I have many troubling thoughts concerning the path the Democratic Party has taken and there are some questions that continue to plague me.
How can the party of the “loyal opposition” claim to support our troops in the battle to defeat terrorism while they and their out-of-control comrades in the national news media are constantly looking for anything that would demean or disgrace these brave men and women in the eyes of the world?
Can the Democrats hate President Bush so much or want power so badly that they would jeopardize our country’s security, future, and our very lives, not to mention the safety of our troops?
Knowing their actions and statements will be broadcast around the globe and taken by terrorists as a sign of American defeatism, they still continue to attack anything and everything President Bush has said or done to combat international terrorism.
I’ve never given much credit to the accusation that Democratic politicians place their party before their country, but the disappointment and anguish they demonstrated after the successful Iraqi parliamentary elections leads one to believe that they actually would like to see Iraq fall to the terrorists just to make President Bush look bad.
And the usual pathetic, reckless statements made by patriots like Howard Dean and the pseudo-Democratic leader, Nancy Pelosi, have only strengthened the terrorists’ resolve to succeed in that country.
Now that the Democratic Party is in an ugly mood over the voting achievement of the Iraqi citizens and the national news media has been stung by the fact that there were no major terrorists’ attacks during the balloting, President Bush and the Republican Party will be subjected to more savage attacks.
These will be greatly helped, I’m sure, by the dangerously irresponsible reporting of The New York Times.
In their obvious attempts to embarrass President Bush and his administration, this newspaper has relentlessly compromised our government’s attempts to safeguard America and has greatly endangered our lives by publishing classified information that will aid and embolden the terrorists.
Their “journalists” and editors continually reinforce the fact that the NY Times staff is blatantly biased toward our President and that they place their personal hostility towards him before the safety of America’s citizens.
The column in the New York Post entitled “The Gray Lady Toys with Treason” should be a must read for the NY Times’ staff and I would welcome an investigation into that paper’s subversive policies.
During their latest attack on President Bush concerning wire-tapping, the Democrats and the liberal press conveniently forget that wire-tapping was a way of life with former President Clinton. They apparently don’t recall that his administration frequently used electronic monitoring of American citizens in the 1990s.
These hypocrites quickly change the subject when reminded that in 1994, Clinton expanded the use of warrantless (peacetime) searches to entirely domestic situations with no foreign intelligence value whatsoever.
And, probably unknown to many people, his Deputy Attorney General Jamie S. Gorelick said in 1994 testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, “The Department of Justice believes — and the case law supports — that the president has inherent authority to conduct warrantless physical searches for foreign intelligence purposes and that the president may, as he has done, delegate this authority to the attorney general.” She added that “the same authority pertains to electronic surveillance such as wiretaps.”
There may have been an outcry from the liberal journalists and Democrats about Clinton trampling on our civil liberties, but I don’t remember any.
In his speeches on Iraq, President Bush has steadfastly refused to abandon the Iraqi people and is gaining strength in the popularity polls because he’s finally answering the false charges against him and is informing the public of the political, economical, and security actualities in Iraq.
The Democratic response to every speech has been, of course, negative. Because they have no plan of their own except to cut and run like they did in Vietnam, they criticize or ridicule his every statement.
Illustrating again their disregard of our safety, the Democrats not only voted to kill the Patriot Act but now defame President Bush for safeguarding us by electronic monitoring of terrorists and known sympathizers within our country. Some have even ridiculously claimed that he should be impeached for safeguarding America.
I’m sure the far left rejoices at the idea and that the DNC probably must continue their tactless accusations to assure continued donations from these radicals. But even the Democratic leadership must realize that to attempt to impeach President Bush for protecting our country would be politically suicidal.
There is hope for our troops and country, though, because in spite of all the negatives and fabricated allegations thrown at President Bush by the Democrats and their liberal cohorts in the news media, he and the Republican Party have weapons that successfully counteract their slander.
These weapons are Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosi, John Murtha, John Kerry, and the rest of the defeatist Democrats. And with the coming midterm elections, soon someone will be unlocking the gates and letting Michael Moore, Al Franken, and Barbara Streisand out to influence even more people to vote Republican.
Ralph Suchomel
Peachtree City, Ga.