stupid little sheep drones, buy my book! $25.00 And get on my mailing list too - so I can just ask you to send me your money to help - The Cause(TM) |
Posted by: 2b 2005-07-15 09:18 |