Fact - Iraq and Al Qaida Were Allies In Aggression

Remember in the 1990s how the Clinton Administration cited Iraqi aid to Al Qaida in justifying pinprick air strikes on Iraq and also the Iraq Liberation Act? Well George W. Bush remembered - and he cited the fact that Saddam Hussein's Iraq and Osama Bin Laden's Al Qaida were allies in aggression in his recent speech on the Iraq war.

Predictably, liberals moaned, even though Bush is right. That liberals keep moaning when the fact of Iraqi-Al Qaida cooperation is cited brings to mind the real reason they do so - because if Iraq was involved with Al Qaida, then the entire counterterrorism policy of the Clinton era was a failure.

But then the escalation of Islamo-Arab acts of war against the US during that time should have shown that already.

Say No To Quitting In Iraq

Amid continued whining about setting timetables for a withdrawal from Iraq, we get a reminder that the only viable Iraq option is victory while we also get a reminder about Saddam Hussein's nuclear-chemical-biological weapons, the ones the Left keeps pretending we didn't find.

The Nonsense Of "Multiculturalism" Re: The Arab World

Kudos to Winds Of Change for their insight into the real world, such as this look at the Arab mind.

Liveshot's Lameness Still There

During the 2000 NFL season Terrell Owens, then of the 49ers, scored a touchdown in Dallas, then stood mockingly on the Cowboys' star, which eventually led to a confrontation with a Cowboys player. Keith Olbermann, then host of his own late-night FOX Sports highlight show (and showing how grossly out of place he is doing hard news instead of sports), summed it up thusly: "And this is sportsmanship from a team that's won one of its last fourteen games. Sit down and shut up!"

I am reminded of this in reading the latest pontifications from the junior senator from my home state of Massachusetts, pontifications published in Wayne Woodlief's June 6 syndicated column. Officially he is John Forbes Kerry, but his "real" name is Liveshot, and Liveshot's lameness as a senator shows again in some of his comments. Kerry worries about pending choices for the Supreme Court, and says he wants candidates "with a reasonable construction of the Constitution based on the Constitution, not on ideology." Of course we never get such from Court candidates Kerry and his fellow liberals prefer, so we thus have the question of what Liveshot is talking about here.

He also claims the Democrats "have to be a big-tent party" and laments how the Republican Congress "votes so monolithic." Now I can't recall the last time the Democrats were a true "big tent" party with genuine disagreements on substantive issues - perhaps in the 1960s. One certainly cannot find such today in a Democratic Party so rigidly ideological; their 2004 bash at the Fleet Center certainly didn't entail a big tent approach.

But the big whopper not eaten in Burger King was that President Bush and color alerts on terrorism: "You see any of those color alerts since the election?" Is Liveshot accusing the President of fabricating terrorist alerts for political purposes? Of course such is in keeping with liberal ideology - the bogus October Surprise of 1980 was a long time liberal staple and this mindset is to be found in all those whines about the Iraq war.

This is why liberals are not qualified for President - Kerry is clearly not taking the role of fighting enemy terrorism seriously when he's questioning the integrity of terrorist alerts. Of course the last Democratic President didn't take Islamo-Arab terrorism seriously either, hence Bill Clinton's serial campaign of doing nothing in the face of multiple attacks on embassies, the World Trade Center in 1993, ships, the Khobar barracks (where persecuting the commanding general, Terry Schwalier, for not following physically impossible standards of security consumed more of the government's effort than actually going after the terrorists responsible), and so forth.

Senator Kerry, sit down and shut up.